Ten years after the Supreme Court extended marriage rights to same-sex couples nationwide, the justices this fall will consider for the first time whether to take up a case that explicitly asks them to overturn that decision.

Kim Davis, the former Kentucky county clerk who was jailed for six days in 2015 after refusing to issue marriage licenses to a gay couple on religious grounds, is appealing a $100,000 jury verdict for emotional damages plus $260,000 for attorneys fees.

In a petition for writ of certiorari filed last month, Davis argues First Amendment protection for free exercise of religion immunizes her from personal liability for the denial of marriage licenses.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 277 points 1 year ago (8 children)

You're not free to enforce your religion on others as a public servant.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 150 points 1 year ago (29 children)

    I genuinely do not understand how this was ever a case. You are an employee at an office that provides a service. You are a representative of that organization. And, as a civil service employee, I would expect you are obligated by the laws of that county or state to facilitate the services offered.

    Davis, as the Rowan County Clerk in 2015, was the sole authority tasked with issuing marriage licenses on behalf of the government under state law.

    ON BEHALF OF

    Regardless if you're in this position or you're the president, you are obligated by the state or federal constitution to operate as a representative of that jurisdiction's laws.

    If she took on this job while knowing it would conflict with her religious views, or the laws changed in a matter that conflicted with her views, she should have notified the county and she should have been denied or removed from that position. Although, I'm sure that raises a different case in denying someone employment based on their religion.

  • source
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 117 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    I once asked my mother if it would be ok for a Muslim or Jewish deli employee to refuse to sell her pork. She said they shouldn't be in that job if it conflicted with their religious beliefs. I tried to tie that to this and she sort of shut down rather than argue against it or accept it.

    We don't have a relationship anymore. She voted for the shithead every time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The deli owner can actually deny service to however they want since it's a private business. They don't have to serve anyone, but it does look fucking bad if/when they discrininate, but technically they can.

    Here, that government employee HAS the obligation to follow the law and act regardless of her own beliefs. Maybe she should instead run a deli...

    Your example is very good, in fact, it prouves your mother wrong in 2 different ways.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    There's a big difference between a deli owner and a deli employee. An owner wouldn't choose to even have pork available to sell if they didn't want to sell it. If is it available to sell, and an employee chooses not to sell it because of their religious beliefs, that's definitely a problem, but (as you said) not discrimination, just bad business and the owner should fire them immediately.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (13 replies)
  • load more comments (28 replies)
    [–] 110 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Interracial marriage is on the table too with these fascists.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Not just interracial marriage, they don’t want people to be able to become citizens through marriage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 88 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    If they're going to open the door to any government employee being able to refuse to do their job as directed on religious grounds, this country is going to grind to a halt.

    Just kidding, we all know that with the current court and administration, this will only allow people with the "right" religion to refuse.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 79 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Could we just get government out of the marriage game? It seems to be the source of all the problems. They simply shouldn't care.

    Even if we don't this is such a simple concept: Marriage is a contract. The requirements for a contract is consenting adults. How can they make gender determine who can sign a contract? That would be unreasonable.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I think you're second point is more important. The religious part of marriage is actually meaningless in the eyes of the law even today, you still need to apply for a marriage certificate with the government.

    I think we just need to extend that to just be a cohabitation/shared asset contract for any two+ people. It makes a lot of legal sense to have a defined "family unit" for medical/legal/financial reasons, but it shouldn't overlap with religious concepts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 72 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Of course they are. And of course that stupid bitch Kim Davis is involved.

    Also: how could Joe Biden and Kamala Harris do this to us?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 67 points 1 year ago

    Can this bitch just fucking die already? I'm tired of seeing her face in the news every couple years

  • source
  • [–] 64 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Who is the injured party here? She clearly refused to do her job.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    Injured parties are for legal systems that actually care about the truth.

    See several of the recent Supreme Court cases with astroturf plaintiffs and made up defendants.

    Because it's super easy to get the ruling you want when no one is on the other side to call bullshit on your claims.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [+] 61 points 1 year ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)
    load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 54 points 1 year ago

    What a hateful piece of shit.

  • source
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Shocked, I tell you! Shocked!

    Also, what's going on with the Epstein Files? Ya know, while we're on the subject of "Dead Cat Theory"

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 44 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    You work for the government, you are acting as the government, paid for by taxes from your constituents.

    You do not get to decide which laws to follow. Fuck off Kim.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 38 points 1 year ago

    Another 3 to 6 decision then. It's getting kind of repetitive.

  • source
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Yooooo.... This bitch is still doing the same, heinous shit? A decade later? Why don't these pieces of shit just get fucking lives or hobbies or something? They're like goddamned ghouls, hanging around and smelling of shit. Like. Fuck. GO AWAY.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Can we get someone who believes in Jakub elected as county clerk somewhere in the US South? Then they can deny marriage licenses to all the white people for being inhuman.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [+] 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 29 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    But her divorces and multiple marriages are fine.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago

    Fuck. Not this asshole again. She should have faded into obscurity and poverty by now.

  • source
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This is how it goes people, either everyone gets rights or no one gets rights.

    They come for the Trans people first, how long until the come for you.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 18 points 1 year ago

    "Davis said she's been "called Hitler, I’ve been called [a] hypocrite, I’ve been called a homophobe."

    "I’ve been called things and names that I didn’t even say when I was in the world. Those names don’t hurt me," Davis said. "What probably hurt me the worst is when someone tells me that my God does not love me or that my God is not happy with me, that I am a hypocrite of a Christian.""

    Lmao, so you don't mind being called Hitler, but being called a fake Christian - now that's insulting! Tells you everything you need to know

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    Depressing as hell but honestly, I’m surprised it took this long.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    Would this be a record turnaround for revoking a group's rights?

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    So could she have refused to serve a black person or an Asian person based on her personal religious views that she doesn't like black or Asian people?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›