The Truth is realized in an instant;
the Act is practiced step by step.
Zen saying
Image of the Day
 |
| via Libertarian Catholic |
A Brief Comment on the Legality of the Rowan County "Gay" Marriage Licenses
If someone had said to me after the Obergefell decision (which made "gay marriage" law of the land) that I would end up siding on this side of the Kim Davis case, I wouldn't have believed him. But I strongly believe in equal protection under the law; I think a far more salient issue is in the case of a judge who performs wedding ceremonies. But one of the irritating arguments which I haven't discussed over the past few posts is the claim of Davis that the licenses/certificates issued without her signature were invalid. Below is an excerpt from the relevant Kentucky statute. (By the way, 1a refers to legal boilerplate on the paperwork.)
402.100 Marriage license -- Marriage certificate -- Confidentiality of Social Security numbers. Each county clerk shall use the form prescribed by the Department for Libraries and Archives when issuing a marriage license. This form shall provide for the entering of all of the information required in this section, and may also provide for the entering of additional information prescribed by the Department for Libraries and Archives. The form shall consist of:
(1) A marriage license which provides for the entering of:
(a) An authorization statement of the county clerk issuing the license for any
person or religious society authorized to perform marriage ceremonies to unite
in marriage the persons named;
(b) Vital information for each party, including the full name, date of birth, place
of birth, race, condition (single, widowed, or divorced), number of previous
marriages, occupation, current residence, relationship to the other party, and
full names of parents; and
(c) The date and place the license is issued, and the signature of the county clerk
or deputy clerk issuing the license.
(2) A marriage certificate which provides for the entering of:Economic Liberty Meets Government Corruption in India and Other Developing Countries
(a) A statement by the person performing the marriage ceremony or the clerk of
the religious society authorized to solemnize the marriage ceremony that the
ceremony was performed. The statement shall include the name and title of
the person performing the ceremony or the name of the religious society
solemnizing the marriage, the names of persons married, the date and place of
the marriage, and the names of two (2) witnesses;
(b) A statement by the person performing the marriage ceremony of his legal
qualification under this chapter to perform the ceremony, such statement to
include the name of the county or city where his license to perform marriage
ceremonies was issued or, in the case of religious societies authorized by KRS
402.050(c) to solemnize marriages, the name of the city or county where the
religious society is incorporated. The provisions of this paragraph shall not be
construed to require the clerk of a religious society to be present at the
marriage so long as the witnesses of the society are present;
(c) A dated signature of the person performing the ceremony; and
(d) A signed statement by the county clerk or a deputy county clerk of the county
in which the marriage license was issued that the marriage certificate was
recorded. The statement shall indicate the name of the county and the date the
marriage certificate was recorded.
Rand Paul on the Davis Case
Rand Paul and I disagree on this and quite frankly I don't get it; I think he's misinformed. Kentucky law states that either the district clerk (Kim Davis) or her 6 deputy clerks can sign the marriage application. The problem, as I understand it, some of her deputy clerks were willing, but Davis refused to let them; Davis had religious accommodation all along. In the cited clip below, Carlson references the Rand Paul clip below; Napolitano addresses Kentucky RFRA.
CARLSON: “What else could the judge have done?”NAPOLITANO: “The way this ended up. Taking away from her personally the authority to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and giving it to her deputies. Then her conscience would have been clear. She would have been free and not in jail and the same-sex couples could have exercised what the supreme court has said is their right under the constitution.”CARLSON: “What if she comes back to her job and says, I'm still against it and in my office I don't want this to happen.”NAPOLITANO: “She can say that, if she says I won't permit five of my six deputies in my office who each told the federal judge that they will sign the marriage licenses, she'll end up back there. And then we have the standoff again. But the bottom line is, she should be free and clear to do her job without a religious impediment. If she has a religious impediment, that part of the job should not be in her job listing.”
Facebook Corner
(FEE). There are several key differences between the county clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky and the wedding cake bakers in Gresham, Oregon.
"She’s in jail until she resigns or is removed from office."
wrong.. she has been ordered released... because she broke no law.
