Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

rowan county [KY] court clerk defies supreme court

Page 6 of 9 [ 140 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

glebel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Age: 61
Posts: 1,665
Location: Mountains of Southern California

11 Sep 2015, 3:00 pm

It's obvious to me that she is doing this for political, not religious reasons. If she was serious about this offending her beliefs, she would have simply resigned. No matter what, this has become the law of the land, and she is sworn to uphold the law.


_________________
When everyone is losing their heads except you, maybe you don't understand the situation.


pcuser
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2014
Age: 73
Gender: Male
Posts: 913

11 Sep 2015, 3:07 pm

glebel wrote:
It's obvious to me that she is doing this for political, not religious reasons. If she was serious about this offending her beliefs, she would have simply resigned. No matter what, this has become the law of the land, and she is sworn to uphold the law.

She's doing this because she wants to force her beliefs about how we should live onto others. Many Christians wish to do this. She simply takes the next step. she's a vile little woman. She's also doing it for the money...



ZenWistalia
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 13 Sep 2015
Age: 27
Posts: 60
Location: NJ, USA

13 Sep 2015, 4:54 pm

RoadRatt wrote:
She needs to be jailed, as well as removed from her position as county clerk. I understand the stance of religious freedom, but as a public employee you have no right to throw that card, you do your job or you should face the consequences. You're in no position to stand on belief here. Your duty is clear and must be carried out without prejudice. Religious freedom has no place in government, you're there to serve the people despite your personal beliefs. It seems that some people don't understand that and will, hypocritically, place their "freedom" above the freedoms of others, totally ignoring the freedom that this country was founded upon, all in the name of religion...

I agree. 100%

auntblabby wrote:
she disgusts me. :eew: did you see the way she sneered at that couple? what a self-righteous *snip* snob.

Yep ... and don't even get me started on Shirley Phelps! :roll: Ugghhh! *shivers*



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,577
Location: Seattle-ish

13 Sep 2015, 8:55 pm

AspE wrote:
Not all issues are the same. Civil rights are far more important then whether someone smokes a J.


Actually, I'd say that not being thrown in a cage and having your life royally f*cked up for a victimless "crime" is more important than having the government recognize your personal relationship in the way you want, but that not germane to the point I was making, which is that it's hypocritical to support officials breaking the law in one case and condemn them in another, depending on whether you happen to agree with their action or not.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Sep 2015, 12:40 am

Dox47 wrote:
AspE wrote:
Not all issues are the same. Civil rights are far more important then whether someone smokes a J.


Actually, I'd say that not being thrown in a cage and having your life royally f*cked up for a victimless "crime" is more important than having the government recognize your personal relationship in the way you want, but that not germane to the point I was making, which is that it's hypocritical to support officials breaking the law in one case and condemn them in another, depending on whether you happen to agree with their action or not.


The only reason why she was ever in the cage was because she chose to not do her job. And it's not a victimless crime. The rights of those couples she had turned away were violated. In other words, she decided she could choose who were less than equal. Would you feel the same way if she had turned away interracial couples? Because there's absolutely no difference. That's reason enough to toss her into that cage.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas

14 Sep 2015, 12:42 am

I dread what is going to happen by the end of Monday.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Sep 2015, 12:55 am

auntblabby wrote:
I dread what is going to happen by the end of Monday.


Well, if she ends up back behind bars, she has no one to blame but herself. The Hucksterbee and her lawyers can have all the rallies that they want, making her a martyr for their holy cause of denying gays equal rights, with all the media attention they can drum up. And maybe those Promise Keeper idiots who swore to use force of arms to keep her out of jail will wave their guns around, and talk about how the End Times are upon us. Who knows, maybe she'll eventually wise up to the fact that none of these people had ever wanted to keep her out of jail, but just wanted to use her incarceration to promote their right wing, homophobic agenda.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas

14 Sep 2015, 12:59 am

I can't help thinking that 1] the local good ol' boy power structure will intervene and keep her out of jail, and 2]vigilante-types will come to the courthouse and keep gay folk away, and that it will end up being a perverted inversion of George Wallace blocking the schoolhouse door, and that this time the national guard will NOT be called in.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Sep 2015, 1:08 am

auntblabby wrote:
I can't help thinking that 1] the local good ol' boy power structure will intervene and keep her out of jail, and 2]vigilante-types will come to the courthouse and keep gay folk away, and that it will end up being a perverted inversion of George Wallace blocking the schoolhouse door, and that this time the national guard will NOT be called in.


