Topic: Does anyone think Kim Davis is right? (Read 1194 times)

It will be interesting to see her first day of work.  I'm sure gay couples will be lining up. 

How is she going to do her job without violating her conscience?  Has she become an atheist? 

IMO, the SCOTUS doesn't have the right to legalize gay marriage across the United States. The decision must be taken by the respective state legislatures. On this occasion, the SCOTUS has transgressed on the authority of the states. That is not legal, and therefore I believe that Kim Davis is 100% correct in refusing to perform gay marriage.

But this was one fight that Survivor did not approve.

The writers of the rock band's 1982 song are mad that it was featured at a rally without their permission.

“NO! We did not grant Kim Davis any rights to use ‘My Tune -The Eye Of The Tiger,'” Survivor guitarist and song coauthor Frankie Sullivan wrote in a Facebook post. “I would not grant her the rights to use Charmin!”

The massively popular and durable song was, at least textually speaking, an apropos choice by Huckabee's staff, who helped coordinate the event. “Eye of the Tiger” was featured in “Rocky III,” in which Sylvester Stallone plays a world champion boxer who loses his title and must fight to regain it.


Davis' one-woman battle against the federal judiciary over legal same-sex marriage was certainly an extreme case.

After the U.S. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage in all 50 states in June, Davis, a 49-year-old Apostolic Christian, stopped issuing marriage licenses to all couples who came to her Rowan County office.

The courts sided with two gay couples and two straight couples who sued Davis, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld those rulings. District Judge David L. Bunning jailed Davis for contempt of court last week after she refused to comply with court orders to issue the licenses. Bunning lifted his contempt finding Tuesday and released Davis from jail after her deputy clerks agreed to issue same-sex marriage licenses in her stead.

See the most-read stories this hour >>
Davis is expected to return to work by Monday, and Bunning has threatened to sanction her again if she interferes with her staff's issuance of marriage licenses.

The attachment of “Eye of the Tiger” to the ordeal was problematic for the rock band.

“I was gobsmacked,” coauthor Jim Peterik told CNN on Wednesday morning, explaining that groups usually contact the band's publisher for permission to play the song at sporting events.

“This really isn't a song that was meant to be a political statement — probably the No. 1 motivational song ever written,” Peterik said.

I don't think you understand what a hypocrite is.   

They look tolerant and willing to budge to me.  As long as gay people are allowed to be married - that's all we care about.  Equal rights.

She wanted to do her job. Now that they gave in and let her do it without her name, they look like hypocrites.

I don't...let me disclose that first.

Any of you disagree with me?

I just can't understand how people can believe their religion is more important than someone else's rights. It's akin to a Jewish President abolishing Christian holidays because of "their religious beliefs".

be ye doers of the word not hearers only, its not enough to say you disagree with something and still go along with it, christians have always been persecuted for their beliefs

The simple fact is she is not a staff member in a church and was a staff member of the U.S federal government, who had decided that gay marriage was now legal, she went against that. On my personal beliefs I think anybody who tries to actively block gay marriage are turdbags, if you want to be a homophobe in your own private companies and organisations fine, but in public? No, this is just another in the long list of groups that keep trying to subvert laws designed to protect equality for their own ends.

We've a law, agree or disagree, it's the law.
A clerk is meant to operate within the law and doesn't have any power to change, avoid or ignore it, leave alone claim "God's law".
So, no, she isn't right.

I don't think she's right, but now that the judge was able to make the other clerks do it... why didn't he do that to begin with?  She can't be fired and won't get impeached for this, but it's just going to make her a bunch of money and give the 'persecuted' Christians something to roll with. 

No, she is the boss, and she ordered her staff not to issue licenses.

Basically, like most religious bums, she wants her money but doesn't want to work for it.

If that's ok, then I wonder why they didn't just let her do that when that's what she wanted to do......

This whole mess could have been avoided completely.

Her name was not on the licenses they were giving out.  However, the city lawyers said they were just as valid.

So, one has to wonder if they're putting her name on the licenses they're giving out. If they are using her name without permission, shouldn't that be illegal? If they aren't, they're just doing what she originally said she would do, give out licenses without her name on them.