Where does the line get drawn for a clerk in Kentucky?

Where does the line get drawn?

I read people screaming and yelling about a clerk in Kentucky, that stands up for her values and is using her discretion.  “She needs to be fire, she needs to be in jail, etc!”

I would like to see these same nitpicker screaming and yelling about the patrolman that uses his discretion to NOT give them a ticket for speeding.  The principle and severity are the same.  The clerk uses her discretion to say no to following a non-law.  Yet, the law also makes someone speeding worthy of get a ticket.

Will these people, demanding that the clerk’s head be hung a pillar of London Bridge also demand that the patrolman be fired…for not giving them a ticket for speeding?

States have all kinds of crazy intrusive laws that provide no value to civilized society.

I use Utah as an example, although any state would suffice.  In Utah it is unlawful to smoke is a vehicle that has children in it.  The idea is great.  The concept of not smoking around children is sound.  Actually, the idea of not smoking at all is sound.  However, that is far beyond the pale of good government.  Police officers exercising their discretion to give a person a warning, rather than a ticket, may be in violation of their duty.  Fire them?  Even if it is you that benefits from their discretion?

It is the law to wear a seatbelt.  If the enforcement officer gives you a warning (s)he should be fired.  No if, and, or buts about it. It’s the law, damn it, and there should be no allowance for deviation and discretion!  Right?  Unless, of course, it is you that is benefiting.  Then it is a whole different story.

But wait!  There is more.  What if the crime is serious.  Let’s say assault.  The prosecutor has the discretion to mitigate the charge…because it happened outside of a bar where everyone was drunk and throwing punches.  It is only rational that such discretion is NOT a good enough reason, in the logic of those that would force an elected official to follow the letter of the law for one simple reason.  The truth is that people who want her fired, jailed, drawn and quartered believe in something different from her.  Hence, the law should only apply to her…according to them, but not to themselves.

But Wait, there is even more.  There is NO LAW requiring that the clerk perform or issue licenses for the conduct which those “masters of all others” would mandate.  You see the United States Supreme Court, in responding to an issue, that they had no business being involved in to begin with, didn’t pass any laws.  They have no authority to pass any laws.

Now, taking this discussion to the extreme, where is the outcry for the SCOTUS to be arrested and jailed for violating their oath of office.  It is only reasonable that if we demand that a county clerk, duly elected to administer the law (nothing more and nothing less), be fire and jailed than the Supreme Court and all those that enforce their illegal requirements should be also fired and jailed.

If the demands of justice apply to one elected official than they should certainly apply to all appointed officials. The hate mongers of injustice excuse themselves by saying that Kentucky is a bunch of hicks, religious nutcases.  In the language those religious fanatic rednecks in Kentucky understand, but is beyond the mental capacity of deviants, “What is good for the goose is good for the gander.”

If a county clerk in Kentucky is to be jailed I want to see jail cells across America bulging at the seams with errant public officials.  If she is to lose her job prematurely I want to see all errant officials lose their jobs also.

But Wait.  There is more.  As I have written previously the Kentucky clerk is specifically protected under the US Constitution and the multitude of employment laws passed by Congress, signed by the president and upheld by the Supreme Court.  I shall not reiterate those arguments here.

Now, to deviate for just a brief few lines.

It is absolutely insane that this issue is even being pursued.  The state and federal government should have absolutely ZERO role in marriage.  None, nada, not a bit.  In the words of our illustrious golfer in chief “there is not a smidgen” of cause for the government to be involved in any marriage.

The cause of decadence is being advanced by elected officials across the nation.  Police officers, sworn to serve and protect, are being slaughtered in the street.  However, far too many of our elected officials are silent or ignorant of the consequences.  I prefer to call them complicit in their self-aggrandizing money-grubbing.

As the saying goes America is “going to hell in a handbasket,” while the Neros of the Say Anything Party fiddle amidst the flames.  They will not be satisfied until the last embers of civility and decorum have burned themselves ashes at the expense of political correctness.

That Is How I See It.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s