I'm hoping the return of Kim Davis to her job and her sad, sad proclamation that she won't stand in the way of her deputies issuing marriage licenses marks the end (or at least the beginning of the end) to Ms Davis being anything more than a future trivia question or "where are they now?" newspaper filler, and that people will be able to get marriage licenses without going through someone's religious approval process.
'She said that having her name on the marriage certificate, whether she signs it or not, "authorizes marriage that conflicts with God's definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman [and] violates my deeply-held religious convictions and conscience. For me, this would be an act of disobedience to my God. "Whether I personally issue the license or whether one of my deputies issues it, the result is the same. The license is issued under the authority of Kim Davis, County Clerk of Rowan County."'
Ms Davis, the law (and the court orders) are not asking you to morally approve of any given marriage as a holy and righteous act before God. They are asking you to confirm a given marriage as legal under the laws of Kentucky and your county, to say that the individuals involved have the license — the freedom — to marry under the civil code. That's all.
Taking God's authority upon yourself, and insisting that issuing such licenses can only be graciously granted if you are acting on God's behalf in condoning and blessing such unions … is unseemly to say the least.
Davis has said she will not interfere with her deputy clerks issuing licenses.
'"I want the whole world to know … If any [deputy clerk] feels that they must issue an unauthorized license to avoid being thrown in jail, I understand their tough choice, and I will take no action against them."'
That's very gracious of you, Ms Davis. Also part of the terms of your remaining out of jail. And from what I've seen, there seem to be plenty of deputy clerks who don't think this is a "tough choice."
'"However, any unauthorized license that they issue will not have my name, my title or my authority on it. Instead, the license will state that they are issued pursuant to a federal court order. […] Effective immediately and until an accommodation is provided by those with the authority to provide it, any marriage license issued by my office will not be issued or authorized by me."'
I suspect, Ms Davis, that the happy spouses-to-be won't mind.
Kentucky clerk Kim Davis: I am being forced to disobey God
Returning to work, Kim Davis says marriage licenses issued by her office will be “unauthorized”
Wow! She's very full of herself, isn't she? I don't really picture any conversations down the road where a couple is upset or voices concern over their marriage license not having "her authority." "Gee, honey, the county clerk didn't sign our license. I wonder if that means our marriage is less real than others."
I give her another week or two before she steps down because God tells her that she can spread her message (Oops! I mean God's message) more effectively by other means. Probably a reality show or talk show.
Looking at a follow-up on this (http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/14/politics/kim-davis-same-sex-marriage-kentucky/index.html), it's not clear to me that Ms Davis isn't still in violation of her court order. Her suggestion is that she is allowing her deputies clerks to issue licenses — but in the same breath she questions if those licenses are valid under state law because they are not issued by her. (She's raised the same issue with her own suggestion that her name be removed from the licenses altogether.)
If she thinks the licenses are not valid, then she is not fulfilling her sworn duty , and she should be back in the clink — or resign, or take a leave of absence so that her deputy/ies can act on her behalf.
+Marty Shaw The only issue I see is either with (a) some marriage that ends up in divorce and one or the other party dickishly asserting it wasn't real, or (b) some government official (in Kentucky or elsewhere) not recognizing the marriage as legal because of the irregularity.
I'll confess that, snarky tone above, Ms Davis remains a mystery to me (not one I have delved into all that deeply beyond her actions and expressed opinions). She's received some dubious legal advice, and it may well be that she's being manipulated in this by others.
I don't know anything about her lawyers but I've worked with a few who were all about throwing gas on a fire to make a bad situation worse just so they could keep those billable hours climbing. Wouldn't be surprised if some of that was going on here.
+Marty Shaw Liberty Counsel, with Mat Staver (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathew_Staver) taking publicity point. In this case, I suspect it is less to crank up fees than to generate publicity for The Cause (Ms Davis' interests being secondary to same).
I believe that Ms. Davis also fails to fully comprehend that her name on this legal document simply indicates it is issued by the State and created on someone’s printer. Her name on it only indicates she is a clerk, not that she is vetting the license.