Quoted from Libertarian4life

I don't know if she took the job before same sex marriage was made legal, but either way if her religion forbids her from doing the job, and she fails to do the job, the correct response is termination of employment for not performing required tasks, not imprisonment.

Imprisonment and trying to force her to act against her religious beliefs is clearly a violation of her rights.

Who ever heard of people going to jail for not doing their job.

People who won't do their jobs get fired, not jailed into submission.

IF she were hired, she could be fired.
IF elected, there are a different set of rules.

Quoted from Libertarian4life

I don't know if she took the job before same sex marriage was made legal, but either way if her religion forbids her from doing the job, and she fails to do the job, the correct response is termination of employment for not performing required tasks, not imprisonment.

Imprisonment and trying to force her to act against her religious beliefs is clearly a violation of her rights.

Who ever heard of people going to jail for not doing their job.

People who won't do their jobs get fired, not jailed into submission.

^5.....but a lot of Americans like to see their FELLOW AMERICANS to go to jail for disagreeing and not complying...

it's A Clockwork Orange...how did we get here? A whole generation legislated a bunch of laws and behaviors to allow it....

how fu(king progressive of them

U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning in Kentucky has ordered that Rowan County Clerk
Kim Davis be released from jail.

He ordered her not to interfere with clerks in her office issuing marriage licenses to
all legally eligible couples.

Quoted from Box A Rox

U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning in Kentucky has ordered that Rowan County Clerk
Kim Davis be released from jail.

He ordered her not to interfere with clerks in her office issuing marriage licenses to
all legally eligible couples.

Quoted Text

UPDATE
Davis' release from jail might not last very long. Her lawyers have indicated that she will,
in fact, halt the issuing of marriage licenses in direct violation of the order.

Quoted from Box A Rox

Put her in jail!  CRIMINAL!!!

Quoted from CICERO

Put her in jail!  CRIMINAL!!!

She was in jail...released....and likely going back.
Oh, and just to be clear...YOU MISSED THE POINT AS USUAL!!!! DUH!

Quoted from joebxr

She was in jail...released....and likely going back.
Oh, and just to be clear...YOU MISSED THE POINT AS USUAL!!!! DUH!

What was the point that I missed?  What does her marital history have to do with a federal judge throwing an elected county clerk in jail for not issuing a state license?

Quoted from CICERO

What was the point that I missed?  What does her marital history have to do with a federal judge throwing an elected county clerk in jail for not issuing a state license?

Again with the idiocy....she didn't get thrown in jail for failing to issue the licenses...she
was thrown in jail for contempt of court because she wouldn't comply with the law that
directs her to issue the licenses.  Just to humor your other area of brain fart, she is
claiming devote religious beliefs as her justification. Those beliefs apparently only
apply as she fits...you should be able to relate to that selective mentality!

In use today[edit]
Contempt of court is essentially seen as a form of disturbance that may impede the functionality of the court. The judge may impose fines and jail time upon any person committing contempt of court. The person is usually let out upon his agreement to fulfill the wishes of the court.[7] Civil contempt can involve acts of omission. The judge will make use of warnings in most situations that may lead to a person being charged with contempt. It is relatively rare that a person is charged for contempt without first receiving at least one warning from the judge.[8] Constructive contempt, also called consequential contempt is when a person fails to fulfill the will of the court as it applies to outside obligations of the person. In most cases, constructive contempt is considered to be in the realm of civil contempt because of its passive nature.

Indirect contempt is something that is associated with civil and constructive contempt and involves a failure to follow court orders. Criminal contempt includes anything that could be called a disturbance such as repeatedly talking out of turn, bringing forth previously banned evidence, or harassment of any other party in the courtroom.[7] Direct contempt is an unacceptable act in the presence of the judge (in facie curiae), and generally begins with a warning, and may be accompanied by an immediate imposition of punishment. Yawning in some cases can be considered contempt of court.[9]

Contempt of court has a significant impact on journalism in the form of restrictions on court reporting which are set out in statute in the UK.[10][not in citation given]

Under the United States jurisprudence, acts of contempt are divided into direct or indirect and civil or criminal. Direct contempt occurs in the presence of a judge; civil contempt is "coercive and remedial" as opposed to punitive. In the United States, relevant statutes include 18 U.S.C. §§ 401–403 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42.[15]

Direct contempt is that which occurs in the presence of the presiding judge (in facie curiae) and may be dealt with summarily: the judge notifies the offending party that he or she has acted in a manner which disrupts the tribunal and prejudices the administration of justice. After giving the person the opportunity to respond, the judge may impose the sanction immediately.
Indirect contempt occurs outside the immediate presence of the court and consists of disobedience of a court's prior order. Generally a party will be accused of indirect contempt by the party for whose benefit the order was entered. A person cited for indirect contempt is entitled to notice of the charge and an opportunity for hearing of the evidence of contempt and, since there is no written procedure, may or may not be allowed to present evidence in rebuttal.
Contempt of court in a civil suit is generally not considered to be a criminal offense, with the party benefiting from the order also holding responsibility for the enforcement of the order. However, some cases of civil contempt have been perceived as intending to harm the reputation of the plaintiff, or to a lesser degree, the judge or the court.

Sanctions for contempt may be criminal or civil. If a person is to be punished criminally, then the contempt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but once the charge is proven, then punishment (such as a fine or, in more serious cases, imprisonment) is imposed unconditionally. The civil sanction for contempt (which is typically incarceration in the custody of the sheriff or similar court officer) is limited in its imposition for so long as the disobedience to the court's order continues: once the party complies with the court's order, the sanction is lifted. The imposed party is said to "hold the keys" to his or her own cell, thus conventional due process is not required. The burden of proof for civil contempt, however, is a preponderance of the evidence, and theoretically punitive sanctions (punishment) can only be imposed after due process but the due process is unpublished.

again, I don't care if there are same sex marriages.....I ask "WHY DO WE BELIEVE THAT WE NEED A LICENSE FROM THE GOVERNMENT?"

Quoted from joebxr

Again with the idiocy....she didn't get thrown in jail for failing to issue the licenses...she
was thrown in jail for contempt of court because she wouldn't comply with the law that
directs her to issue the licenses.

Uhhh..Yeah I get what contempt of court is.  She was held in contempt and jailed because she did not issue a Kentucky marriage license. Yes...I seem to remember in 2004 when mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco ordered his country clerks to issue marriage licenses to gay couples and ACTUALLY ORDERED CLERKS TO BREAK CALIFORNIA MARRIAGE LICENSING LAWS.

So please spare me the "law and order" comply with law baloney.  She's held in contempt because she isn't rich and powerful and a high profile name.  She is being made an example of what happens if you do not comply with the ruling of 5 Supreme Court Justices.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/22/same.sex/
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/19/samesex.marriage/index.html

Quoted from CICERO

Uhhh..Yeah I get what contempt of court is.  She was held in contempt and jailed because she did not issue a Kentucky marriage license. Yes...I seem to remember in 2004 when mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco ordered his country clerks to issue marriage licenses to gay couples and ACTUALLY ORDERED CLERKS TO BREAK CALIFORNIA MARRIAGE LICENSING LAWS.

So please spare me the "law and order" comply with law baloney.  She's held in contempt because she isn't rich and powerful and a high profile name.  She is being made an example of what happens if you do not comply with the ruling of 5 Supreme Court Justices.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/22/same.sex/
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/19/samesex.marriage/index.html

You can pile bull$hit higher than anyone I've ever met!