Posted on 09/06/2015 4:26:18 AM PDT by HomerBohn
Now, we're getting somewhere. The judge that ordered Kim Davis to be jailed for not breaking the law, but opposing his unlawful orders, is the same judge behind re-educating (indoctrinating) Kentucky student who opposed sodomy. That judge, a Bush appointee no less, was none other than US District Judge David Bunning.
In 2003, the communist American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued the Boyd County Board of Education. The suit was to bully the Boyd County High School into allowing a "gay-straight" alliance club to meet. Parents overwhelmingly spoke out against the club, but to no avail. (Hint: Parents who love your kids, get them out of these indoctrination centers now!)
This same group, the ACLU, is also the same organization that filed suit against Kim Davis.
Judge Bunning ordered the allowance of the sodomite-straight club on campus, despite the fact that he had no jurisdiction to do so.
He wrote in his ruling, "Absent a preliminary injunction, plaintiffs will be unable to meet at school, unable to benefit from a forum for discussion with other students who are suffering the effects of harassment based on sexual orientation, and unable to work with other students to foster tolerance among all students."
Christian News reports:
But Bunning also required the school district to implement training as part of a settlement, which mandated school staff and students to undergo diversity education, "a significant portion of which would be devoted to issues of sexual orientation and gender harassment."
However, a number of students objected to being forced to watch a video that asserted that it is wrong to oppose homosexuality and that a person's sexuality cannot be changed. They discovered that they could not opt-out of the training without being penalized, and contacted the legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) for assistance.
ADF then sued the Boyd County Board of Education over the matter on behalf of student Timothy Morrison and his parents, who said that the re-education requirement "effectively forces the students to speak in agreement with the school district's view that homosexuality is a safe and healthy lifestyle that cannot be changed."
But in 2006, Bunning again ruled that the students must watch the video and could not opt-out because of their Christian identity, stating that the education "rationally related to a legitimate educational goal, namely to maintain a safe environment." He said that the training wouldn't mean that students would have to change their religious beliefs, therefore, an opt-out was unnecessary.
Bunning then denied the students request who were refusing the training.
"Plaintiffs are not requesting that a student absent from the training be considered an 'excused' or that the Board offer an alternate assignment on the issue of diversity. Rather, they seek to opt-out of the training altogether," Bunning wrote.
"Given the requirements of the consent decree, the Board cannot meet this demand. Moreover, as there is no burden on plaintiffs' freedom of speech, free exercise or other constitutional right, there is simply no basis for an opt-out," he added.
He then appealed to a First Circuit ruling, in which he noted, "If all parents had a fundamental constitutional right to dictate individually what the schools teach their children, the schools would be forced to cater a curriculum for each student whose parents had genuine moral disagreements with the school's choice of subject matter."
That, my friends, is statism, plain and simple. But, of course, the schools can push any depravity, historical revisionism and even religion they want to, so long as the state agrees that it is so.
Parents, the state does not own your children. They are a gift to you from God (Psalm 127-28). You are to teach them diligently (Deuteronomy 6), not the state. The more you send your children to state indoctrination, the more they will think like statists, and, like the communist Chinese, they will turn your children against you. I have already provided sources and means for you to begin educating your precious children on your own for free… and you can do it!
This judge's previous ruling and the ruling against Mrs. Davis demonstrates that he should be impeached, charged and justice be brought down upon him... and if those who took the oath to uphold the law, namely Sheriff Jack Carter won't carry out the enforcement of the law, then it is up to the people to carry it out. What will you do people of Rowan County Kentucky?
It’s pretty obvious now that Bunning is gay himself.
LC.org
September 6, 2015 Grayson, KY - Late last night someone sent a fake letter from a fake Twitter account, purporting to be written by Kim Davis who is being held at the Carter County Detention Center. "Kim Davis informed me that she does not have any social media accounts and we confirmed her statement with her husband this morning," said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. Staver continued, "The letter is fake and did not come from Kim Davis or her husband."
