On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 09:00:16 -0400, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 9/10/2015 1:18 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 13:28:58 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/9/15 1:18 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
A deputy county clerk in Kentucky says that even if his boss tells him to
stop issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, he will tell her he
can't obey her and will instead follow a judge's order.

Brian Mason works for Rowan County clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed for
five days over her refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex
couples. Davis was released Tuesday. A federal judge warned her not to
interfere with licensing; deputy clerks have been issuing them in her
absence. But Davis' lawyers have said she can't violate her conscience,
and she's repeatedly cited her beliefs about homosexuality as an
apostolic Christian. The attorneys wouldn't say exactly what she'll do
when she returns to work Friday or Monday.

Mason said Wednesday that licenses would be granted to anyone seeking
them. He told reporters that if Davis tells him to stop, he will tell her
no. Mason says he would have to follow the judge's order to issue licenses.

Lawyers for Rowan County clerk Kim Davis say she will return to work
Friday or Monday. In the meantime, deputy clerk Mason says the office
will issues licenses Wednesday in Davis' absence if anyone seeks them.

Mason says that while Davis was jailed, the office issued 10 licenses:
eight Friday, two Tuesday. Seven went to same-sex couples.

- - -

And Kentucky is still there...

The clerk stopped issuing all licenses.



The "clerk" has not returned to work.

I am still waiting for the first challenge to the validity of those
licenses. The governor has already hinted that he may be calling the
legislature back to fix the language in the law after denying it was
necessary.
I guess the question might be, what will they do if the legislature
deadlocks on the new law. Will they get locked up too?


You want this gay marriage movement to stop yet you want dope legalized.
Do you want a set of laws just to suit just you and a few other non
conformists like myself?

Don't go "all Harry" on me.
I have no opinion about the gay marriage. I would prefer that the
government simply get out of the marriage business altogether.
The only thing they have any business doing is a civil union and I am
not even sure what the function of that would be if they didn't make
it one with tax policy.
My only position in this case is the fact that the SCOTUS has gutted
the Kentucky law to the point that it is gibberish without additional
legislation to replace the offending text.

Justan Olphart wrote:
On 9/10/2015 12:59 AM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 9/9/15 1:18 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
A deputy county clerk in Kentucky says that even if his boss tells him to
stop issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, he will tell her he
can't obey her and will instead follow a judge's order.

Brian Mason works for Rowan County clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed for
five days over her refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex
couples. Davis was released Tuesday. A federal judge warned her not to
interfere with licensing; deputy clerks have been issuing them in her
absence. But Davis' lawyers have said she can't violate her conscience,
and she's repeatedly cited her beliefs about homosexuality as an
apostolic Christian. The attorneys wouldn't say exactly what she'll do
when she returns to work Friday or Monday.

Mason said Wednesday that licenses would be granted to anyone seeking
them. He told reporters that if Davis tells him to stop, he will tell her
no. Mason says he would have to follow the judge's order to issue licenses.

Lawyers for Rowan County clerk Kim Davis say she will return to work
Friday or Monday. In the meantime, deputy clerk Mason says the office
will issues licenses Wednesday in Davis' absence if anyone seeks them.

Mason says that while Davis was jailed, the office issued 10 licenses:
eight Friday, two Tuesday. Seven went to same-sex couples.

- - -

And Kentucky is still there...

The clerk stopped issuing all licenses.



The "clerk" has not returned to work.

She stopped issuing ALL licenses before going to jail. Not just same sex
partners.


That's history. Just like Sodom and Gomorrah in the Hebrew bible.
Sodomy is legally encouraged by our progressive justice system now.

I do not care if same sex marry. Not a concern of mine. But "journalist"
like Harry claims to be, are stating the same sex issuing ceased. Get the
facts correct. And it very well may be with the state marriage law
overturned, no licenses should be issued.

On 9/10/2015 12:04 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 10:18:24 -0400, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 9/10/2015 11:06 AM, wrote:

Don't go "all Harry" on me.
I have no opinion about the gay marriage. I would prefer that the
government simply get out of the marriage business altogether.
The only thing they have any business doing is a civil union and I am
not even sure what the function of that would be if they didn't make
it one with tax policy.
My only position in this case is the fact that the SCOTUS has gutted
the Kentucky law to the point that it is gibberish without additional
legislation to replace the offending text.

Offending text? "a man and a woman"

"One man and one woman" among other things like "the county where
female resides". By the time you excise all of this text without
replacing it, the power of the state to issue a license is undefined.

In fact that statute refers to who "may" issue a license, not who
"shall" so they have the power to refuse to issue any.

The whole statute is flawed and probably on purpose. I notice, nobody
has even addressed this in the media. If it ever gets to the SCOTUS, I
bet Scalia will point it out. He believes the law is what it says, not
what we wish it said.

Clinton might ask "define man" and "define woman".

On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 10:18:24 -0400, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 9/10/2015 11:06 AM, wrote:

Don't go "all Harry" on me.
I have no opinion about the gay marriage. I would prefer that the
government simply get out of the marriage business altogether.
The only thing they have any business doing is a civil union and I am
not even sure what the function of that would be if they didn't make
it one with tax policy.
My only position in this case is the fact that the SCOTUS has gutted
the Kentucky law to the point that it is gibberish without additional
legislation to replace the offending text.

Offending text? "a man and a woman"

"One man and one woman" among other things like "the county where
female resides". By the time you excise all of this text without
replacing it, the power of the state to issue a license is undefined.

In fact that statute refers to who "may" issue a license, not who
"shall" so they have the power to refuse to issue any.

The whole statute is flawed and probably on purpose. I notice, nobody
has even addressed this in the media. If it ever gets to the SCOTUS, I
bet Scalia will point it out. He believes the law is what it says, not
what we wish it said.