Are you supporting Kim Davis for defending her faith?

[Book of Jeremiah]

I approve of Kim Davis's stand because she is obeying God's Laws. Her adultery and divorces have nothing to do with her stand.

She's doing what she subjectively believes to be 'god's law,' absent any proof or evidence; where we know as a fact of law she's in violation of the Constitution, hence her being jailed of her own free will.

Moreover, the issue has nothing to do with Davis' faith, what she might perceive to be 'god's law,' or any aspect of 'religious liberty'; this is a matter completely devoid of religious conflict or controversy, no government seeks to disadvantage Davis' liberty to worship, and no Free Exercise Clause issues are at stake.

The notion that this is about 'religious liberty' therefore fails as a lie, a partisan contrivance, and red herring fallacy.

What crime has this woman committed? The judge is going to eat crow.

I suspect he will be doing more than that when he faces God, Hossfly.

Did you hear about this story?

Judge Who Jails Kim Davis Claims Power Above God

Actually, your honor, the sovereignty of natural law over man-made authority is a founding principle — a starting point of the underlying political theory — of our constitutional republic. These United States separated from the British monarchy because we were entitled to by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” and not subservient to the alleged divine right of kings, nor to an imperious Parliament.

We ordained and established a Constitution of enumerated powers, not of general legislative authority, and “We, the People” gave Congress authority to legislate only within the powers granted in the Constitution. The rest belongs to the states, to the people and, obviously, to the great lawmaker and judge of us all.

Not only does natural law supersede the court’s authority, the judge’s authority is utterly dependent upon the existence of such a law, and — whether one wishes to acknowledge it or not — upon the authority of God.

This is not to say that each individual person may decide what natural law (or God’s law) shall be for the entire republic. But it certainly does not mean that a federal judge’s authority supersedes the law of God, or “natural law.”

 

[guno]

Kim Davis is guilty of persecuting homosexuals. She deserves what she's getting.

And if it were a homosexual and a horse demanding a marriage license would the clerk still be persecuting someone? In your eyes? Do you see the slippery slope you are on right now?

Lame Jeri. Really lame.

And, didn't you just demand that someone else stay on topic?

My point is now that the flood gates have been opened to sin where does it end? What will be considered persecution next? It's an on topic question, Luddly. What's next? Man and beast? Group marriages? Think about it.

Flood gates sin? You might feel more comfortable in a theocracy . our laws aren't made based on you religious interpretation and your strawman arguments and emotionalism. You have no confidence in the American people and laws.

The U.S. government derives it's power from the people (not God), as it clearly states in the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion. and protect minority religions


Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the 1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

So people can believe and practice what they want , but it cannot be part of the law

As to Christian and mentioning of God in the Declaration of independence , it does not describe the personal God of Christianity. Thomas Jefferson who held deist beliefs, wrote the majority of the Declaration. The Declaration describes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." This nature's view of God agrees with deist philosophy and might even appeal to those of pantheistical beliefs, but any attempt to use the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail for this reason alone.

 

[Hossfly]

I approve of Kim Davis's stand because she is obeying God's Laws. Her adultery and divorces have nothing to do with her stand.

False. She is not issuing licenses to heterosexual couples, either. That is a violation of her faith, to deny two people to be married legally in the sight of the Lord.

She didn't issue any license and that's not illegal. I hope it gets to SCROTUS because she didn't commit a crime.

She defied a court order

I heartily approve. Of course she held the court in contempt because any wise judge would have made a deal to allow her clerks to issue license without her signature. Now the judge can get A-1 sauce for the crow he's going to eat.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I approve of Kim Davis's stand because she is obeying God's Laws. Her adultery and divorces have nothing to do with her stand.

She's doing what she subjectively believes to be 'god's law,' absent any proof or evidence; where we know as a fact of law she's in violation of the Constitution, hence her being jailed of her own free will.

Moreover, the issue has nothing to do with Davis' faith, what she might perceive to be 'god's law,' or any aspect of 'religious liberty'; this is a matter completely devoid of religious conflict or controversy, no government seeks to disadvantage Davis' liberty to worship, and no Free Exercise Clause issues are at stake.