SCOTUS does not make law... Legislature does.
the Constitution of the US does not say that marriage needs to be recognized in all instances, especially in the instance of same sex. The 14th amendment was put in place to ensure that All Americans were served by the protection of LAW... it does not say that Men can have hysterectomies, and women can have vasectomies... nor does it say that men can marry men (because marriage is more than two people in love... it is the correct institution for raising a family)
so... number 1:
"This distinction matters because the Kleins were genuinely minding their own business, whereas Davis was elected with the understanding that she would mind the public’s business, as represented by the law."
The only Law that impacts her job is the one that is in the State Constitution of KY... marriage is one man, and one woman... NEXT!
2. "Kim Davis’s salary is paid for by the public, including many same-sex couples who want marriage certificates. The Kleins make their money entirely voluntarily."
Good point... and the majority of them there define marriage as one man, and one woman. If the TAXPAYERS have an issue with it, they can attempt to recall her, or choose not to reelect her. That's how it works FEE.
3. Kim Davis harms gays and lesbians.
what? how, exactly? By not permitting them to violate KY State Law?
4. Kim Davis swore an oath to uphold the law.
Which law is she in violation of? the one that SCOTUS made up? Wait... no, they aren't permitted to make law.
5. Kim Davis refused to allow her willing deputies to serve gays and lesbians.
So, the issuance of a marriage license will actually bear her name/signature. Think about that for a minute... you may work there, and be totally willing to process the paperwork, but if she won't sign it, that is her prerogative... She is the elected official... deputies are not.
This is all wishful thinking and rubbish. And I happen to oppose Obergefell. But I believe in the rule of law.
Only the judge can explain why he decided to release Davis. I think that he wanted to ensure that the deputy clerks would process the paperwork in her absence, and they have. He has instructed Davis not to interfere, and he is requiring regular updates on compliance. The Kentucky law clearly states the deputies can sign in lieu of the clerk. The judge said any attempt by Davis to frustrate the process will result in her coming back to court,
Davis is still guilty of official misconduct, a misdemeanor offense and likely move to impeachment. Keep in mind Davis' problems are with a federal court in response to a civil rights lawsuit. She has also been defying the governor's order to comply with Obergefell. It may well be that the Attorney General waives prosecution of Davis so long as she doesn't interfere with the deputy clerks doing the paperwork, but I don't speak for the governor or attorney general. She should resign, or at least declare victory if long as she's not processing paperwork. (I don't think they should make her a martyr.) But if Davis engages in any more nonsense, she may find herself prosecuted by the state and/or the federal government.
1. The Fourteenth Amendment amendment trumps Kentucky's marriage law. Obergefell decided that the rights enjoyed by traditional married couples cannot be denied to gay couples in a committed relationship. It's not "making law". It's saying you have to process couples on equal grounds.
2. You are totally missing the point. The Fourteen Amendment expressly forbids the state, not the private sector, from discrimination. You forget the Bill of Rights is about protecting individual rights against the tyranny of the majority, i.e., the government.
3. Legal marriage confers fungible legal benefits (e.g., tax gimmicks and benefit mandates). The county has a legal monopoly on marriage recognition. In a competitive market, there are multiple bakers, photographers, etc. You may not like a vendor doesn't agree to do business with you, but you have alternatives.
4. Davis took an oath of office to perform duties, including marriage paperwork. The law says that gay couples are eligible for legal marriage. She cannot opt out of doing her duties--that's official misconduct.
5. Existing Kentucky statute explicitly recognizes marriage paperwork signed by deputy clerks. You seem to recall that she has been arguing religious liberty. The point is, she's had a religious liberty exception all along, simply letting the deputy clerks to do their job. She's obstructing compliance with the law,which is a criminal offense.
(Rand Paul 2016). Kim Davis to be released from jail today
Rand Paul, and I say this as a supporter, made a mistake in discussing this. He said, "I think it's absurd to put someone in jail for exercising their religious liberty. I think it's a real mistake, and even those on the other side of the issue, I think it sets their movement back."
Davis was not exercising her religious liberty. The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from engaging in discrimination, and Davis is an elected official who is openly and intentionally defying the Obergefell decision. She also had problems with her 6 deputy clerks alternately processing gay marriage paperwork.
I personally disagree with Obergefell; if I felt I could not in good faith execute my duties in office, I should resign--not defy the rule of law. I do think it's a mistake for the Supreme Court to overturn Kentucky's marriage law, but Rand Paul's issues have more to do with SCOTUS than the Davis case.
