Disgraced Lump of Shit Kim Davis Again Asking SCOTUS to Terminate Gay Marriage

The definition of insanity.

She will probably wind up being vindicated and putting the crown jewel in the largest rollback in rights this country has ever seen.

If anybody deserves brain cancer …

But Christians love their gays, it's only the trannies the Christians want to get rid of.

She's dumb, butt-ugly, bigoted and a tool. No way she's funding this herself.

Let's not forget her multiple divorces, years of whoremongering, and relatively late-in-life conversion to Jesus.

R6, a textbook case of the zeal of the newly converted.

Anne Rice also went whole hog Christian after becoming a believer again but eventually gave it up.

R7 Kim Davis already was a whole hog, so she had to adopt this crusade.

If her attempt to terminate gay marriage won't work, someone else's will. SCOTUS is waiting for the appropriate argument to justify their twisted logic explanation as to why gay marriage is not legitimate. And after than, they will make gay sex illegal as well. If you think this is bullshit in today's political world, you are living in a deluded reality. Christo-fascism will replace democracy.

I would bet good money that younger gays won't mind because marriage is not "queer" and the main issue is that trans sex workers of color are dying by the thousands.

Wrong, r10. Teenagers and twenty-somethings are not retarded. If anything, they would be extra angry because they're too young to remember the fight for gay marriage. They would correctly realize that a fundamental civil rights is being taken away.

She’s just a hateful cunt that only goes on living through her miserable, empty life out of spite.

It's funny that her name is Kim Davis because she looks like a Garfield character

Such a hateful and obsessed person as Davis seriously deserves to have the living shit beaten out of her by a gaggle of vicious drag queens in full makeup and costume.

Davis is even more hateful and obsessed than R10 is.

How does she even have standing to sue? Gay marriage has zero effect on her life. She's free to find another job if she doesn't want to deal with marriage licenses for gay couples.

She's another grifter who got a taste of fame and can't let go of the spotlight. Who's funding her?

Calling her a lump of shit is an insult to shit

You know exactly who's funding her R16 - the Christians.

Can we gays sue her for something? I'd be fucking thrilled to donate money to doing that.

I'll donate to her Ozempic fund. She's still fat.

Desperately trying to relive her glory days. We see you, Kim.

"Who's funding her?"

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if she was being aided and abetted by DL's numerous and vociferous anti-trans queens.

r21 Which live rent free in your head.

She's not doing this - some conservative group is giving her money and using her name recognition to push this through.

I don't believe for a second that she's that principled about this issue.

These religious conservatives will stop at nothing until they get their way.

Fuck. Imagine picking THIS WOMAN as your celebrity spokesperson.

What, was Harvey Weinstein busy?

Kim, Kimmy, KimKo, listen; he will never come back to you. Ever. He’s an homosexual and there’s nothing you can do about it. You can’t even invalidate his marriage. No. Take that five-head and find yourself a mouth-breather. He’ll beat you and you’ll love it.

One of the greatest "accidental" photos of all time.

This hog was married 4 times. Sanctity my ass.

She was fucking one of her future husbands while still married to her then-current husband. Then she did the same thing all over again. Such a paragon of morality!

What's amazing is that there were four men on the entire planet who actually wanted to fuck that pig.

Because it has caused exactly 0 problems?

R9 is right-The "EVIL SCOTUS 6" have been waiting to overturn Gay Marriage. Roberts, Pubic hair Thomas-Catholic nazi Alito have been wanting to do overturn this. They overturned Roe, voters rights, want to "keep down the minorities"& destroy the Federal Gov't.

miss kim "has right to belong to a church or support religious organizations that oppose homosexuality and same-sex marriage."

however... kim’s legal argument isn't about opposing "marriage" or "sex."

it's homosexual "behavior."

Ahem

Inhale that KFC faster, Kim.

Fuck that cunt! She can go get a job at the DMV if gay marriage is so triggering for her.

It is so unseemly for someone that ugly to be on TV talking about anything sexual at ALL.

Kim Davis is just another republican griffter

If you opaid her enough, she'd recant her opposition.

Rep 4:

"But Christians love their gays"

They "hate their sins", i.e. humping another of the same sex.

Her position never made any sense.

