Quantcast
Connect with us

Read one gay dad’s scathing letter to anti-LGBT Kentucky clerk Kim Davis: ‘Do your job’

Published

on

A gay dad who runs a parenting resource center for LGBT families wrote a scathing letter to Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who refuses to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples — in spite of multiple court orders.

Writing at Huffington Post, The Next Family’s Rob Watson said, “As a gay dad, Ms. Davis’s behavior bothers me on multiple levels. I look at the messages not just to me, but to my kids and their counterparts in LGBT families across the nation.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“Her treatment of two prospective families is humiliating and demeaning,” Watson continued. “Kids who are in LGBT families, and kids who are LGBT themselves should not be sent this message that a government official would rather they simply not exist.”

Furthermore, he said, he has concerns about Ms. Davis’ behavior.

“I am teaching my kids principles of responsibility and citizenship,” wrote Watson. “Ms. Davis violates that principle at every turn.”

He went on to write to Davis, “I understand that you are angry that the fight for marriage equality did not go the way you had hoped. While I am pretty sure I will not be able to persuade you into liking the decision, as a public servant, I do expect you to respect it.”

“Your demand that the terms of your job adhere to your own standards rather than the objective standards of law reminds me of how my 12-year old son would like rules applied,” he said. “He would like for his brother, who is 13, and him to be able to go to the local pool unattended. The pool’s rule for unattended kids is 14 and older. Jesse applies his logic this way: “Dad. If you add both Jason’s and my ages, together we are 25. That’s the same thing.” (Imagine them trying that logic at the local dance bar.)”

ADVERTISEMENT

“His logic and the rules are not the same thing. Neither is your desire and the rule you want to break on behalf of ‘your beliefs,’” said Watson, who has four children.

“In those situations, he, like you, will want to only do what he wants, when he wants. It has taken many discussions and his growing maturity to understand that by being part of a team, a village, a country and by agreeing up front to the terms of engagement, he does not get to violate rules just because he wants to,” he explained.

“It is a lesson I wish you, too, would learn,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

He went on to explain to Davis that the Liberty Counsel — the right-wing law firm dedicated to defending theocratic law in U.S. courts — does not have Davis’ best interests at heart when they urge her to flout the law and risk fines and imprisonment.

“Liberty Counsel seeks to attract emotionally charged hate money from those wanting to harm all gay families, from those who would wish to criminalize homosexuality, from those who see gay marriage and abortion with equal passion. Just because they have rallied to your cause, they are not your friends either however. What they are doing to you is worse than what they will actually be able to affect towards LGBT families,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Your ‘friends,'” Watson continued, “who themselves will reap millions, are telling you to hang out until the end where you will be potentially unemployed, and perceived globally as a selfish intolerant hypocrite who was cruel to her neighbors.”

He urged Davis to “do your job, respect the people making their own life choices, and trust the God you profess to believe in that love will prevail in the end.”

Read the full letter here.

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

George Conway reveals Trump is being shunned by law firms because young lawyers ‘want nothing to do with him’

Published

on

Conservative attorney George Conway asserted in a column over the weekend that President Donald Trump's history of mistreating law firms is catching up with him.

In a Sunday op-ed for The Washington Post, Conway explains that Trump is now faced with sparse choices for legal representation in his impeachment trial after years of not paying attorneys and generally being a bad client.

Pointing to Trump's choice of Alan Dershowitz and Kenneth Starr, Conway writes:

?The president has consistently encountered difficulty in hiring good lawyers to defend him. In 2017, after Robert S. Mueller III became special counsel, Trump couldn’t find a high-end law firm that would take him as a client. His reputation for nonpayment preceded him: One major Manhattan firm I know had once been forced to eat bills for millions in bond work it once did for Trump. No doubt other members of the legal community knew of other examples.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Texas GOPer Cornyn blames Trump’s problems on campaign ‘grifters’ — then calls Giuliani ‘not relevant’

Published

on

Appearing on CBS's “Face the Nation," Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) attempted to blame Donald Trump's impeachment problems on "grifters" who found a way to attach themselves to the now-president when he began to run for president.

Speaking with host Margaret Brennan, Cornyn was asked about allegations made by Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas that have implicated not only the president but Vice President Mike Pence and senior White House officials in an attempt to strongarm the leaders of Ukraine in return for military aid.

"Doesn't it trouble you that [Parnas] was working so closely with Rudy Giuliani, who was acting on the president's behalf and saying he was acting on the president's behalf?" host Brennan asked. "

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

‘No sound basis’: Georgetown law professor explains why Alan Dershowitz will crumble under Senate questioning

Published

on

Georgetown law professor John Mikhail suggested on Sunday that the portion of President Donald Trump's defense which is being covered by Alan Dershowitz to fail because it has "no sound basis" in history and law.

"There is no sound basis for Alan Dershowitz to claim that abuse of power is not an impeachable offense. In addition to being at odds with common sense, this claim is contradicted by a clear and consistent body of historical evidence," Mikhail stated.

The law professor cited the impeachment of Warren Hastings in the 1780s.

"Some of the best evidence comes from the case of Warren Hastings, which informed the drafting Art. II, Sec 4," Mikhail wrote. "The fact that he was not guilty of treason, but still deserved to be impeached, was a major reason 'other high crimes and misdemeanors' was added to the Constitution."

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image