The notion that this is about 'religious liberty' therefore fails as a lie, a partisan contrivance, and red herring fallacy.

What crime has this woman committed? The judge is going to eat crow.

Again, none.

And again, this is not a criminal proceeding, that's why she's free to go home once she complies with court order – by either issuing marriage licenses to all who are eligible, including same-sex couples, or by resigning her position allowing others to obey the law, where she may no longer manifest interference with the law.

This is very simple to understand and in no way complicated – the 'controversy' is one needlessly contrived by the partisan right.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I approve of Kim Davis's stand because she is obeying God's Laws. Her adultery and divorces have nothing to do with her stand.

False. She is not issuing licenses to heterosexual couples, either. That is a violation of her faith, to deny two people to be married legally in the sight of the Lord.

She didn't issue any license and that's not illegal. I hope it gets to SCROTUS because she didn't commit a crime.

She defied a court order

The Judge defied the law of God and the laws of Kentucky. He will answer to God for what he has done.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I approve of Kim Davis's stand because she is obeying God's Laws. Her adultery and divorces have nothing to do with her stand.

False. She is not issuing licenses to heterosexual couples, either. That is a violation of her faith, to deny two people to be married legally in the sight of the Lord.

She didn't issue any license and that's not illegal. I hope it gets to SCROTUS because she didn't commit a crime.

She defied a court order

I heartily approve. Of course she held the court in contempt because any wise judge would have made a deal to allow her clerks to issue license without her signature. Now the judge can get A-1 sauce for the crow he's going to eat.

Incorrect.

Kentucky law currently allows valid licenses to be issued and authorized by a deputy clerk's signature; no 'deal' was needed.

 

[Hossfly]

I approve of Kim Davis's stand because she is obeying God's Laws. Her adultery and divorces have nothing to do with her stand.

She's doing what she subjectively believes to be 'god's law,' absent any proof or evidence; where we know as a fact of law she's in violation of the Constitution, hence her being jailed of her own free will.

Moreover, the issue has nothing to do with Davis' faith, what she might perceive to be 'god's law,' or any aspect of 'religious liberty'; this is a matter completely devoid of religious conflict or controversy, no government seeks to disadvantage Davis' liberty to worship, and no Free Exercise Clause issues are at stake.

The notion that this is about 'religious liberty' therefore fails as a lie, a partisan contrivance, and red herring fallacy.

What crime has this woman committed? The judge is going to eat crow.

Again, none.

And again, this is not a criminal proceeding, that's why she's free to go home once she complies with court order – by either issuing marriage licenses to all who are eligible, including same-sex couples, or by resigning her position allowing others to obey the law, where she may no longer manifest interference with the law.

This is very simple to understand and in no way complicated – the 'controversy' is one needlessly contrived by the partisan right.

We shall see. I want to see this issue wind up in the SCOTUS. But the Court of Appeals will probably end the farce.

 

[Hossfly]

I approve of Kim Davis's stand because she is obeying God's Laws. Her adultery and divorces have nothing to do with her stand.

False. She is not issuing licenses to heterosexual couples, either. That is a violation of her faith, to deny two people to be married legally in the sight of the Lord.

She didn't issue any license and that's not illegal. I hope it gets to SCROTUS because she didn't commit a crime.

She defied a court order

I heartily approve. Of course she held the court in contempt because any wise judge would have made a deal to allow her clerks to issue license without her signature. Now the judge can get A-1 sauce for the crow he's going to eat.

Incorrect.

Kentucky law currently allows valid licenses to be issued and authorized by a deputy clerk's signature; no 'deal' was needed.

In that case she never should have been jailed. The judge is not a wise man.

 

[guno]

I approve of Kim Davis's stand because she is obeying God's Laws. Her adultery and divorces have nothing to do with her stand.

False. She is not issuing licenses to heterosexual couples, either. That is a violation of her faith, to deny two people to be married legally in the sight of the Lord.

She didn't issue any license and that's not illegal. I hope it gets to SCROTUS because she didn't commit a crime.

She defied a court order

The Judge defied the law of God and the laws of Kentucky. He will answer to God for what he has done.

Jeri you really cannot be that ignorant of the Law can you?

