Watch: Chris Hayes Destroys Kim Davis’ Attorney’s Arguments

There’s a reason the folks at Liberty Counsel keep losing. Chris Hayes debates Mat Staver, the head of the legal group representing Kim Davis.

There’s a reason Liberty Counsel keeps losing at every turn. Their legal arguments are based on their religious extremism, and their reason for being is to inject their religious extremism into American law. Fortunately, they’re failing, because even the most conservative of judges (Alabama’s Roy Moore excluded) generally still respects the Constitution.

Meet Mat Staver.

Staver is the head of Liberty Counsel, the certified anti-gay hate group that, like ambulance-chasing attorneys, looks for potentially high-profile cases of religious liberty, then uses its clients to further its agenda of religious extremism.

Liberty Counsel is representing Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who, under the counsel of Staver’s group, finds herself in jail, a “prisoner of her conscience,” Staver told reporters yesterday. 

Staver Friday night appeared on MSNBC’s “All In with Chris Hayes,” and was roundly pummeled in a very gracious manner by the 36-year old journalist. 

“Mr. Staver, there’s no victory here, there’s no path to victory. How do you understand the end game here?,” Hayes began.

UPDATE: Fox News Legal Panel: Kim Davis’ Attorney’s Defense Is ‘Stunningly Obtuse’ And ‘Ridiculously Stupid’

Then, Hayes brought up the nation’s historic bans on interracial marriage. Staver refused such comparisons, insisting that same-sex marriage has altered the historic definition of marriage, which is of course poppycock.

Staver claimed there are “express constitutional amendments” prohibiting bans on interracial marriage, which of course is false. Bans on interracial marriage were struck down by the Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia. That’s a rather embarrassing error for any attorney to make. 

LOOK: Breaking: ‘Prisoner Of Conscience’ Kim Davis Says She Has ‘No Remorse,’ Will Not Quit, Will Appeal

Hayes asked if “post Loving v. Virginia, 1967,” should clerks “have the right to carry on their duties, and not give licenses to interracial couples?” 

“The difference is, before and after the Supreme Court decision, marriage was always, and still remained, the union of a man and a woman,” Staver then tried to argue. 

False again.

Marriage over time has been used to form kingdoms, stop wars, and ensure property rights, just as it in biblical times was between one man and as many wives as he could afford. And there are plenty of examples of same-sex marriages being blessed by religion centuries ago.

“If really, the issue here is, you say, it’s conscience, right?,” Hayes asks. “Then that sort of jurisprudencial argument doesn’t seem to me to apply. The question is, what does her Christian conscience tell her? If someone’s Christian conscience did not allow them to for instance, issue divorce certificates – I mean, Jesus himself condemned divorce, let’s be clear – should they be able to do that?”

Staver’s response was that “throughout the millennia we’ve never had same-sex marriage,” which, again, is false. 

Staver also claimed that divorce doesn’t change the essence of marriage, to which Hayes responded that “no-fault divorce is perhaps the most radical change to marriage in centuries.”

Hayes then attacked Staver for his group’s fundraising. 

“Mr. Staver, there are allies of yours that say they think you’re taking Kim Davis for a ride and basically raising money off her plight, so I’m just asking the question. How are you doing on fundraising this week?,” Hayes asked.

It was, needless to say, heated, and a win for Hayes and the Constitution, and a loss for Staver.

 

EARLIER:

Ted Cruz Forgets His Religious Right Pals Are Calling Kim Davis ‘Rosa Parks’

Rand Paul Advises Marriage Equality Supporters To Back Off Kim Davis

Second Same-Sex Couple Gets License In Rowan County As Religious Activists Call Them ‘Perverts’

 

Image: Screenshot via MSNBC