There was a Gallup poll conducted two years after the Supreme Court legalized interracial marriage. Only 20% of Americans said they approved of interracial marriage at the time. Yet personal opposition to such marriages didn't mean that a government official could decline to follow the law of the land and refuse to hand out such licenses. If they didn't want to do it, they had to quit and find other work.

Why would this be any different?

Probably funded by Mrs. Clarance Thomas & Co.

Ginny Thomas is another batshit lunatic. And of course we all know about her husband.

She doesn’t have standing. It’s a distant possibility the Court will do everything it can to twist itself into a pretzel to justify her standing, but she doesn’t have it. She’s not going to be the avenue for the reversal of marriage for millions of couples. Coney Barrett, crying college rapist beer boy, and even Gorsuch are not showing much inclination of dealing with this (by today’s standards) very popular issue. Yes, there has been a decline of some support amongst Republicans which is why we need to get rid of the albatross of the you know who’s around our necks.

In every other Western country, an insane religious zealot cunt like Kim Davis would be an object of ridicule and told to fuck off by everyone, including the media and politicians. In the US she's taken seriously. It's nuts.

How does that soil taste down there, Mr Ostrich @R42?

She's still holding fast to her pentacostal hair and multiple thin, cheap layered teeshirts.

She has the votes.

Did they agree to hear the case or did she just file?

Just filed so far, but with this fucking joke of a Supreme Court who knows. They might hear it.

Of course they will hear it and of course they will do her bidding.

In 2020, she pulled this with SCOTUS. At that time, Thomas and Alito, though sympathizing with the religious "freedoms" of Davis and other like-minded bigots, agreed with the other justices not to hear this case. Whether or not they'll turn her down this time remains to be seen, but the same justices turned her down 5 years ago. I have no faith, however (so to speak) in SCOTUS, obviously.

Why is this cunt so obsessed with same sex marriage?

R51 Because her four marriages stink of failure and stale Fritos, so she wants everyone else to be as miserable.

R51, because she's an adulterous old whore and demeaning gay marriage, makes her feel better about her own marriages and homewrecking

Why, R51? Because she was humiliated and sanctioned the last time because of her anti-gay bigotry, and that makes her want to double down. And she sees an "in" in the present political climate.

She got rich last time too. She had all kinds of fundraisers and private donors. She wasn't allowed to have a gofundme, but on reddit, her neighbors reported a bunch of new cars and home improvements including a pool installation

We need to start a gay religion.

This might be funny to you all, but it's not good. She most likely has the backing of the Republicans lawyers and pockets as she is just the pawn they need to take this to the Supreme Court. The first time around she was hooked up with Huckabeeast's father financially and politically backing her.

Wow r55. What a grifting piece of shit. She is truly a despicable person.

I can not imagine being this obsessed with people’s attraction preferences to this degree.

It doesn't matter how marriage equality is polling. Or whether younger voters are 100% for equality. The republican supreme court cunts will do away with gay marriage. They took a away a women's right to choose and white women voted for Trump anyway. Not that they care one way or another about election results.

[bold]The TRANZ are going to cost us Gay Marriage. And this is probably going to be the case that does it. [/bold] And Tranz don't give a fuck because THEY can't get a man or a marriage license. They became the "boogie man" the Right Wing needed. Prancing around the White House. Talking about CHILDREN. Calling biological women names like TERF. Stealing sports medals and female locker rooms. And don't just blame the MAGA and Republicans. The GOP is doing what the GOP does--take advantage of every opportunity---and men in dresses are giving them all the material they need.

[bold] It's not just Gay Marriage. It's also Social Security SSM benefits that will be taken from gays, making gay seniors poorer. [/bold] But of course you can't explain that to a MAN in a dress who refuses to pay for bread at DisneyLand.

[quote] It's also Social Security SSM benefits that will be taken from gays

Huh, R62? How will gay people lose their Social Security benefits? You sound mental.

The Heritage Foundation, Russell Vought & co. are pushing for the abolishment of social security. Their new flack in the Labor Bureau called it a "Ponzi scheme" on Fox News. Why the... person above chose to only highlight gays when everyone will be affected indicates a certain solipsism that permeates their worldview.

This appeal will be easily dismissed. It will not get the four votes needed for cert.