As Obama is no longer bound by the fear of losing the next election, I see no reason why he shouldn't send in the national guard. He will be remembered for the rest of history as a President who took a stand for civil rights, if he does. Bill Clinton would give his soul for that sort of historical legacy, as his - despite his accomplishments - will always be first and foremost a seaman stained blue dress.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas

14 Sep 2015, 1:23 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
I can't help thinking that 1] the local good ol' boy power structure will intervene and keep her out of jail, and 2]vigilante-types will come to the courthouse and keep gay folk away, and that it will end up being a perverted inversion of George Wallace blocking the schoolhouse door, and that this time the national guard will NOT be called in.


As Obama is no longer bound by the fear of losing the next election, I see no reason why he shouldn't send in the national guard. He will be remembered for the rest of history as a President who took a stand for civil rights, if he does. Bill Clinton would give his soul for that sort of historical legacy, as his - despite his accomplishments - will always be first and foremost a seaman stained blue dress.

back in the day he probably would have been impeached had he gotten his semen on a seaman ;) [couldn't resist ;) ] anyways, this woman fancies herself as another George Wallace.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Sep 2015, 1:30 am

auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
I can't help thinking that 1] the local good ol' boy power structure will intervene and keep her out of jail, and 2]vigilante-types will come to the courthouse and keep gay folk away, and that it will end up being a perverted inversion of George Wallace blocking the schoolhouse door, and that this time the national guard will NOT be called in.


As Obama is no longer bound by the fear of losing the next election, I see no reason why he shouldn't send in the national guard. He will be remembered for the rest of history as a President who took a stand for civil rights, if he does. Bill Clinton would give his soul for that sort of historical legacy, as his - despite his accomplishments - will always be first and foremost a seaman stained blue dress.

back in the day he probably would have been impeached had he gotten his semen on a seaman ;) [couldn't resist ;) ] anyways, this woman fancies herself as another George Wallace.


Okay, you got me! :lol: :oops:


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas

14 Sep 2015, 1:31 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Okay, you got me! :lol: :oops:

sorry :oops: I was just trying to shed a little humor on an otherwise humorless situation. ;) I am so worried about where this is heading. :ninja:



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Sep 2015, 1:56 am

auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Okay, you got me! :lol: :oops:

sorry :oops: I was just trying to shed a little humor on an otherwise humorless situation. ;) I am so worried about where this is heading. :ninja:


Oh no, you have nothing to apologize for; I took it in good humor.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas

14 Sep 2015, 1:58 am

^^^Phew! :oops: thanx :) btw, do you think she will fire clerks who refuse to obey her when she tells them to cease and desist granting licenses to gays?



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,577
Location: Seattle-ish

14 Sep 2015, 2:19 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
The only reason why she was ever in the cage was because she chose to not do her job. And it's not a victimless crime. The rights of those couples she had turned away were violated. In other words, she decided she could choose who were less than equal. Would you feel the same way if she had turned away interracial couples? Because there's absolutely no difference. That's reason enough to toss her into that cage.


I know you're not illiterate, so try going back and reading the context of that quote and the one I was replying to, and take another crack at what I actually said.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,798
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Sep 2015, 2:43 am

Dox47 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
The only reason why she was ever in the cage was because she chose to not do her job. And it's not a victimless crime. The rights of those couples she had turned away were violated. In other words, she decided she could choose who were less than equal. Would you feel the same way if she had turned away interracial couples? Because there's absolutely no difference. That's reason enough to toss her into that cage.


I know you're not illiterate, so try going back and reading the context of that quote and the one I was replying to, and take another crack at what I actually said.


No, I saw what you wrote. I just chose to address your claim that the inconvenience of her being thrown into jail was worse than gay marriages - which are now legal - not being recognized by her.
As for your primary point: there is in fact a difference between those people who refuse to support one law, as compared to those who refuse to support another. And that is, if the law is blatantly discriminatory against other people for what ever reason, then those people have the moral right on their side, which those who oppose a law that enforces the rights of others do not have. It's a matter of right and wrong. And no, this is not my notion about how the law works; rather it's just what I honestly believe to be right, for what it's worth. Just the same, anyone who opposes a law should be ready to accept the legal consequences.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer