Clerk won't give gay couple marriage license

[bybee]

You don't find the fact that she is using her "religious liberties" to oppress the liberties of others hypocritical?

It would appear that going against her religious convictions would be hypocritical to her. She is risking her job by her actions. That doesn't seem hypocritical to me.

 

[Quetzal]

It would appear that going against her religious convictions would be hypocritical to her. She is risking her job by her actions. That doesn't seem hypocritical to me.

Celebrating an expression of freedom by taking freedoms away from others doesn't seem hypocritical to you? Say that out loud a few times.

 

[bybee]

Celebrating an expression of freedom by taking freedoms away from others doesn't seem hypocritical to you? Say that out loud a few times.

She is not taking freedom away from anyone. She is refusing a service that may be had elsewhere.
I do not agree with her but I do support her right to make that choice.
I believe it is straining at gnats to refuse to bake a cake. What difference does it make on either side of the issue?
Bake the cake!

 

[serpentdove]

yet you can't discern the meaning of a word...

:yawn: 2 Ti 1:7

 

[Quetzal]

She is not taking freedom away from anyone. She is refusing a service that may be had elsewhere.
I do not agree with her but I do support her right to make that choice.
I believe it is straining at gnats to refuse to bake a cake. What difference does it make on either side of the issue?
Bake the cake!

She is a representative of the county, she does not get that same luxury.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

You don't find the fact that she is using her "religious liberties" to oppress the liberties of others hypocritical?

Are you opposed to civil disobedience in principle?

Or are you just opposed when it's the "other side" being disobedient?

 

[TracerBullet]

It would appear that going against her religious convictions would be hypocritical to her. She is risking her job by her actions. That doesn't seem hypocritical to me.

Would you be supporting her if she was refusing to serve black couples because of her 'religious beliefs'? Or Jewish couples? Or someone who is handicapped?

 

[TracerBullet]

:yawn: 2 Ti 1:7

Disingenuous, I thought so

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Would you be supporting her if she was refusing to serve black couples because of her 'religious beliefs'? Or Jewish couples? Or someone who is handicapped?

Nope. I wouldn't.

I support her because I agree with her stance.

Similarly...

I support protestors that protest abortion. I don't support protestors that promote abortion.

This seems like common sense to me. :idunno:

 

[Totton Linnet]

A reasonable compromise would be for Christians in business or in public offices to state very clearly that they are Christian...then homosexuals will not embarrass themselves by seeking their services they can be served elsewhere.

The homos don't want to compromise.

 

[TracerBullet]

Nope. I wouldn't.

I support her because I agree with her stance.

Her stance is that she should have the special right to discriminate against a minority, to ignore their civil rights, and to treat them like second class citizens.

 

[Totton Linnet]

You don't find the fact that she is using her "religious liberties" to oppress the liberties of others hypocritical?

If the homos KNEW that she was Christian [and I bet a pound to a penny they did] then THEY are the oppressors.

 

[TracerBullet]

A reasonable compromise would be for Christians in business or in public offices to state very clearly that they are Christian...then homosexuals will not embarrass themselves by seeking their services they can be served elsewhere.

The homos don't want to compromise.

These fine young Christians made thier faith plain to see.

But those horrible black people wouldn't compromise so blacks just kept embarrassing themselves.

 

[Quetzal]

Are you opposed to civil disobedience in principle?

Or are you just opposed when it's the "other side" being disobedient?

You didn't answer the question.

 

[Quetzal]

Her stance is that she should have the special right to discriminate against a minority, to ignore their civil rights, and to treat them like second class citizens.

Sounds about right.

 

[Totton Linnet]

These fine young Christians made thier faith plain to see.

But those horrible black people wouldn't compromise so blacks just kept embarrassing themselves.

I would defy anyone to advertise "I am Christian therefore I hate blacks"

Homos are not homo by race or ethnicity....I work with homos, I treat them the same as I treat anybody else...but when they asked if I thought homosexuality is ok I told them I don't think so.

And incidentally I do not hate homos...I have a very good friend who is homo...but I still witness the truth. Strangely enough people accept that

 

[TracerBullet]

I would defy anyone to advertise "I am Christian therefore I hate blacks"

the KKK does it all the time

Homos are not homo by race or ethnicity....I work with homos, I treat them the same as I treat anybody else...but when they asked if I thought homosexuality is ok I told them I don't think so.

You claim you treat the "homos" like everyone else yet you use a hateful and derogatory name when referring to the people you claim to not hate.

Do you toss out the N word while at work as well?

 

[Totton Linnet]

...and I hear that an awful lot of homos do not like this aggressive picking on Christians.

 

[Angel4Truth]

[Defying order, clerk won't give gay couple marriage license by Claire Galofaro Morehead, KY AP] "A Kentucky clerk's office turned away a gay couple seeking a marriage license on Thursday, defying a federal judge's order that dismissed her argument involving religious freedom.

Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis' office turned away David Moore and David Ermold just hours after a U.S. district judge ordered her to do the opposite."

Deputy clerk Nathan Davis says the office was advised by its attorneys with the Christian law firm Liberty Counsel to continue refusing same-sex couples as it appeals the ruling to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Kim Davis has argued that her deeply held Christian beliefs prevent her from issuing licenses to same-sex couples. After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled gay marriage bans unconstitutional, Davis stopped issuing licenses to any couple, gay or straight.

Five couples sued her, and U.S. District Judge David L. Bunning on Wednesday ordered her to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling.

He wrote that her refusal "likely violated the constitutional rights of her constituents."

Ermold, in a tearful plea, called her actions "cruel" and said they were representative of the continued discrimination faced by gay couples.

In Kentucky, county clerks issue marriage licenses, but someone else must "solemnize" the marriage before the license can be filed with the county clerk. Davis argued that issuing a same-sex marriage license that contains her signature is the same as her approving the marriage, which she said violates her Christian beliefs. But Bunning rejected that argument, saying Davis has likely violated the U.S. Constitution's ban on the government establishing a religion by "openly adopting a policy that promotes her own religious convictions at the expenses of others."

"Davis remains free to practice her Apostolic Christian beliefs. She may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible Study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County Jail. She is even free to believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman, as many Americans do," Bunning wrote. "However, her religious convictions cannot excuse her from performing the duties that she took an oath to perform as Rowan County Clerk."

Laura Landenwich, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the 28-page ruling reveals that the judge painstakingly combed through each of Davis' legal arguments and rejected each one. Bunning said that although couples could get marriage licenses elsewhere, "why should they be required to?" He noted the surrounding counties require 30 minutes or one hour of travel and there are many "in this rural region of the state who simply do not have the physical, financial or practical means to travel."

Bunning said state law does not allow the county judge-executive to issue marriage licenses unless Davis is absent from her job, and Bunning refused to deem Davis absent because she has a religious objection. And Bunning said issuing a marriage license does not constitute speech, saying the marriage license form "does not require the county clerk to condone or endorse same-sex marriage on religious or moral grounds." Defying order, clerk won't give gay couple marriage license

Agree, she should fight it out.

 

[Totton Linnet]

the KKK does it all the time



You claim you treat the "homos" like everyone else yet you use a hateful and derogatory name when referring to the people you claim to not hate.

Do you toss out the N word while at work as well?

Homosexuality is the correct word...gay they very often are not.

n****r is not a correct name.

The KKK does and everybody knows that the KKK are not true followers of Christ....how could they possibly be?

If you say homosexuality is a hateful term, what makes it so in your view? since it is an accurate term for what they are.