While I’m glad to see Ms. Davis punished for breaking her oath of office, I’m sad about this specific outcome, because now she’s a martyr, and you have jackasses like Rand Paul saying she’s being “jailed for exercising her religious liberties”. (Apparently, violating one’s oath of office and denying citizens their rights because the magic sky god told you to is now a fundamental right.)

I really wish there had been some quiet way to just impeach or recall her, a whimper rather than a bang to end her career. Honestly, this is probably exactly the outcome the extremists who support her wanted.

Aside: I heard on NPR that Davis (a Democrat, interestingly) succeeded her mother as clerk, who had held the office for something like 30 years. I didn’t realize elected offices in the US were hereditary.

Aside: Why does Davis get this stoic photo leading the article? Where is the unflattering mugshot?

56 thoughts on “While I’m glad to see Ms. Davis punished for breaking her oath of office, I’m sad about this specific outcome,…

  1. I read a comment elsewhere that jailing here is probably a better way for gay couples to get their licenses. If she’s fined, she’s still able to report to work and do her job. If she’s jailed, then her boss – who some say has signaled his or her willingness to issue licenses to gay couples – can issue licenses in her absence. If she were still able to report and do her job, her boss wouldn’t have had the legal authority to step in.

  2. < ![CDATA[I read a comment elsewhere that jailing here is probably a better way for gay couples to get their licenses. If she's fined, she's still able to report to work and do her job. If she's jailed, then her boss - who some say has signaled his or her willingness to issue licenses to gay couples - can issue licenses in her absence. If she were still able to report and do her job, her boss wouldn't have had the legal authority to step in.]]>

  3. < ![CDATA[Tim Koppang The article says the judge didn't think fines were adequate, maybe for the reasons Dave Turner outlines above. If she was actually a decent person, she'd just step down.]]>

  4. Aside: NPR mentioned that she’s been divorced three times. Some of the protesters brought that up, which friends of Davis said was “unfair.” “Why are they bringing her personal life into this?”

    I loved that. She can bring her personal beliefs into the equation, but if her opponents do, it’s not fair.

  5. < ![CDATA[Aside: NPR mentioned that she's been divorced three times. Some of the protesters brought that up, which friends of Davis said was "unfair." "Why are they bringing her personal life into this?" I loved that. She can bring her personal beliefs into the equation, but if her opponents do, it's not fair.]]>

  6. More than that she had children to a man who was not her husband at the time. Normally a pretty “none of your damn business” thing…except when you’re an elected official making “sanctity of marriage” arguments.

  7. < ![CDATA[More than that she had children to a man who was not her husband at the time. Normally a pretty "none of your damn business" thing...except when you're an elected official making "sanctity of marriage" arguments.]]>

  8. Well, let’s be fair. She is in jail. So she took a stand. It was stupid, and we can all agree on that, but she made her choice — civil disobedience and all. I’m not so keen on calling her out on her divorce situation.

  9. < ![CDATA[Well, let's be fair. She is in jail. So she took a stand. It was stupid, and we can all agree on that, but she made her choice — civil disobedience and all. I’m not so keen on calling her out on her divorce situation.]]>

  10. That would be the part where she believes in the bible enough to refuse her do her job, but not enough to refuse to fuck people who aren’t her husband.

    Technically all the bible pounders who are cheering her now should actually be stoning her to death…you know if the reason was really the bible and not just bigotry.

  11. < ![CDATA[That would be the part where she believes in the bible enough to refuse her do her job, but not enough to refuse to fuck people who aren't her husband. Technically all the bible pounders who are cheering her now should actually be stoning her to death...you know if the reason was really the bible and not just bigotry.]]>

  12. What’s worse is that the Bible is not clear at all on the definition of marriage, nor on it’s alleged, unilateral condemnation of homosexuality. Davis is following specific dogma of contemporary evangelicals, which is, for the most part, totally whacked.

    She is not a typical Christian. She is an extremist, no different from the Muslim extremists constantly plastered all over American news.