While Kim Davis remains a prisoner of conscience, unscrupulous individuals are attempting to personally attack her, her family, her faith, and her church. The purported letter from Kim Davis circulated on Twitter and other social media in the last 12 hours is fake and fraudulent. Liberty Counsel attorneys remain the exclusive spokespersons for Kim Davis.
Read our Press Release for more information, and then head over to our Facebook page and join the conversation!
See previous post, forgot to do a thread ping..
Can’t say he is, and I can’t say he is not...(no real proof of that) but he is certainly not unbiased.
I’ve changed my mind on the Kim Davis situation. I still think it is a poor place to take a stand, and that a government official needs to act IAW the government rules.
However, in a battle, one can’t always pick the place of battle. Jailing her was excessive, and it seems this is where a battle WILL be fought, regardless of the logical underpinning. So if anyone knows where I can donate to help her with her legal bills, please post a link or advise.
It isn’t the ground I would choose, but it is time to fight.
George W. Bush.
It was probably a total coincidence that Judge Bunning's father was the Republican Senator from Kentucky at the time of the appointment.
This guy is a good candidate for impeachment.
There will be more....of that you can be certain. But I disagree with you that this is a poor choice.
Let me sum up why...
1. yes, this could be viewed by some as a standard case of civil disobedience where the person who employs this device, should and often does pay a large penalty for it to include imprisonment and/or fine and loss of job.
2. But this is not a standard case! This particular individual also has a protected constitutional status because she is doing it as a result of government infringement of her rights, specifically protected by the constitution because of the religious implications of what I and many other view as a unconstitutional decision by scotus, resulting in a unconstitutional intimidation, threat, and arrest by a supportive federal judge who has thusfar turned down any and all efforts to compromise. They are ramming this through like a pile driver!
I think that if you see this as I do, (and my interests are more constitutional then religiously derived,) you should view supporting this woman, even if a democrat, even if flawed, and in spite of any other argument as a DUTY of any citizen, if not a responsibility as well.
That is how I see it and why I will be leaving south Arkansas sometime very late tonight for my trip to the Carter County Detention Center, 13 Crossbar road, Grayson KY.
The Rally, organized by Mike Huckabee, Is scheduled for 3PM ET, 9/8/15
I'll be there.
Anybody know if Judge Bunning is a homosexual?
He sure is acting like one!
Posting copyrighted material hits the moderator’s nerve every time.
>>...forced to watch a video that asserted that it is wrong to oppose homosexuality and that a person’s sexuality cannot be changed.
>>This is false.
>>Reference: Mayor DeBlasio’s wife, etc.
It can be changed TO gay. It just can’t be changed back FROM gay. Progressives are incredible hypocrites like that!
Like, poor choice of words, bro.
Good luck! I’m in Arizona and won’t be going. But unlike a few days ago, I’ll be wishing y’all well.
That’s =thanks....lol...typo
If he is queer, that would explain that.
He could easily just be a *ucktard though.
Perhaps his long years of side work at the local fudge factory, packaging fudge for those who desired it, weighed in the balance?
Step into the retraining camp, comrade.
She was performing her job. The Supreme Court invalidated Kentucky's definition of "marriage":
402.005 Definition of marriage.
As used and recognized in the law of the Commonwealth, "marriage" refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent upon those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex.
Effective: July 15, 1998
History: Created 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 258, sec. 4, effective July 15, 1998
If the "judge" wasn't a stunningly bigoted fudge-packer supporter, and knew more than a smattering about the law, he would understand what the Supreme Court has done.
But, he prefers to throw his judicial lightning bolts in plain defiance of the facts, because the federal black-robed clowns can abuse their power for their own pleasure, like the demi-gods we treat them as.
We SHOULD start treating them as the lawless tyrannical scum that they are.
Judge Bunning’s wife, Kay, and two of their three children — Laura, 6 and Lou, 4 — stood by him during the brief swearing-in ceremony. One-year-old Emily did not make the event.
(Bunning is just another government stooge who believes the Soopreme Kort is supreme. Bush II really knew how to pick ‘em didn’t he?)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.