Why would any straight person care that gays can marry?

Gee, I don't know. Why would a straight person care if a MAN uses a woman's restroom or takes a woman's sports medal? And what's the deal with Straights not allowing CHILDLESS MEN in dresses to give the straights parenting and MEDICAL advice?

Gay Survivor Benefits are getting taken from gays the day after we lose marriage. And men in dresses don't give a fuck about that. They only care about TikTok dollars and giving MAGA fresh material on a daily basis.

It's about power R66. People want it and, as a relatively small segment of the population, we're an easy target. On a government level, gays and childless women are a good scapegoat for a population decline that has largely economic and environmental causes.

Right. Let's blame the trans instead of the people who are actually restricting rights.

[quote] Gay Survivor Benefits are getting taken from gays the day after we lose marriage.

More from the mental case. Not sure how taking away same sex marriage is a response from SCOTUS about trans people.

[quote] Right. Let's blame the trans instead of the people who are actually restricting rights.

You're right. Let's pretend tranz don't give MAGA all the material they need. And let's ignore the fact that the tranz do it for money. Also that the MAGAs couldn't be so effective without the tranz. Also ignoring that ALL in the LGBT get lumped together an vilified because of the trans, even though WE did nothing wrong.

This thread has nothing to do with trans people. Go away, anti-trans LOON.

They don't need trans to hate gays.

My point exactly, R73.

She raised him right

Shame! Taylor Swift warned everyone.

[quote]How will gay people lose their Social Security benefits? You sound mental.

If SCOTUS overturns Obergefell, then the surviving same sex spouses of deceased LGBTQ+ persons would be barred from receiving survivor benefits. Does that sound mental?

"The guards were just doing their job. They didn't do anything wrong". -----R69

R77 that’s not accurate

Can we get a work furlough for Luigi Mangione to take care of this cunting heifer?

R77 = Exactly. And that's where we are headed. There are going to be some poor gay seniors when part of their SS is taken away. And there is ONE LETTER in the LGBT that is working to help MAGA accomplish that. Ignore it if you want. Kamala ignored it too.

R79, Social Security is a FEDERAL benefit, if they reverse gay marriage back to the states, you will lose social security. That's exactly the way it was before the Supreme Court ruled in favor of gay marriage. Now that 3 of those original judges are gone and replaced with Trump MAGA judges, you can bet they will overturn gay marriage.

[quote]that’s not accurate

Here's what the SSA has to say on the matter:

[quote]Who can get Survivor benefits You may qualify if you’re the spouse, divorced spouse, child, or dependent parent of someone who worked and paid Social Security taxes before they died.

No mention of benefits for non-family members.

Remember the argument FOR federal right to marriage was that there are about 1,000 rights you only get through legal marriage? Well, that could all be gone if they overturn that one right.

Not just about money. For example if your spouse wound up in court accused of some crime, if you are legally married they can't force the spouse to testify against them. If you are not married, like a child, relative, friend, roommate they could force you legally testify against him and send him to jail.

^^ So what that means is they can force you into court, which means they can also look into YOUR background and bring that all in the open as a way to say are a sketchy low life or however the prosecution wants to paint you just to win that case. Or even implicate you in the crime.

[bold]"Actually ZERO percent sounds high. It's probably more like minus 7%.."[/bold]---------->>> South Bend, Indiana black voters.

Overturning the original ruling will not mean an existing marriage is void ab initio.

Lots of hysterics who know nothing on this thread

Wow this thread really sent the anti-trans loon spiraling.......unless it's just a parody troll trying to make things interesting.

When Anita Bryant launched her "Save Our Children" crusade, she was trying to "save" them from GAY MEN. Not trans. That witch believed that because homosexuals can't reproduce (not actually correct- heterosexuals do the repopulating of homosexuals for us), that they must recruit and groom kids. These fundamentalists will never like you.

The fundamentalist ideology is the one that's screwing up this country - and there's a direct link from Anita Bryant to today's radicalized right wingers.

[quote]Overturning the original ruling will not mean an existing marriage is void ab initio

It can be, and with this hand picked ultra right court they can make anything retroactive. If they abolishing the mandate as a federal issue and pushing it back to the states will destroy many gay marriages as about 35 states still do not have the right in their own constitution.