  13. < ![CDATA[What's worse is that the Bible is not clear at all on the definition of marriage, nor on it's alleged, unilateral condemnation of homosexuality. Davis is following specific dogma of contemporary evangelicals, which is, for the most part, totally whacked. She is not a typical Christian. She is an extremist, no different from the Muslim extremists constantly plastered all over American news.]]>

  14. < ![CDATA[I savor the irony of Davis' supporters arguing that the decision of "five Supreme Court Justices isn't a law" while also holding beliefs based on interpretations of the literal word of the Bible.]]>

  15. I think I see what’s happening. A lot of peeps are assuming they know her beliefs and ascribe hipocracy. There are more “christian” sects than there are blades of grass. You can’t with any authority apply the term hipocracy until you know what she does or does not believe in.

  16. < ![CDATA[I think I see what's happening. A lot of peeps are assuming they know her beliefs and ascribe hipocracy. There are more "christian" sects than there are blades of grass. You can't with any authority apply the term hipocracy until you know what she does or does not believe in.]]>

  17. Felbrigg Herriot She has stated pretty clearly what she believes in.

    That, and we can look at her actions. Namely, that she is willing to compromise what she sees as “God’s law” when it comes to her own life, but not when it comes to the lives of complete strangers.

  18. < ![CDATA[Felbrigg Herriot She has stated pretty clearly what she believes in. That, and we can look at her actions. Namely, that she is willing to compromise what she sees as "God's law" when it comes to her own life, but not when it comes to the lives of complete strangers.]]>

  19. From a tweet I read that highlights Twitter’s ability to hone ideas to razor-sharp clarity:

    “No one’s being jailed for practicing her religion. Someone’s being jailed for using the government to force others to practice her religion.”

  20. < ![CDATA[From a tweet I read that highlights Twitter's ability to hone ideas to razor-sharp clarity: "No one's being jailed for practicing her religion. Someone's being jailed for using the government to force others to practice her religion."]]>

  21. I’m glad she’s being punished, and I think she should have stepped down from her position. But crying “Hypocrisy!” because she’s been divorced four times feels just a bit too much like liberal (combined with a healthy dose of atheist) smugness. She took a stand (a wrong-headed and insensitive stand), and now she’s paying the price. Relying on your interpretations of the Bible to call her out on hypocrisy is too easy. We all know that many conservative Christians don’t follow the Bible in all places, and they seem to feel they’ve reconciled those differences. That’s a larger debate, and maybe one worth having, but it seems sort of beside the point here. Declaring that you know better what her beliefs should be because you think you know her religion better than her is a weird way to go.

  22. < ![CDATA[I'm glad she's being punished, and I think she should have stepped down from her position. But crying "Hypocrisy!" because she's been divorced four times feels just a bit too much like liberal (combined with a healthy dose of atheist) smugness. She took a stand (a wrong-headed and insensitive stand), and now she's paying the price. Relying on your interpretations of the Bible to call her out on hypocrisy is too easy. We all know that many conservative Christians don't follow the Bible in all places, and they seem to feel they've reconciled those differences. That's a larger debate, and maybe one worth having, but it seems sort of beside the point here. Declaring that you know better what her beliefs should be because you think you know her religion better than her is a weird way to go.]]>

  23. Why must you spoil our fun, Tim Koppang?

    I see what you’re saying. Bringing her past relationships into it is an ad hominem, and doesn’t really address the facts, which are damning enough.

    But! I can’t help but sympathize with the liberal/atheist rage. This whole story — the person holding others to standard which they themselves fail to maintain — is so damn old. And if she is going to judge others based on their private lives, why can’t we judge her on hers? Or do we have to take the high road?

  24. < ![CDATA[Why must you spoil our fun, Tim Koppang? I see what you're saying. Bringing her past relationships into it is an ad hominem, and doesn't really address the facts, which are damning enough. But! I can't help but sympathize with the liberal/atheist rage. This whole story — the person holding others to standard which they themselves fail to maintain — is so damn old. And if she is going to judge others based on their private lives, why can't we judge her on hers? Or do we have to take the high road?]]>