Davis, DOMA and What the Hell is Happening

I’ve been asking all day long, “What law did Kim Davis violate to get her ass arrested?”   I’ve discussing this with my wife and a couple  of my “Gay as Fuck” friends.
No one on Facebook even tried to answer the question. I Googled the shit out of Kim Davis and couldn’t find shit. That is until I found this;
Davis’ attorneys said the licenses issued Friday are not
“….worth the paper they are written on”
Because Davis did not authorize them. But attorneys for the gay couples who sued her along with the elected Rowan County attorney said the licenses were valid. U.S. District Judge David Bunning said he did not know if the licenses were valid but ordered them issued anyway.
Wait just a minute. Did Judge Bunning just say that he, himself didn’t know if the licenses were valid (legal) but ordered Davis to issue them anyway?
Mrs. 3.0 told me that the law Davis violated was the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 (Pub.L. 104–199, 110 Stat. 2419, enacted September 21, 1996, 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C). On the surface, that made sense to me.

On September 15, 2009, three Democratic members of Congress, Jerrold Nadler of New York, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, and Jared Polis of Colorado, introduced legislation to repeal DOMA called the Respect for Marriage Act. The bill had 91 original co-sponsors in the House of Representatives and was supported by Clinton, Barr, and several legislators who voted for DOMA. Congressman Barney Frank and John Berry, head of the Office of Personnel Management, did not support that effort, stating that “the backbone is not there” in Congress. Frank and Berry suggested DOMA could be overturned more quickly through lawsuits such as Gill v. Office of Personnel Management filed by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD).

In a pair of landmark decisions, the Supreme Court on Jun 26, 2013, struck down the 1996 law blocking federal recognition of gay marriage, and it allowed gay marriage to resume in California by declining to decide a separate case. The court invalidated the Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal benefits to gay couples who are legally married in their states, including Social Security survivor benefits, immigration rights and family leave.
On hearing the SCOTUS decision, LGBT groups around the country took it as a green light for same sex marriage nationwide.
I personally have thought that Chief Justice Roberts was a closet liberal or quisling to the conservative voting bloc. Having reflected on the SCOTUS decision, he may be smarter than I gave him credit for. By citing the 14th Amendment the Court struck down DOMA as unconstitutional and sent the issue back to the States. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy stated in the majority opinion: “The Court, in this decision, holds same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States.” That is not what they did and his statement is outside the power of the SCOTUS. He is legislating from the Bench. DOMA should have returned to Congress to be rewritten and maybe, passed.

DOMA was a bad law anyway. It was written by Republicans to garner votes during an election cycle. It pandered to their Base. When a bad law is written, we the voters should petition their elected representatives to change the law. If the elected officials tell us to stick it up our ass and think what we’re told to think, we have the Right to vote them out of office. If that fails, citizens have the Right, no, the obligation to dissent by using civil disobedience. This is what Davis is doing. Is there a question about whether she’s right or wrong?
No.

Here’s why. SCOTUS struck down DOMA so therefore you can’t be arrested by violating a law that doesn’t exist. SCOTUS struck DOMA down by citing the “equal protection under the law”. Under the 10th Amendment:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
Same sex marriage grants couples legal rights and protection under the law. States can legislate marriage because marriage is NOT mentioned in the Constitution. As this post is written, 25 States have passed laws allowing for same sex marriage. Kentucky is NOT one of them.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
Under the 14th Amendment, SCOTUS ruled that a same sex marriage granted in one State MUST be recognized in all 50 States. It does not make same sex marriage legal in all 50 States no matter how loud or often the Left says it is. If Steve and Gary get married in California, Kentucky MUST recognize the marriage as legal. However Debbie and Susan CANNOT marry in Kentucky (or get a marriage license) because same sex marriage is not legal in Kentucky.

Let me make this clear. If you know someone is going to commit murder and you know, you are guilty of murder as well “before the fact”. As an elected official you have sworn to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the respective State if you are a State Official. Davis knows that same sex marriage is ILLEGAL in the State of Kentucky so she was doing her sworn duty to support and protect the Constitution and Laws of Kentucky.
WHY KIM DAVIS?
At last count, there are about 90 county clerks around the country that are not issuing same sex marriage licenses. Why was Kim Davis singled out for “special treatment” by the media and Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD)? When this first started she was filmed saying that she doesn’t issue licenses to same sex couples because of “Legal and religious reasons”. The Media, the Left and the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) have cheerfully erased the word “Legal” from her statement.
Gay marriage is forbidden in the Bible and some very, very smart people knew that if they used this issue politically, the Religious Right would go absolutely ape shit. Also the secular American’s would rise up in indignant zeal calling for the separation of Church and State. The writers of the Constitution were very wise in including the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom of Religion in the same Amendment. No should be required to be a member of the Church of The United States to be a citizen. If government tries to eliminate the First Amendment’s religious clause the religious Americans would dissent. If by eliminating the 1st Amendment for religious reasons the secular citizens of America would lose their right to free speech to protest religion. Once the freedom of speech is lost Fascism follows. The First Amendment therefore protects everyone.
The following video illustrates how ignorant people are about the Bill of Rights.

httpv://youtu.be/eiZFXkmofgI

Please leave comments here on this page so that Facebook can go back to talking about cats.