Even if you live in a blue state like New York, the minute you cross state line your marriage can be considered illegal or unrecognized. Or suppose you work in a blue state but the company headquarters is in a red state? Does that company now have to offer health insurance or other benefits? The answer is now, because I personally experienced this before gay marring was nationalized.

Wow, only took 7 mos. The Angry Old White Men must be harrassing their Representatives.

I wouldn't put making gay sex illegal past this Supreme Court.

I would.

I’m sorry but you’re mistaken.

She’s bitter because she’s HOMELY.

Despite its reputation, Datalounge is more often the home of polite understatement. See r95.

If the bulk of SCOTUS declines to erase gay marriage, I wonder how the Deplorables will react? For many of them it was the key voting issue.

R97 = Have you met this SCOTUS? Roberts will side with the liberals but the others are going against Gay Marriage.

AI breakdown----->>> "Some legal experts believe it's unlikely the Supreme Court will overturn Obergefell, citing the Respect for Marriage Act and the potential for political backlash. ".........AI has also never met this SCOTUS.

Read this and calm the fuck down. As I said above, Kim Davis is not going to be the avenue for overturning Obergefell. Not even close. The hysteria here over this is ridiculous and embarrassing. Most of the people in this thread have a fundamental misunderstanding how the court works. She has no standing and will be rejected, there will not be four votes on an extremely popular issue on cert.

And the people above that say my head is in the sand? Go fuck yourselves, you pathetic singletons. I actually have a dog in this fight, a marriage and relationship of 35 years that could potentially be (note I said POTENTIALLY) upended if marriage was overturned. Even then, I’m STILL not worried because an overturning of Obergefell WOULD NOT AFFECT MY MARRIAGE. It would give power back to the states WHICH WOULD STILL HAVE TO RECOGNIZE MY MARRIAGE even in shitholes like Texas and Alabama.

Knock it off. The kind of obnoxious disinformation displayed above is why people don’t take us seriously in the political scheme. You don’t help yourselves inciting hysteria and behaving this way. You give up our hard fought and won power when you behave like screaming infants. Grow up and stop behaving like hysterical brats. I have to believe it’s a bunch of misinformed Gen Z and millennials acting this way. No one else would be so bizarrely disconnected from reality.

[quote]MY MARRIAGE. It would give power back to the states WHICH WOULD STILL HAVE TO RECOGNIZE MY MARRIAGE even in shitholes like Texas and Alabama.

That's just not true. A state like Texas can if the don't already decline to recognize gay marriage of any kind while in their state. There is no federal law that would force them to do what you claim if that federal law is overturned like Kim Davis is being used as a pawn to get it to the Supreme Court.

You still have not responded the the main point, you will lose ALL FEDERAL BENEFITS if they overturn the right to marry. Maybe YOU wont be affected because you don't care about cretin things but many other gay couples will lose a lot. Even things like adoption will be affected.

Keep in mind, the Supreme Court can decide what the actual issue is, not want is actually presented to them. They have done this recently with many of Trump's wins.

R99, I agree with you. I assume you're an attorney. Could you answer this for me? I'm single, but even at my age (62) I still entertain the hope of meeting a man, falling in love, and getting married. I live in a state that would continue to recognize marriage equality. What would happen, however, if the SCOTUS chips away at marriage equality by allowing states to decide which marriages to recognize? Your marriage might be safe, but would mine be if I married after such a ruling? That's where I see a problem. Your marriage might remain unaffected by a ruling, but future marriages between same-sex couples might be. Thank you.

R100 you’re wrong six ways to Sunday. Stand down, and let the adults and lawyers discuss.

You don’t understand the law R100, and you’re trying to stir up hysteria with uninformed statements like ALL FEDERAL BENEFITS WILL BE REMOVED. You have zero evidence of that. We are nowhere near that point. Stop.

I’m not an attorney R101. I know how to read and interpret without bias, something frequently sorely lacking here and in this discussion that is being drummed up by the media to get clicks. It would be fair to assume that if Obergefell is reversed that gay marriage in hostile southern states would be difficult to come by. Liberal states will not have this issue. Marriages that exist already would still be protected in hostile states. Anything happening after that is wild supposition and pointless to discuss. Especially since it’s used to engender hysteria and overreaction, as seen throughout this thread.

