August 27, 201511 yr What's the usual punishment for contempt of court? I'm not sure of the usual punishment but if many on this forum have their way it sounds like Rowan County will hold a public hanging.
August 27, 201511 yr What's the usual punishment for contempt of court? I know if say I refuse to testify, I can be held in contempt and jailed until I agree to testify. Now obviously this is a little bit different. I've heard before that contempt of this nature can be up to a year in jail and some monetary fine. Don't quote me though on that.
August 27, 201511 yr I'm not sure of the usual punishment but if many on this forum have their way it sounds like Rowan County will hold a public hanging. No matter what side of the fence you're on in this issue you have to respect her standing her ground based on her beliefs. She no doubt will do some jail time, but it certainly won't be the first, and no doubt the last one did jail time for refusing to give in based on their beliefs.
August 27, 201511 yr No matter what side of the fence you're on in this issue you have to respect her standing her ground based on her beliefs. She no doubt will do some jail time, but it certainly won't be the first, and no doubt the last one did jail time for refusing to give in based on their beliefs. Not when her beliefs are flawed and she is being a hypocrite.
August 27, 201511 yr Not when her beliefs are flawed and she is being a hypocrite. Are you saying her beliefs are flawed because she's been married 2 or 3 times, or that her beliefs are flawed because she believes marriage should be between a man and a woman?
August 27, 201511 yr Are you saying her beliefs are flawed because she's been married 2 or 3 times, or that her beliefs are flawed because she believes marriage should be between a man and a woman? Beliefs are flawed because she has been married multiple times. That is hypocritical to me. Is she issuing licenses to divorcees such as herself? In her job, she is required to issue marriage licenses based on the law and not her beliefs. Once she decides to not issue licenses because of her beliefs then all of her beliefs are open to questioning. If she is against gay marriage that is cool but in her role her beliefs cannot come into play and stop her from doing a job that she is paid to do with taxpayer money.
August 27, 201511 yr Are you saying her beliefs are flawed because she's been married 2 or 3 times, or that her beliefs are flawed because she believes marriage should be between a man and a woman? It would seem she is struggling with her Christian beliefs if she believes that it is okay for her to be on marriage number four while she judges that others requests for marriage licenses threaten the sanctity of marriage.
August 27, 201511 yr Beliefs are flawed because she has been married multiple times. That is hypocritical to me. Is she issuing licenses to divorcees such as herself? In her job, she is required to issue marriage licenses based on the law and not her beliefs. Once she decides to not issue licenses because of her beliefs then all of her beliefs are open to questioning. If she is against gay marriage that is cool but in her role her beliefs cannot come into play and stop her from doing a job that she is paid to do with taxpayer money. It would seem she is struggling with her Christian beliefs if she believes that it is okay for her to be on marriage number four while she judges that others requests for marriage licenses threaten the sanctity of marriage. Thanks, and I agree that is hypocritical. So if she had only been married once then whether you agree with her stance or not, you would have no problem with her standing up for her belief.
August 27, 201511 yr Thanks, and I agree that is hypocritical. So if she had only been married once then whether you agree with her stance or not, you would have no problem with her standing up for her belief. # of trips down the aisle is immaterial in this case. Her job is to uphold the law of the land. She isn't.
August 27, 201511 yr Thanks, and I agree that is hypocritical. So if she had only been married once then whether you agree with her stance or not, you would have no problem with her standing up for her belief. I still wouldn't agree with her stance but I wouldn't have a problem with her standing up for her beliefs. As it is I feel as though she only has these "deeply held convictions " when they suit her. I have a feeling that she'd have been screaming bloody murder if one of her numerous requests for her own marriage licenses had been denied because the issuer felt that she was abusing the sanctity of marriage by trading in husbands like most people do cars.
August 27, 201511 yr You all have a point about her multiple marriages. Maybe she is a recent convert to Christianity (after her last marriage) and so her scruples changed because of her newfound faith. But that is all besides the point. Whether she is a hypocrite or not is a secondary issue and does not change the import of the only issue at hand. The main issue is whether a publicly elected official can refuse to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple because doing so would (in her view) "cause her to violate her religious convictions." In my view, since SCOTUS ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, she won't be able to maintain her stance. She will be forced to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples or face the consequences, unless the county or state comes up with a means to issue licenses that take it out of the clerks' hands. You all know I think the SCOTUS ruling was bogus but it is here and it is the law and the law don't care if it created a crisis of conscience for anybody.
August 27, 201511 yr Thanks, and I agree that is hypocritical. So if she had only been married once then whether you agree with her stance or not, you would have no problem with her standing up for her belief. If she was denying licenses to divorcees then I wouldn't have a problem with her standing up for her beliefs. At least she would be consistent then. I also think she can stand up for her beliefs and still distribute marriage licenses.
August 27, 201511 yr # of trips down the aisle is immaterial in this case. Her job is to uphold the law of the land. She isn't. That's not what was being discussed.
August 27, 201511 yr That's not what was being discussed. You asked if she had only been married once would her standing up for her beliefs be fine. I said that the number of marriages is immaterial. You don't get to stand up for your beliefs in her job. You stand up for the law.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.