User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:08:50 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And if her constituents were pleased that she refused to issue handgun permits because her religion made her take a stance against "gun violence"? The constitutional challenge on that would be swift and decisive. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I fail to understand, if she feels so strongly in her beliefs, why don't she just quit? Can't have your cake and eat it too. Why should she quit her job because a couple of lunatics that no one elected decided to redefine civilization? why cant she just hire someone that either does not care or is not Christian to issue the marriage licenses? Because that is the job she was elected to do. I can pretty much guarantee you that her constituents are pleased with her stance on this. And if her constituents were pleased that she refused to issue handgun permits because her religion made her take a stance against "gun violence"? The constitutional challenge on that would be swift and decisive. Apples and airplanes. She is standing up for at least 6,000 years of human civilization as well of her religious beliefs against a simple majority of political appointees. She is not opposing a fundamental human right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:10:40 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
More like a muslim being hired on at a dairy farm and then farmer deciding to raise pigs instead because he hates muslims. Her job didn't conflict with her religion when she was hired. Now, the federal government has decided to sanction homosexuality, which is a sin against God. Who's GOD? yours maybe...but not mine |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:11:02 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A. She is following state law. B. Marriage licenses are not shall issue. If that was the case then polygamy would be legal. C. She is elected. She has discretion on what she does. She is not issuing to anyone. Prosecutors can chose to file or not file a case. A similar power. D. Federal court cannot tell a county executive how to do her job. Marriage is a power reserved to states and people respectively as it is not enumerated in constitution and is reserved to states and people via 10th amendment. The 14th amendment of the Constitution ensures that all citizens are protected and treated equally. She is denying marriage licenses to everyone, not just gays. Straight people are not being treated equally by her office either. Her office is responsible for issuing marriage licenses. She can't just stop, she is required to allow all people to follow the law. This particular law says you need a license to get married |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:11:02 PM EDT
[#4]
She needs to be fired.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:12:01 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
....and you'd be OK with law enforcement coming to take your ar15's because someone decides they should be........they're only doing their sworn duty.........to uphold the law. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
While I don't agree that using "God's authority" as the reason for your actions, she could simply say she has strong personal convictions and will not follow through with the order. But with that aside, I applaud her for standing up to these assholes. She is refusing to issue licenses to ANYBODY, not just gay couples. She's not doing the job she was elected to perform. In most career fields that gets you fired. ....and you'd be OK with law enforcement coming to take your ar15's because someone decides they should be........they're only doing their sworn duty.........to uphold the law. no what I am ok with are laws that protect freedoms...the freedom of me to be armed...and the freedom of consenting adults to love who they want even if I can not understand that love.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:12:02 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Apples and airplanes. She is standing up for at least 6,000 years of human civilization as well of her religious beliefs against a simple majority of political appointees. She is not opposing a fundamental human right. She's not standing up for anything for "human civilization" and it's not her place to decide that on any "civilization's" behalf. These aren't apples and airplanes. They are extremely similar constitutionally governed issues. There are certain things the government is explicitly prohibited from doing. I asked you about how you would feel if she did one of those things because she is doing another one of those things. These are red apples and green apples. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:12:06 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Would it change opinions here to learn she hasn't been approving ANY marriage licenses at all? Bingo she is not discriminating since she is not issuing any. That is why I don't have a problem with her actions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:12:09 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just so I can get a handle on the depths of absurdity involved, are you really implying that human civilization is ending because of this? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Why does a 5-4 Supreme Court majority get to redefine the cornerstone of human civilization? Just so I can get a handle on the depths of absurdity involved, are you really implying that human civilization is ending because of this? No, I am saying that the Supreme Court refined the most basic unit of human civilization. Civilization will not end over it, but our society will become significantly more perverse and corrupt. Not every civilization is going to follow us into the abyss. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:12:31 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Would it change opinions here to learn she hasn't been approving ANY marriage licenses at all? So she's giving Kentucky law the finger too? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:12:35 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
