Rob Rogers for September 13, 2015

I guess civil disobedience is only good when it is for a liberal cause.

Clearly if every government official were able to do anything they want based on their own personal convictions the rule of law and government would be over. We would be right back to the stone age.

What do you mean “if”?

I always thought religious freedom meant the right to go to the church of your choice and to be able to worship the God of your choice. After all, there are thousands of Gods. It did not mean you have the right to be a raging jerk.

Five appointed individuals, using their own personal moral convictions, overrode four other appointed individuals who used their strict interpretation of the law to effectively rewrite the law of the land. Marriage is not mentioned in the constitution, and as such it is not within the jurisdiction of the federal government. Everything is within the jurisdiction of the states unless specifically assigned to the federal government by the constitution. Marriage is not a right, but is a privilege, for which one must meet the requirements. Kentucky has its own marriage laws which define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. When Kim Davis took her oath, that was the only law that she was required to follow on that issue.

The supreme court decision determined that rightly or wrongly. the 14th amendment, written long before this issue was ever considered or thought possible, none the less applied to the various marriage laws of all the states. It in effect ruled Kentucky’s marriage law to be unconstitutional, leaving no actual law governing marriage for Kim Davis, her deputies or anyone else to uphold and follow. Kim Davis had no power to rewrite the law. The federal judge who ordered her to comply with the law or go to jail, made a dreadful mistake, a fact of which I believe he is now aware. The order should have been directed to the Kentucky legislature to amend the law. If Kim refused to follow a revised law, then perhaps her situation would be different.

The supreme court, more and more, seems to be overstepping the power and authority assigned to it by the constitution. As appointed officials they are deciding issues based on their own personal political, moral and ethical opinions, rather than strict interpretation of the laws and the constitution. The will of the people means nothing. To all those who are ridiculing Kim Davis, and calling her a lot of vile names, wait until a future decision goes against one of your deeply held beliefs. Freedom and the democratic process are gradually being eroded

It’s all about Freedom FROM Kim Davis’ Religion..Just like the Constitution says.

Yes, freedom is mentioned, but marriage is a privilege, not a right. You have to meet the requirements in order to obtain a licence. There are age requirements, plus limitations on the participants, such as the number (2) and certain relationships to each other such as siblings. You can’t get a drivers licence without passing the tests and meet the age requirements. The issue isn’t religion or gay marriage. It is whether the laws have been enacted properly according to the will of the people, and subsequently interpreted correctly by the courts.

@Hiram Bingham

“But marriage IS a freedom. Currently unfairly denied to some.”

The subject of freedom, rights and privileges is a very interesting one to debate. However, marriage is a legal contract between the two parties and the government. Freedom extends only to the right to apply. From that point onward it becomes a privilege because the government has the right to impose its terms and conditions, just as the church has if the couple wish to sanctify the union in a religious ceremony. One could argue that the privilege had been unfairly denied to some but not the freedom. That changed as of June 2015, but it is a legal technicality that the privilege was suspended for everyone at that point until Kentucky changes its law to conform with the Supreme Court ruling.