(Proud to be an American). Hundreds of protesters gathered over the weekend in support of embattled Kentucky clerk Kim Davis. Do you support or oppose the stand Davis is taking against same-sex marriage?
I oppose lawbreaking public officials who take a paycheck but obstruct the law. I personally disagree with "gay marriage", but if I had an issue with processing paperwork as my duty requires, I would resign from office, not obstruct the law. She needs to respect the rule of law.
(National Review). He gives a reason for why he "felt" that way but, is everyone going to just let him get away with a comment like this?
The military has a way of breaking down disrespectful, self-serving, undisciplined assholes. Trump doesn't have a clue.
(IPI). Chicago Public Schools is facing a pension shortfall of $10 billion and a credit rating that’s been downgraded to junk. This crisis is arguably the best example of how Illinois politicians use and abuse pensions, turning what is meant to provide government workers with retirement security into a political slush fund.
In 1999, the Chicago Teachers' Pension Fund was fully funded. That’s in stark contrast with the crisis CTPF faces today. CTPF now has just half the funding it needs to pay out its future retirement obligations. By any private-sector measure, the fund is already bankrupt.
What happened was their daily went to the state legislature and ask for a pension holiday this extended for over 10 years they did not pay into the pension system the teachers did pay into the pension system daily needed the money to fund his crony bullshit
Crony unionist rubbish as usual. The insolvency issue has to do is cashflow problems. There's no doubt that the pension holidays didn't help, but let's take a look at the real work, not your bullshit "we did our part" rationale--keep in mind 3 major unions signed off on the pension holidays in any case:
"I looked at the compensation for a teacher who had contributed $90,706 to the Teachers Retirement System during her 34 years of service. The 72-year-old retired in 2002 and now receives an annual pension of $66,519. To date, she has collected $649,504 in pension payments. If she lives to a normal life expectancy, she'll collect a total of $1.8 million, according to the Illinois Policy Institute, a conservative Chicago-based think tank."
Do you understand the math? In less than 18 months, she had already made back in benefits than she paid into the system; even if the state had not paid in a single match penny, their share would have matched hers, and not even covered with her share 3 years. Not even Jesus could multiply $180K into $1.8M, literally 10 times the combined contributions.
 |
| via Proud to be an American |
 |
| via LFC |
This is utter economic illiteracy and general stupidity on steroids. But let me sketch out a few points, by no means a comprehensive list.
-- consider occupational licensing, general business permits, etc. For example, NYC may cap the number of taxicabs, it may not allow you to operate a food cart/truck. There may be zoning restrictions, so you can't operate your business from your home. I'm just scratching the surface here.
--you have no clue whatsoever about taxes; stop repeating dishonest propaganda. "even rich people don't pay half". Taxes are more than just income taxes--there are property, sales, etc. And on wages, up to 40% just in federal, up to 10% or more in state and/or county, some local/city as well. On investment you may experience double taxation, after the business may pay up to 40% or more in federal, state, and other income taxes, property taxes, etc. Your capital gains may actually be negative in inflation terms, but you're taxed on nominal terms. I could go on forever. You're pretty retarded on looking at rates--flat rates mean that someone who makes 10 times more, also pays 10 times more--we have a "progressive" income tax scheme. The bottom 50% pay something like 12% of the tax burden. At higher brackets you're actually working for the benefit of the government than yourself, which is utterly insane. You don't any extra government benefits when you de facto work more for the benefit of political whores. We benefit from the extra efforts of the economically successful in terms of business growth; I trust them to invest in the real economy than government wasting their money at dysfunctional sinkholes.
-- How does government increase prices? By limiting competition, domestic or imports, occupational licensing cartels (e.g., the AMA), loose monetary policy.
--How does government decrease job opportunities? Minimum wages, benefit mandates, licensing, etc.
Blaming government for business problems? Don't be a f*king retard. Do you think businesses wanted the highest corporate tax rates in the world, nearly $1.8T in annual regulatory cost burden? This goes beyond delusional left-fascist thinking.
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Bob Gorrell via Townhall |
Tina Turner, "I Don't Wanna Fight"