her beliefs are for her....not for her to force onto others.... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Whether or not you agree with her, you have to agree with what she's representing. If she can be forced to go against her religious beliefs, then what is freedom of religion? At that point, all it is is "Yes, you have freedom of religion, as long as we agree with you." Similarly - "yes, you have the right to keep and bear arms, but no one needs an assault weapon." her beliefs are for her....not for her to force onto others.... That's what I'm arguing against. If you are allowed to have religious freedom but are not allowed to follow your religious beliefs, you do NOT have religions freedom. Cakemakers are allowed to be against homosexual marriage - but they MUST support it or be fined. Freedom doesn't work that way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:13:10 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's what I'm arguing against. If you are allowed to have religious freedom but are not allowed to follow your religious beliefs, you do NOT have religions freedom. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Whether or not you agree with her, you have to agree with what she's representing. If she can be forced to go against her religious beliefs, then what is freedom of religion? At that point, all it is is "Yes, you have freedom of religion, as long as we agree with you." Similarly - "yes, you have the right to keep and bear arms, but no one needs an assault weapon." her beliefs are for her....not for her to force onto others.... That's what I'm arguing against. If you are allowed to have religious freedom but are not allowed to follow your religious beliefs, you do NOT have religions freedom. She can follow her religious belief. She can't force me to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:14:15 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They are in support of the law, the same courts could deem your guns illegal and these same people would support the big jackbooted foot of government kick your ass if you refused to submit, BECAUSE IT IS THE LAW. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So, We are IN SUPPORT of Gay Rights now? 
They are in support of the law, the same courts could deem your guns illegal and these same people would support the big jackbooted foot of government kick your ass if you refused to submit, BECAUSE IT IS THE LAW. Not the the simple law but the law that supports freedoms of individuals...to include individuals who I don't always agree with... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:14:41 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So basically you're saying that religious people can't do some jobs because of their religous beliefs. An idea which would obviously violate various EEO regulations put forth by the feds. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I fail to understand, if she feels so strongly in her beliefs, why don't she just quit? Can't have your cake and eat it too. Why should she quit her job because a couple of lunatics that no one elected decided to redefine civilization? Because she is not willing to do her job. It really is that simple. Great she has beliefs but sometimes your beliefs can cost you and the ones who stand up then are truly worth the adoration. So basically you're saying that religious people can't do some jobs because of their religous beliefs. An idea which would obviously violate various EEO regulations put forth by the feds. No one said that religious people can't do some jobs. I think his point was some religious people "choose" not to do their jobs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:15:28 PM EDT
[#14]
She must be racist.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:15:56 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bingo she is not discriminating since she is not issuing any. That is why I don't have a problem with her actions. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Would it change opinions here to learn she hasn't been approving ANY marriage licenses at all? Bingo she is not discriminating since she is not issuing any. That is why I don't have a problem with her actions. Why isn't she approving any marriage licenses? Sounds like she isn't doing her job. If I don't do my job, I'm given a box and shown a door. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:17:45 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which reads: The Federal government was not assigned the task to regulate marriage, thus according to the tenth, it's not the business of the federal government. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So if the sheriff decided not to issue carry permits because of his strong personal belief, you're okay with that? Please point out where in the Bill of Rights you are guaranteed the "right to Marry". 10th amendment.  Which reads: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people The Federal government was not assigned the task to regulate marriage, thus according to the tenth, it's not the business of the federal government. Woops. 9th amendment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:19:45 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The 14th amendment of the Constitution ensures that all citizens are protected and treated equally. She is denying marriage licenses to everyone, not just gays. Straight people are not being treated equally by her office either. Her office is responsible for issuing marriage licenses. She can't just stop, she is required to allow all people to follow the law. This particular law says you need a license to get married Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