Thank you, R104. I'm not given to hysteria either, but many assumed Roe v. Wade was established law, then...lo and behold. The two justices who have voiced support of returning tp Obergefell are Thomas and Alito. Could they influence Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett? That's on the back burner of my worries.

A more pressing worry is the chipping away at the rule of law that the present SCOTUS is doing in its rulings -- allowing an unprecedented wielding of power without consequence to the POTUS. And we have a rubber-stamp Congress acquiescing to it as well.

It's imperative that Democrats regain control of both chambers.

Understand that rationale for Roe differed from Obergrfell. And the inherent nature of the right leads to a different outcome if overturned.

Playing Chicken Little every time is a disservice to the cause. Her request for cert is made on the very weakest legal grounds. There are not four votes on the court looking to overturn the marriage precedent.

Obergefell*

What R106 said. Roe v. Wade was a SCOTUS decision. It was not established law and that was precisely the problem. To be law, it has to be passed by Congress, and Congress never passed an abortion law and it’s likely now that most of us will never see that happen in our lifetimes. Unfortunately, when people see a SCOTUS opinion they think a law is made. That is not the case, and people rather than full court pressing for a Congressional law on abortion after Roe happened allowed themselves to become complacent thinking the courts’ liberal opinions would never change. We just learned a very nasty lesson of how that is fundamentally not true. Democrats’ laziness when it came to protecting Roe and not seeing that the Republicans were playing the long game when it came to the courts (when they’ve seen it going on for decades since Reagan) paid off in spades for the conservatives.

Unlike Roe, gay marriage proponents DID get a law passed, the Respect for Marriage act in 2022. It repealed DOMA, and also requires Federal AND State recognition of gay marriage in EVERY state. There is a religious exemption in there. The law was passed with major Republican support. For the law to be repealed, for which there is no current appetite or interest whatsoever, there would have to be a massive shift to the right across the board, and there would have to be support from the Democrats, of which there is none. If it DOES get to the point where insane Republicans have completely co-opted the government and have the votes to repeal gay marriage, the country is in much deeper shit than imagined, and it’s not going to matter a whit if gay marriage exists or not.

May we talk about women who don't resemble Kim Davis? Please?!?

Trans did this!!!

The trans are definitely causing the opinion on gay marriage to roll back with their absurd misreading of public opinion about how to handle children and their borderline hostile hijacking and overtaking of the ACLU which ended up setting back their cause for decades if not permanently R110, and if you aren’t seeing that, then you’re being willfully obtuse.

For you chickens: just an excerpt from the Stern summary on Slate. Do you own research —YMCV

But the “nut” is spelled out:

“At least three members of this supermajority have dropped hints that they do not wish to revisit Obergefell. Just two years after the decision, Chief Justice John Roberts seems to have quietly joined a follow-up ruling affirming its protections for same-sex parents, suggesting that he had made his peace with marriage equality. Justice Brett Kavanaugh has called same-sex marriage a “very important right” and declared that gay Americans “cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth.” In his most important opinion about precedent, Justice Neil Gorsuch went out of his way to signal that Americans have “reliance interests” on their ability to marry. Roberts and Gorsuch, of course, also voted to protect gay employees from workplace discrimination in 2020’s Bostock v. Clayton County. And while Kavanaugh dissented from that decision, he did so apologetically, offering a sentimental tribute to gay Americans’ “extraordinary vision, tenacity, and grit.” The justice also took pains to note that the death of Roe v. Wade “does not threaten or cast doubt on” marriage equality.”

A friend of mine has argued many, many cases at the Supreme Court (you might even know his name if you're in legal circles) and he knows the court, the personalities, and the system -- and the corruption -- well. He says reversal of Obergefell is not on anyone's mind whatsoever (except of course Thomas and Alito).

As pointed out above, this is not the case to do it anyway. But even if the right case comes along, Roberts and Kavanaugh are unlikely to go for reverse, Gorsuch probably not. Barrett is an unknown but again, according to my friend, overturning Obergefell is not a priority.

