As Kim Davis returns to Work as a County Clerk in Kentucky, still insisting that she will not Issue Marriage Licenses to Same Sex Couples, it appears her Moment in the Spotlight may be Fading.
Deputy Clerks, who are willing to do the Job They're being Paid For, are picking up the Slack. It seems Licenses will still be Valid even without her Signature, at least for the Time Being.
However, the Real Message to Take from this, is the Knowledge that Some Americans care nothing for the Constitution, and the FREEDOMS IT GUARANTEES. Kim Davis is probably a Simple Pawn who is being used
by Ultra- Conservatives to Create Controversy, and Distract Voters from REAL ISSUES, SO HOPEFULLY THEY WILL FORGET THE PROGRESS THAT HAS BEEN ACHIEVED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.
Unfortunately, for them, YOU CAN IGNORE THE BODY OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, BUT ERASING IT IS NOT POSSIBLE.
Consider This, FROM ARTICLE 6:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
In what has to be one of the Most Unique Pieces of HYPOCRISY IN U.S. HISTORY, WE ARE LEFT WITH THE FOLLOWING;
ARTICLE 6 CLEARLY ASSERTS THIS MAXIM: THAT NO PERSON CAN BE DISQUALIFIED OR PREVENTED FROM HOLDING OFFICE BECAUSE OF THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. A VOW TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, AND SUPPORT IT, IS REQUIRED TO BE AN OFFICE HOLDER.
KIM DAVIS CAN HATE HOMOSEXUALITY, CALL IT IMMORAL AND SO ON....THAT CANNOT BE USED AGAINST HER, FOR IT WOULD BE A "RELIGIOUS TEST." PERSONAL FAITH CANNOT BE USED TO BARR ANYONE FROM HOLDING OFFICE.
SO WHAT HAS SHE, AND THOSE WHO THINK LIKE HER DONE? THEY HAVE CREATED A REQUIREMENT OF THEIR OWN.
THAT SHE WILL PERFORM HER DUTIES, AND UPHOLD THE DOCUMENT SHE VOWED TO SUPPORT, ONLY IF IT PASSES HER "RELIGIOUS TEST."
IN OTHER WORDS, CONSTITUTIONALLY SHE CANNOT
BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE FOR HER BELIEFS,
HOWEVER, SHE CLAIMS IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO IGNORE AND DISREGARD CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOMS, IF IT VIOLATES THOSE SAME BELIEFS.