A. She is following state law. B. Marriage licenses are not shall issue. If that was the case then polygamy would be legal. C. She is elected. She has discretion on what she does. She is not issuing to anyone. Prosecutors can chose to file or not file a case. A similar power. D. Federal court cannot tell a county executive how to do her job. Marriage is a power reserved to states and people respectively as it is not enumerated in constitution and is reserved to states and people via 10th amendment. The 14th amendment of the Constitution ensures that all citizens are protected and treated equally. She is denying marriage licenses to everyone, not just gays. Straight people are not being treated equally by her office either. Her office is responsible for issuing marriage licenses. She can't just stop, she is required to allow all people to follow the law. This particular law says you need a license to get married It is her prerogative as an elected official to do her job. She is treating everyone equally by not issuing licenses. Her office is only one authorized to issue but you cannot force her to issue them. She is issuing none. Police don't have to issue tickets even though they are the ones authorized to do it. Prosecutors don't have to prosecute if they don't want to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:20:05 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So if the sheriff decided not to issue carry permits because of his strong personal belief, you're okay with that? Piss-poor analogy. Lots of CLEO's across the country refuse to sign NFA, and lots either refuse to issue CCW or deliberately make the process as difficult as possible. NYC makes it a pain in the ass to even purchase a long gun, and if anyone came here bitching the most popular answer would be "tough shit, you should move" |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:20:21 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She's not standing up for anything for "human civilization" and it's not her place to decide that on any "civilization's" behalf. These aren't apples and airplanes. They are extremely similar constitutionally governed issues. There are certain things the government is explicitly prohibited from doing. I asked you about how you would feel if she did one of those things because she is doing another one of those things. These are red apples and green apples. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Apples and airplanes. She is standing up for at least 6,000 years of human civilization as well of her religious beliefs against a simple majority of political appointees. She is not opposing a fundamental human right. She's not standing up for anything for "human civilization" and it's not her place to decide that on any "civilization's" behalf. These aren't apples and airplanes. They are extremely similar constitutionally governed issues. There are certain things the government is explicitly prohibited from doing. I asked you about how you would feel if she did one of those things because she is doing another one of those things. These are red apples and green apples. OK, I'd be pissed, but the question is stupid because your logic is flawed, to say the least. Possessing the tools to help ensure you existence, defend your family, community and property is an essential human right. Getting a government issued marriage license is not an essential human right. And since we're on the topic, the same Supreme Court that you are claiming has chosen to stand for constitutionally protected Liberty in this case chose to interpret the Second Amendment as granting you a right to apply for a license to keep and carry a handgun inside your residence. That is literally what they said. Don't talk to me about the Supreme Court standing up for essential rights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:21:13 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Apples and airplanes. She is standing up for at least 6,000 years of human civilization as well of her religious beliefs against a simple majority of political appointees. She is not opposing a fundamental human right. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Why should she quit her job because a couple of lunatics that no one elected decided to redefine civilization? why cant she just hire someone that either does not care or is not Christian to issue the marriage licenses? Because that is the job she was elected to do. I can pretty much guarantee you that her constituents are pleased with her stance on this. And if her constituents were pleased that she refused to issue handgun permits because her religion made her take a stance against "gun violence"? The constitutional challenge on that would be swift and decisive. Apples and airplanes. She is standing up for at least 6,000 years of human civilization as well of her religious beliefs against a simple majority of political appointees. She is not opposing a fundamental human right. She's welcome to stand up for all that as a private citizen (and I applaud her for doing so). She is not welcome to do it in her capacity as an agent of the state. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:21:18 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why isn't she approving any marriage licenses? Sounds like she isn't doing her job. If I don't do my job, I'm given a box and shown a door. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Would it change opinions here to learn she hasn't been approving ANY marriage licenses at all? Bingo she is not discriminating since she is not issuing any. That is why I don't have a problem with her actions. Why isn't she approving any marriage licenses? Sounds like she isn't doing her job. If I don't do my job, I'm given a box and shown a door. It's not a job. She is the county clerk. An elected official. Nothing compels her to do anything except wanting to be re elected or avoid impeachment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:21:29 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Piss-poor analogy. Lots of CLEO's across the country refuse to sign NFA, and lots either refuse to issue CCW or deliberately make the process as difficult as possible. NYC makes it a pain in the ass to even purchase a long gun, and if anyone came here bitching the most popular answer would be "tough shit, you should move" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So if the sheriff decided not to issue carry permits because of his strong personal belief, you're okay with that? Piss-poor analogy. Lots of CLEO's across the country refuse to sign NFA, and lots either refuse to issue CCW or deliberately make the process as difficult as possible. NYC makes it a pain in the ass to even purchase a long gun, and if anyone came here bitching the most popular answer would be "tough shit, you should move" Those instances aren't shall-issue, like this case is. If it were an issue of a Georgia (shall-issue) county not issuing a CCW to someone, I'd be pissed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:21:50 PM EDT
