County Clerk Kim Davis Defends Refusal to Issue Marriage Licenses – Insists She Shouldn't Have to Quit Job
Davis, who has been married four times herself, told Megyn Kelly that while she considered that her decision might land her in jail – which it did, for six days – she never saw resigning her elected position as an option.
“If I resign, I lose my voice,” she said. “Why should I have to quit a job I love and am good at?”
Davis claims that she asked for accommodations to be made in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s spring ruling on gay marriage when she originally accepted the position in January. However, she only received one response.
“They can accommodate for all sorts of issues, and we ask for some simple accommodation and we can’t receive it,” Davis said.
Kelly then addressed the issue that many critics of the county clerk point out about an accommodation, telling her that if one adjustment be made for her on the grounds of religion, similar adjustments would have to be made for other federal employees who cite religion as an obstacle to their workflow.
Davis replies that other religious arguments would be understandable if she “thought it was a valid argument.”
“The fact is, marriage is between a man and a woman. It’s not black and white,” she continues. “You’re not talking about a racial issue. I’m just talking about marriage in general.”
When Kelly challenges Davis, saying that ideas of who can and can’t marry vary by religion, the Kentucky resident holds steady and still defends her actions.
“So you have millions of Christians who object this whole same-sex marriage issue. Are their rights invalid? Are their rights not worth anything? It’s a valid point and it’s a fight worth fighting for,” she said.
According to Fox, last week an appeals court denied Davis’s request asking that she not be forced to serve any more marriage licenses since the couple she originally refused one to, received theirs.
On Wednesday, another bid stating that “she is likely to suffer irreparable harm by having to issue licenses,” was dismissed.
Judge David Bunning said that the arguments were dismissed because “this argument is unpersuasive because Davis has created her own risk of harm by violating a valid order issued by this court.”