Murihiku wrote:
Wow, I actually wasn't expecting a jail sentence to be handed out so quickly. I thought she'd be fined first; even the plaintiffs were only seeking a fine. That said, I can understand Judge Bunning's reasoning. Davis made it clear that, fine or no fine, she would continue to not carry out her duties in compliance with federal law. The only choice left for the judge was to remove Davis from her office until she agreed to do her job or resign. It's fine for people to have sincerely held religious beliefs, even while holding office; it's another thing entirely to use those beliefs to justify not doing your job as a government official, at taxpayers' expense. Either do your job or step down.
It's not a sentence per se. It's coercion. But she could be in prison for a year or so before a compelling argument could be made that it's not working.
Quote:
I also read –
on the Fox News website, no less – that the other clerks in the marriage office were made to declare whether or not they would give marriage licences to same-sex couples. All but one agreed to do it, with the sole holdout being Davis' son who also works in the office. The judge said that this was acceptable and even offered to spare Davis from jail if she agreed not to get in the way of allowing the other clerks to sign those licences, but she declined his offer.
Correct, and they may join her in custody if they don't comply.
Quote:
There's speculation that the Kentucky state legislature might consider legislation allowing clerks to opt out of signing marriage licences for same-sex couples, when it reconvenes next year (which is weird, since it's only September now). If Kentucky goes down that route, hopefully they include a provision that another clerk in the same office must be available to sign those licences.
Not having someone on hand to sign them might be construed as unconstitutional.
Quote:
...
On another note, a lot of people have been criticising her for religious views on marriage in light of her previous divorces. If they happened while she was a practicing Christian, then I'd call her hypocritical. But since they all happened before her conversion to Christianity, I myself wouldn't call her religious views on marriage hypocritical. People have the right to change their beliefs over time: that's how SSM went from majority opposition to majority support in countries like the US within a mere 10 years.
I've mocked her for that, sure.
But if she is a practicing christian now, she has a very selective reading of the bible.