[#23]
does she have a gofundme acct yet? are christians throwing money at her yet? I bet she steps down when she has a few hundred k in the bank.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:22:08 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Who's GOD? yours maybe...but not mine Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: More like a muslim being hired on at a dairy farm and then farmer deciding to raise pigs instead because he hates muslims. Her job didn't conflict with her religion when she was hired. Now, the federal government has decided to sanction homosexuality, which is a sin against God. Who's GOD? yours maybe...but not mine Who is God? I think that's a bit beyond the scope of this discussion. Maybe you should start a thread in the Religion forum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:22:43 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OK, I'd be pissed, but the question is stupid because your logic is flawed, to say the least. Possessing the tools to help ensure you existence, defend your family, community and property is an essential human right. Getting a government issued marriage license is not an essential human right. And since we're on the topic, the same Supreme Court that you are claiming has chosen to stand for constitutionally protected Liberty in this case chose to interpret the Second Amendment as granting you a right to apply for a license to keep and carry a handgun inside your residence. That is literally what they said. Don't talk to me about the Supreme Court standing up for essential rights. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Apples and airplanes. She is standing up for at least 6,000 years of human civilization as well of her religious beliefs against a simple majority of political appointees. She is not opposing a fundamental human right. She's not standing up for anything for "human civilization" and it's not her place to decide that on any "civilization's" behalf. These aren't apples and airplanes. They are extremely similar constitutionally governed issues. There are certain things the government is explicitly prohibited from doing. I asked you about how you would feel if she did one of those things because she is doing another one of those things. These are red apples and green apples. OK, I'd be pissed, but the question is stupid because your logic is flawed, to say the least. Possessing the tools to help ensure you existence, defend your family, community and property is an essential human right. Getting a government issued marriage license is not an essential human right. And since we're on the topic, the same Supreme Court that you are claiming has chosen to stand for constitutionally protected Liberty in this case chose to interpret the Second Amendment as granting you a right to apply for a license to keep and carry a handgun inside your residence. That is literally what they said. Don't talk to me about the Supreme Court standing up for essential rights. Well, since we're talking about granting a right to apply for a license to wed... it's starting to sound more like red apples to red apples. Maybe red delicious to braeburn? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:23:31 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, We are IN SUPPORT of Gay Rights now?
I think it would be Individual Rights |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:24:03 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good for her. It has to start somewhere. Let it be here. We're not going to be able to vote ourselves out of this headlong slide into the Marxist cesspool. People have to start doing something about it. State and local officials refusing to enforce idiotic legislation rammed up our asses by the lunatics in D.C. needs to become SOP. Yeah, some religious nutjob in Buttfuck,Kentucky who is refusing to do her job is going to fire the shot heard around the world.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:24:24 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Would it change opinions here to learn she hasn't been approving ANY marriage licenses at all? So now she is refusing to perform the job duties that don't conflict with her religious beliefs as well ??? at what point will some of you stop supporting her? Maybe she shouldn't even bother going to work |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:24:26 PM EDT
[#29]
This is a dumb hill to die on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:25:15 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't those people work for the President, not SCOTUS? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's about damn time someone told these jackasses to go fuck themselves. Anthony Kennedy made his ruling, now let him enforce it! http://timothyolyphant.siterubix.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/raylan-badge.jpg
