I thought Bridget Burke’s post was perfectly clear.
So did I.
It’s a really common sentence structure in my experience.
I don’t understand anything any of you say.
Well, you’re Really Not All That Bright.
Kentucky statue 402.100 (1) (c) permits a deputy to sign.
Which means they are still technically in violation of the law.
“by order of the federal govt” - we’re so oppressed!
And this is why I am curious if she is still likely to be found in violation of the order of the court. The law says the deputies are permitted to sign and she is no longer ordering the to refrain from signing BUT, it appears the deputies are not signing. Which brings up this ridiculous issue of whether they are valid or not.
I know we already discussed the fact that most courts have held that marriages can’t be invalidated because of some technicality of this type. In the other thread about the validity of these marriages I linked to this column by Cecil with this quote that
So it seems they would be upheld in court but is she just going to be able to play this little game until the law is changed or what?
Please review the law cited in the link. It gives the deputies the authority to issue. Also, they are signing the licenses (although I don’t think her son is). The bottom line is that the process is going on without her, and in accordance with the statute.
If they are signing them that would seem to be a change from what I have read earlier in the thread and in news stories. I understand they would be valid if they are doing that.
http://ak-hdl.buzzfed.com/static/2015-09/4/15/enhanced/webdr11/enhanced-buzz-wide-18262-1441396144-7.jpg The parties’ addresses were redacted for the pic of the deputy-issued marriage license.
Thats one from last week - this weeks supposedly has “by ordeer of the federal govt” -
[QUOTE=http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/14/politics/kim-davis-same-sex-marriage-kentucky/index.html]
The marriage license that the couple received said “pursuant to federal court order” on it, and instead of listing Davis’ name and Rowan County, it says city of Morehead, the county seat.
[/QUOTE]
Either way, the fact remains that the requisite information of the parties is being properly recorded on the county’s licenses, and the licences are being issued by deputies in accordance with the statute. Just because the certificates don’t have a gold tassel does not invalidate them.
But if the certificate does have a gold fringe, doesn’t that mean they can only be married by a ship’s captain aboard a vessel on the high seas?
and I never said it did - I simply stated that the clerks, deputy or otherwise, are still technically not following the law or the judges orders - this is shenanigans. (IMHO, of course).
Davis seems to think its her “authority” that makes them valid - that her ‘refusal’ to authorize them or attach her name to them makes them invalid.
TECHNICALLY - they are not properly issued according to the statute - but that does not invalidate them at this point - only a court could do that, and that isn’t likely to happen.
Has there been any reluctance to have the actual weddings recorded? Most of this kerfluffle has been over permits, but what about the actual marriages?
Is anybody going to jump up and down, when one of these couples files a joint income tax statement, and say, “Wait! The marriage hasn’t been recorded in the county hall of records!”?
Or is it just only the permits that have been stonewalled. (YSWID)
at this point, it has been about the license - no one (to my knowledge) has sent in the the ‘its done’ part to be recorded - it will be interesting to see what happens then.
“oh dear, that seems to have been lost… for shame”
so - it occurs to me - that has to be her next gambit -
she’s making sure that the current licenses don’t meet the statute - so, when they come back in to be recorded- she can look at them and say “not valid”, and refuse to record them on that basis - and might even have the law behind her.
Of course, it’s her own doing - but that has to be in her brain if she’s able to think that far ahead of it.
I still don’t understand who you think said these marriage licenses are invalid. Clearly from what I’ve posted I know they are valid. My only question is - has this woman managed to figure out how to avoid doing her job and stay out of jail or is it she still running the risk of getting locked up for contempt?
And I’m sure she appreciates you looking out for her personal failings, because you can totally read her mind and know the exact interpretation of the Bible her specific sect practices, since you’re a studied theological expert and all.
And entirely hypocritical. If you want to insult someone for the laughable “crime” of not following every word of the Bible (a standard a four-year old would be embarrassed to come up with), you’re required to do the same. Just ask some of your fellow Bible-thumpers for advice.
Rather amusing that you don’t even know what Bible-thumper means.