The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is found in Article VI, paragraph 3, and states that:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

 

[guno]

I approve of Kim Davis's stand because she is obeying God's Laws. Her adultery and divorces have nothing to do with her stand.

False. She is not issuing licenses to heterosexual couples, either. That is a violation of her faith, to deny two people to be married legally in the sight of the Lord.

She didn't issue any license and that's not illegal. I hope it gets to SCROTUS because she didn't commit a crime.

She defied a court order

The Judge defied the law of God and the laws of Kentucky. He will answer to God for what he has done.

He will answer to God for what he has done.

Enough with your christian revenge fantasies

 

[Synthaholic]

We shall see. I want to see this issue wind up in the SCOTUS.

It's already been to the Supreme Court, from Kim Davis!

They declined to hear the case.

 

[Hossfly]

We shall see. I want to see this issue wind up in the SCOTUS.

It's already been to the Supreme Court, from Kim Davis!

They declined to hear the case.

I don't think so. There's a number of courts to go through before it gets to the SCROTUS.

 

[Tuatara]

I want to know how she is standing up for her christian faith. Does it say anywhere in the bible not to serve homosexuals? Christians getting all bent out of shape from a couple of passages in the old testament yet they remain silent on the whole working on Sunday which is even a commandment. Sounds like they are just a bunch of homophobics and their using their religion as a crutch.

 

[Synthaholic]

Man and beast?

A beast cannot give informed consent.

NEXT!

I'm sure they will figure out something, Synthaholic. Our world is getting just that immorally insane!

No, a beast cannot give consent to a relationship, sexual or otherwise. A beast is property. And there are laws against bestiality.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I want to know how she is standing up for her christian faith. Does it say anywhere in the bible not to serve homosexuals? Christians getting all bent out of shape from a couple of passages in the old testament yet they remain silent on the whole working on Sunday which is even a commandment. Sounds like they are just a bunch of homophobics and their using their religion as a crutch.

We are to abstain from all appearances of evil. It is written in Scripture.

Abstain from all appearance of evil.
1 Thessalonians 5:22

 

[Hossfly]

I want to know how she is standing up for her christian faith. Does it say anywhere in the bible not to serve homosexuals? Christians getting all bent out of shape from a couple of passages in the old testament yet they remain silent on the whole working on Sunday which is even a commandment. Sounds like they are just a bunch of homophobics and their using their religion as a crutch.

Projecting and guessing won't work.

 

[Synthaholic]

We shall see. I want to see this issue wind up in the SCOTUS.

It's already been to the Supreme Court, from Kim Davis!

They declined to hear the case.

I don't think so. There's a number of courts to go through before it gets to the SCROTUS.

Holy shit. And you wonder why we call you FOXNEWS consumers uninformed.


Supreme Court Rules Against Clerk in Gay Marriage Case

Look at the date - last week!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

We shall see. I want to see this issue wind up in the SCOTUS.

It's already been to the Supreme Court, from Kim Davis!

They declined to hear the case.

And you have a news source and a link to confirm that?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

We shall see. I want to see this issue wind up in the SCOTUS.

It's already been to the Supreme Court, from Kim Davis!

They declined to hear the case.

I don't think so. There's a number of courts to go through before it gets to the SCROTUS.

Holy shit. And you wonder why we call you FOXNEWS consumers uninformed.


Supreme Court Rules Against Clerk in Gay Marriage Case

Look at the date - last week!

So first they break the law by ignoring the law of the land, the votes of the people and over rule it all - including the will of the people of the United States of America by making same sex marriage legal and then they deny the rights of a Christian who is arrested for upholding the laws of Kentucky and and her Christian faith refusing to participate in the issuance of a marriage license to a same sex couple. Amazing!

 

[Synthaholic]

So first they break the law by ignoring the law of the land, the votes of the people and over rule it all - including the will of the people of the United States of America by making same sex marriage legal and then they deny the rights of a Christian who is arrested for upholding the laws of Kentucky and and her Christian faith refusing to participate in the issuance of a marriage license to a same sex couple. Amazing!

Yes, a pluralistic, secular society that shows no bias toward any religion is an amazing and wonderful thing!