Don't those people work for the President, not SCOTUS? Correct. As Andrew Jackson correctly surmised, the SCOTUS actually has no enforcement powers. But I'm sure Obama will send federal agent to enforce this decision- just as soon as they're done in DC and Chicago and NY enforcing Heller and McDonald. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:25:56 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Whether or not you agree with her, you have to agree with what she's representing. If she can be forced to go against her religious beliefs, then what is freedom of religion? At that point, all it is is "Yes, you have freedom of religion, as long as we agree with you." Similarly - "yes, you have the right to keep and bear arms, but no one needs an assault weapon." She is a government agent, she doesn't get religious freedom in her official capacity, in fact she is forbidden from using religion as a basis for any of her official actions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:26:11 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So she's giving Kentucky law the finger too? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Would it change opinions here to learn she hasn't been approving ANY marriage licenses at all? So she's giving Kentucky law the finger too? Yes, according to local news. My taxes are paying this windbag to sit in her chair with a thumb up her ass. She'll be in federal court in Ashland on Thursday though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:28:11 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just to clarify she is no longer issuing licenses AT ALL to ANYONE. The reason she is not being recalled is it is a rural county in KY. Nobody cares about the 3 gay couples in the county or their agenda. Or the couple who intentionally came to that clerk with an AP reporter in tow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:28:19 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I fail to understand, if she feels so strongly in her beliefs, why don't she just quit? Can't have your cake and eat it too. This. WHen you can't do your job, it's time to leave your job. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:28:41 PM EDT
[#35]
If an elected government official can be impeached for not doing their job there wouldn't be any elected officials
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:29:41 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. WHen you can't do your job, it's time to leave your job. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I fail to understand, if she feels so strongly in her beliefs, why don't she just quit? Can't have your cake and eat it too. This. WHen you can't do your job, it's time to leave your job. Because she's God's snowflake, she's not going to quit when she thinks she's doing God's work, despite the fact that government doesn't recognize "God's work". Someone needs to impeach this clown. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:30:04 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I just want to say that watching the mental twists of people who purport to be conservative in order to justify destroying the rule of law is hilarious and a bit disturbing. I've already deleted 3 responses. It is crazy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:31:34 PM EDT
[#38]
As a citizen of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, she needs to be replaced.
Her job is not to decide who gets marriage licenses. Her job is to issue marriage licenses. If she is so firm in her beliefs that she can't hand out the licenses to certain people, she should resign. But she doesn't want to do that because she'd lose a super easy government job and that kick ass pension. She's nothing but FSA, like most of Rowan county is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:31:49 PM EDT
[#39]
Marriage is between male and female cats! To hell with all of this crap!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:32:07 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
yeah I kind of doubt she would be recalled unless the county was about to be bankrupted or something. Be interesting to see if she folds after her "Come to Jesus" talk with a federal judge thursday. edit looks like her flunkies are being dragged into federal court too, that's gotta suck. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Moreover the people that elected her are okay with her stance...or else there would be clamor to have a recall vote. The POTUS has set this precedent over the past 6 years and everyone on the left has been okay with it...well the pendulum is starting to swing the other way and the left better get used to a new bunch of conservatives that are going to play the game acording the the rules the left has used. Be interesting to see if she folds after her "Come to Jesus" talk with a federal judge thursday. edit looks like her flunkies are being dragged into federal court too, that's gotta suck. What can the judge do? She hasn't done anything against the law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:32:25 PM EDT
[#41]
I wonder what would happen if a county refused to issue CCW licenses because of personal convictions.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:33:14 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You aren't kidding. It's like a lot of people here who are pushing Christian beliefs to be enforced by an elected official acting as part of the state haven't read the Bible... 1 Peter 2:13-17 sums up situations like this pretty damn clearly. Acting as an agent of the state, she ought to obey. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
but but what if it was a muslim in that position? Lol butt hurt. Yep there are a lot of hypocrites here who's basic motivation is they enjoy hating other people. You aren't kidding. It's like a lot of people here who are pushing Christian beliefs to be enforced by an elected official acting as part of the state haven't read the Bible... 1 Peter 2:13-17 sums up situations like this pretty damn clearly. Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people. Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God’s slaves. Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor. Acting as an agent of the state, she ought to obey. You know how I know that you don't know what those verses mean? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:33:45 PM EDT
[#43]
God ain't signing your check, lady. The public funded government who has recognized that gays have the same rights to marry as you do.