They are, however, interested in creating as many exceptions to gay rights as they can in the name of religious freedom that will allow religious nuts to discriminate.

This is what we get for not pushing back when our community and organizations were invaded by mentally ill people pushing insanity. The worst thing that can happen to a minority group seeking rights is to be lumped in with deeply unpopular whackjobs.

Yes, R113 exactly. SCOTUS is definitely filled with religious weirdos who are carving out and culling gay rights where they can, but they choose their battles wisely, just like we should. This court has to be handled, unfortunately.

[quote]Roberts and Kavanaugh are unlikely to go for reverse,

Roberts was one of the dissenting votes in the original ruling. What's going to change his mind should this come before them?

Because he’s the CJ and he cares about the Court…and his legacy. This is not Roe redux. He willl not vote to grant cert.

r108, that law can be struck down by the Supreme Court. It's not like it's an amendment. You're assuming that if the Court overrules Obergefell, it will let that law stand when it's inevitably challenged by some anti-gay folks.

My concern is that a Supreme Court that is foolish enough to overrule Obergefell will also be foolish enough to strike down that law. Yes, those will be separate cases and challenges. And that does mean marriage protections don't just vanish immediately. It will take time for that case to work its way up to them. But it is a concern.

My hope is that the Court isn't foolish enough to even begin the project. And there should be significant pushback and protest to it even considering to take the first step so it doesn't get any funny ideas.

Your concern is overwrought

Uncle Clarence would re-criminalize interracial marriage, but carve out a gruesome exception for himself and that jiggly felon wife of his.

But but but THE AI SUMMARY, R99!

R99, have you not seen THE AI SUMMARY!

TRUMP and MAGA have already realized they can steal retirement benefits from the rainbow.. They are doing the TRANz now and will be getting to married gays next....wait for it....

[quote]At least three members of this supermajority have dropped hints that they do not wish to revisit Obergefell.

Bla, Bla, Bla, those same Supreme Court hacks said the same thing about NOT revisiting the abortion rights as they said during their confirmation it's 50 years of established law! Then look what they did.

Talk is cheap especially when SCOTUS is talking.

The problem with the "adults in the room" is that they are suffering from early onset of dementia. Taking a way rights is not a one shot deal, it's a chipping away bit by bit until mission accomplished. Exactly what they did with abortion.

You really think it's smart calling everyone hysterical and not sound the alarm now instead of waiting until the end when it's too late?

Gay Democrats: Look the kitchen is on fire!

R102, Oh, stop being hysterical, it's not like the whole house has burned down. We should wait and see.

Tag this reply r124. Come back in the fall after the Court votes on the cert petition/this appeal. I won’t tell you I told you so when they’ve denied cert. IYKYK.

Denied cert of this attempt maybe but it won't be the last.

The Deplorables will get their consolation prize: Religious Freedom. So when you try to patronize their business they can sneer at you that they don't cater to your kind.

It's going to be a shit show as cashiers, Dental Hygienists, Nurses, Masseurs, etc. will have to excuse themselves and be replaced by a non-religious co-worker in order for you to be served.

Let it happen r127. It will quickly fall out of favor when "the faithless heathens" become known for being better tippers.

All this because no one will suck on Kim Davis’ pussylips

Do unattractive women realize men are proposing to them because they have a good job? Or do they realize it's part of the deal?:

"Davis has been married four times to three husbands. The first three marriages ended in divorce in 1994, 2006, and 2008. Davis has two daughters from her first marriage and twins, a son and another daughter, who were born five months after her divorce from her first husband. Her third husband is the biological father of the twins, the children being conceived while Davis was still married to her first husband. The twins were adopted by Davis's current husband, Joe Davis, who was also her second husband; the couple initially divorced in 2006 but later remarried"

You’re not telling anyone anything they don’t already know, R124, and you do come off as a borderline hysteric. You help no one with these continued ravings. If you’re so worried about it, which I doubt other than concern about engendering an outsized online reaction regarding a subject that does not affect you at all, then go do work to counter SCOTUS and the Republicans. I don’t know what else to tell you. You’re determined to vomit your anxiety about this subject onto everyone. Have fun with that.

Isn't there a Moldavian wedding she needs to attend?

I'd like to hear more about how this grifting bitch got and spent all that money.