If Justice Kennedy Had Known A Christian Would Be Jailed Less Than 3 Months Later...

[Hossfly]

On a sidenote, does anyone know what you get when you cross a rooster with a telephone pole?

A 30ft cock.

You win the seegar butt when Bulldog finishes smoking it!

 

[JakeStarkey]

She actively violated the law, got spanked, and that is the end of it.

 

[Skylar]

She actively violated the law, got spanked, and that is the end of it.

Pretty much. And nothing Sil predicted came to pass. Not a single 'legal' argument Sil insisted would be used was used. Nor were any of his 'mark my words' moments anything more than empty air.

This is just another Sil thumb sucker thread. Where Sil is self soothing by repeating the same empty nonsense to herself again and again. The rhetorical equivalent of a binky.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Very apt insight to Sil.

An OCD pesonality, Sil soothes inner angst by posting the same stuff over and over.

 

[Silhouette]

She actively violated the law, got spanked, and that is the end of it.

Not according to her constitutional attorney she's retained.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"If Justice Kennedy Had Known A Christian Would Be Jailed Less Than 3 Months Later..."

Nonsense.

Davis was jailed because she was in contempt of court, and as a result of her own free will, having nothing to do with her faith.

 

[WorldWatcher]

An OCD pesonality...

Actually we refer it to CDO, Compulsive Disorder for Obsessives.





(That is OCD alphabetized.)


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

She actively violated the law, got spanked, and that is the end of it.

Not according to her constitutional attorney she's retained.

A constitutional attorney whose arguments were rejected by the Federal District Court Judge?

A constitutional attorney whose arguments were rejected by the 6th Circuit Court when requesting a stay of the Federal District Court Judges injunction?

A constitutional attorney whose arguments were rejected by the United States Supreme Court when requesting a stay of the Federal District Court Judges injunction?




She needs a new constitutional attorney.


>>>>

 

[Skylar]

She actively violated the law, got spanked, and that is the end of it.

Not according to her constitutional attorney she's retained.

The lawyer that lost every single time he argued for her in court?

Yeah, I can tell why he gives his services away for free. That's about twice as much as they're worth.

 

[Silhouette]

She actively violated the law, got spanked, and that is the end of it.

Not according to her constitutional attorney she's retained.

A constitutional attorney whose arguments were rejected by the Federal District Court Judge?...A constitutional attorney whose arguments were rejected by the 6th Circuit Court when requesting a stay of the Federal District Court Judges injunction?...A constitutional attorney whose arguments were rejected by the United States Supreme Court when requesting a stay of the Federal District Court Judges injunction?

Yes, a constitutional attorney who in all likelihood knew all that was going to happen. After all, if he's going to get a conspicuous and public Hearing, he can't be affirmed at a lower level, can he?

Just sayin'. Those are "defeats" in your eyes only IMHO.

 

[Skylar]

She actively violated the law, got spanked, and that is the end of it.

Not according to her constitutional attorney she's retained.

A constitutional attorney whose arguments were rejected by the Federal District Court Judge?...A constitutional attorney whose arguments were rejected by the 6th Circuit Court when requesting a stay of the Federal District Court Judges injunction?...A constitutional attorney whose arguments were rejected by the United States Supreme Court when requesting a stay of the Federal District Court Judges injunction?

Yes, a constitutional attorney who in all likelihood knew all that was going to happen. After all, if he's going to get a conspicuous and public Hearing, he can't be affirmed at a lower level, can he?

Just sayin'. Those are "defeats" in your eyes only IMHO.

So the constitutional attorney knew how badly he sucked, knew his arguments weren't compelling and were legally baseless....

......and that somehow makes him LESS incompetent? Um, no.

 

[Silhouette]

No, they want the case to be decided at the SCOTUS level after a long and tidiously predictable string of unquestioned victories for the new cult.

You'll see. I guess...sure, why not...I'll ask you this... Do you think Justice Kennedy was pleased to hear the news that Kim Davis was thrown in jail for her passive Christian refusal to accomodate a "gay wedding" (to normalize homosexuality in direct mortal violation of God's commandment to her), or maybe, just maybe...was Kennedy a bit pissed off about that?

Imagine being the first Justice since the start of our nation to be directly responsible for the jailing of a Christian for refusing to promote gay sex?

 

[JakeStarkey]

She actively violated the law, got spanked, and that is the end of it.

Not according to her constitutional attorney she's retained.

You know better than that. She has no religious right to deny others equal access to government services based on what she believes. None. And then she prevented her deputies from doing their job. She is lucky the state and country are not suing her for theft of services.

 

[Skylar]

No, they want the case to be decided at the SCOTUS level after a long and tidiously predictable string of unquestioned victories for the new cult.

You'll see.

You've said this so many times before. And you've always been wrong. Every time, every case, every principle, without exception.

And now with a perfect record of failure for Kim Davis, with every ruling against her, with the Supreme Court rejecting her appeals....you offer us your imagination as evidence. Sigh....again. Literally your imagination. And continue to ignore the actual world.

And this, right here, is why you fail. As you lack the courage to follow the evidence, clinging to what you want to be true rather than what the evidence actually demonstrates.