Show us how strong those convictions are, and quit. I'll stand up for religious freedom, but this isn't an example of it. Same low-IQ tards applauding her would have a conniption if a government employee won't serve pork in the commissary because of their muslim beliefs and grandstanded about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:34:13 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Those instances aren't shall-issue, like this case is. If it were an issue of a Georgia (shall-issue) county not issuing a CCW to someone, I'd be pissed. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: So if the sheriff decided not to issue carry permits because of his strong personal belief, you're okay with that? Piss-poor analogy. Lots of CLEO's across the country refuse to sign NFA, and lots either refuse to issue CCW or deliberately make the process as difficult as possible. NYC makes it a pain in the ass to even purchase a long gun, and if anyone came here bitching the most popular answer would be "tough shit, you should move" Those instances aren't shall-issue, like this case is. If it were an issue of a Georgia (shall-issue) county not issuing a CCW to someone, I'd be pissed. And that right there is why it is a puss poor analogy. The Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment as the right to apply for a license and left it up to the states to decide who, what and where that license applies to, but they said that the state's MUST issue a license to homosexual couple wanting to marry. They performed legal gymnastics to determine what a critical portion of the Bill of Rights means and they took a portion of a Reconstruction amendment out of context in order to redefine the foundation of human civilization. Apples and Airplanes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:34:39 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Those instances aren't shall-issue, like this case is. If it were an issue of a Georgia (shall-issue) county not issuing a CCW to someone, I'd be pissed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So if the sheriff decided not to issue carry permits because of his strong personal belief, you're okay with that? Piss-poor analogy. Lots of CLEO's across the country refuse to sign NFA, and lots either refuse to issue CCW or deliberately make the process as difficult as possible. NYC makes it a pain in the ass to even purchase a long gun, and if anyone came here bitching the most popular answer would be "tough shit, you should move" Those instances aren't shall-issue, like this case is. If it were an issue of a Georgia (shall-issue) county not issuing a CCW to someone, I'd be pissed. KY has Shall-issue on NFA sign off as well, this is actually a good comparison. If a sheriff refused to sign off on NFA paperwork he'd be in violation of KY law. Right now, in KY, this woman is violating the law by refusing to sign shall issue marriage licenses. She should be terminated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:34:59 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A. She is following state law. B. Marriage licenses are not shall issue. If that was the case then polygamy would be legal. C. She is elected. She has discretion on what she does. She is not issuing to anyone. Prosecutors can chose to file or not file a case. A similar power. D. Federal court cannot tell a county executive how to do her job. Marriage is a power reserved to states and people respectively as it is not enumerated in constitution and is reserved to states and people via 10th amendment. I would love to hear our house lawyers on these points. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:36:15 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why should she quit her job because a couple of lunatics that no one elected decided to redefine civilization? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I fail to understand, if she feels so strongly in her beliefs, why don't she just quit? Can't have your cake and eat it too. Why should she quit her job because a couple of lunatics that no one elected decided to redefine civilization? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:37:19 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wonder what would happen if a county refused to issue CCW licenses because of personal convictions. This is a new and highly compelling perspective. I will now take time to re-evaluate my position. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:37:43 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She works for the government. It's not her place to make these decisions. Fire her and put someone who will do the job in her place. Now if she was a private business owner or religious institution making the decision not to serve them, I have no problem with that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 1:37:59 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And if her constituents were pleased that she refused to issue handgun permits because her religion made her take a stance against "gun violence"? The constitutional challenge on that would be swift and decisive. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I fail to understand, if she feels so strongly in her beliefs, why don't she just quit? Can't have your cake and eat it too. Why should she quit her job because a couple of lunatics that no one elected decided to redefine civilization? why cant she just hire someone that either does not care or is not Christian to issue the marriage licenses? Because that is the job she was elected to do. I can pretty much guarantee you that her constituents are pleased with her stance on this. And if her constituents were pleased that she refused to issue handgun permits because her religion made her take a stance against "gun violence"? The constitutional challenge on that would be swift and decisive. No it wouldn't. Heller and MacDonald are settled, too. Now go into Chicago or NYC or DC and open carry and see what happens. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