That process has produced nothing but failure for you.

 

[Skylar]

She actively violated the law, got spanked, and that is the end of it.

Not according to her constitutional attorney she's retained.

You know better than that. She has no religious right to deny others equal access to government services based on what she believes. None. And then she prevented her deputies from doing their job. She is lucky the state and country are not suing her for theft of services.

Oh, the civil lawsuits are coming.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Give it up, the cross groveler in KY broke the law she got off easy with jail time

May I ask what difference it makes her reason?

There's a 1st amendment prohibition against Establishing Religion. By using the State's power to force people to abide her religion she violated the 1st amendment.

Which wouldn't be the case if religion wasn't what she was attempting to enforce.

Ok, I see, it is your misunderstanding of the "establishment" clause that is the problem. What you are doing is trying to silence the majority of Americans who are still of faith. Sorry Charlie just because you don't like their reason doesn't mean it is invalid.

No one, including Davis, is establishing a religion.

There's no 'misunderstanding' of the Establishment Clause, or the Free Exercise Clause, for that matter – given the fact neither have anything to do with this case.

Indeed, there are no Free Exercise Clause issues in play, no religious liberty rights at stake, and no one is seeking to “silence the majority of Americans who are still of faith,” the notion is ridiculous, unfounded nonsense.

As already correctly noted: all persons of faith are free to worship as they see fit, absent any unwarranted interference by government.

And should a person of faith refuse to abide by a just, proper, and Constitutional court order – as did Kim Davis – then they can expect to be found in contempt of court, having nothing whatsoever to do with their faith.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, they want the case to be decided at the SCOTUS level after a long and tidiously predictable string of unquestioned victories for the new cult.

You'll see. I guess...sure, why not...I'll ask you this... Do you think Justice Kennedy was pleased to hear the news that Kim Davis was thrown in jail for her passive Christian refusal to accomodate a "gay wedding" (to normalize homosexuality in direct mortal violation of God's commandment to her), or maybe, just maybe...was Kennedy a bit pissed off about that?

Imagine being the first Justice since the start of our nation to be directly responsible for the jailing of a Christian for refusing to promote gay sex?

Nope. It has been turned down. If he files a new case, it will be summarily dismissed.

 

[Silhouette]

No, they want the case to be decided at the SCOTUS level after a long and tidiously predictable string of unquestioned victories for the new cult.

You'll see. I guess...sure, why not...I'll ask you this... Do you think Justice Kennedy was pleased to hear the news that Kim Davis was thrown in jail for her passive Christian refusal to accomodate a "gay wedding" (to normalize homosexuality in direct mortal violation of God's commandment to her), or maybe, just maybe...was Kennedy a bit pissed off about that?

Imagine being the first Justice since the start of our nation to be directly responsible for the jailing of a Christian for refusing to promote gay sex?

Nope. It has been turned down. If he files a new case, it will be summarily dismissed.

A Christian jailed for following the warning of a mortal sin for accomodating a "gay marriage" (normalizing homosexuality) and you think it's going to get thrown out?

We'll see... If it does, the election results for democrats will be even worse than I've predicted. Beware the curse of unintended consequences..

 

[Skylar]

No, they want the case to be decided at the SCOTUS level after a long and tidiously predictable string of unquestioned victories for the new cult.

You'll see. I guess...sure, why not...I'll ask you this... Do you think Justice Kennedy was pleased to hear the news that Kim Davis was thrown in jail for her passive Christian refusal to accomodate a "gay wedding" (to normalize homosexuality in direct mortal violation of God's commandment to her), or maybe, just maybe...was Kennedy a bit pissed off about that?

Imagine being the first Justice since the start of our nation to be directly responsible for the jailing of a Christian for refusing to promote gay sex?

Nope. It has been turned down. If he files a new case, it will be summarily dismissed.

A Christian jailed for following the warning of a mortal sin for accomodating a "gay marriage" (normalizing homosexuality) and you think it's going to get thrown out?

Neither the words 'mortal sin' nor 'normalizing homosexuality' appear anywhere in Jude 1.

You're literally hallucinating your own Bible. We can't read the imaginary version of the Bible in your head.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, they want the case to be decided at the SCOTUS level after a long and tidiously predictable string of unquestioned victories for the new cult.

You'll see. I guess...sure, why not...I'll ask you this... Do you think Justice Kennedy was pleased to hear the news that Kim Davis was thrown in jail for her passive Christian refusal to accomodate a "gay wedding" (to normalize homosexuality in direct mortal violation of God's commandment to her), or maybe, just maybe...was Kennedy a bit pissed off about that?

Imagine being the first Justice since the start of our nation to be directly responsible for the jailing of a Christian for refusing to promote gay sex?

Nope. It has been turned down. If he files a new case, it will be summarily dismissed.

A Christian jailed for following the warning of a mortal sin for accomodating a "gay marriage" (normalizing homosexuality) and you think it's going to get thrown out?

We'll see... If it does, the election results for democrats will be even worse than I've predicted. Beware the curse of unintended consequences..

Considering that the Bible is not the law book, but the Constitution is: sure, it's going to be thrown out. And this incident will have no bearing on any election.