Kim Davis Is Winning

[Redfish]

What I said is 100% true. The liar here is you.

Let me ask you something: Is a US citizen allowed to hold beliefs which are contrary to government beliefs? Or, are we all required to think and believe what the government dictates?

Now you're defending her breaking the law.

Not at all, I said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

I asked you if american citizens should be ALLOWED to hold beliefs different from what the government dictates.

For example: are americans allowed to believe that the muslim religion preaches destruction of all non muslims even though obama and his minions declare that that is not true?

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Of course, can you cite where I ever condoned killing abortion doctors?

You're calling it thought control.

Did you miss your meds this morning? Better call the nurse.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Now you're defending her breaking the law.

Not at all, I said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

I asked you if american citizens should be ALLOWED to hold beliefs different from what the government dictates.

For example: are americans allowed to believe that the muslim religion preaches destruction of all non muslims even though obama and his minions declare that that is not true?

Who is trying deny anyone a belief? How would you even do that?

By punishing people for trying to live by their beliefs, by forcing people to do things that are against their beliefs.

"big brother is watching you" Orwell

Thought control is very dangerous. Its happening today in north korea. People who express any thinking that is in conflict with the government mandated thinking are killed.

See, now you're asserting her right to ignore the law, despite your earlier claim she didn't have that right.

Is it thought control to make shooting abortion doctors a crime?

You totally missed the point of the thread. She is winning because she is out of jail, back at her job, and does not have to put her name on gay marriage licenses.

Why you think abortion doctor shootings have anything to do with this, only you know.

She lost because gays are getting married.

 

[Redfish]

What I said is 100% true. The liar here is you.

Let me ask you something: Is a US citizen allowed to hold beliefs which are contrary to government beliefs? Or, are we all required to think and believe what the government dictates?

Now you're defending her breaking the law.

Not at all, I said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

I asked you if american citizens should be ALLOWED to hold beliefs different from what the government dictates.

For example: are americans allowed to believe that the muslim religion preaches destruction of all non muslims even though obama and his minions declare that that is not true?

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Do you understand that issues like abortion should be decided by society as a whole, not 5 unelected old farts in black robes?

before you answer, remember the next time those 5 could be conservatives.

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Now you're defending her breaking the law.

Not at all, I said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

I asked you if american citizens should be ALLOWED to hold beliefs different from what the government dictates.

For example: are americans allowed to believe that the muslim religion preaches destruction of all non muslims even though obama and his minions declare that that is not true?

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Of course, can you cite where I ever condoned killing abortion doctors?

You're calling it thought control.

Did you miss your meds this morning? Better call the nurse.

You said right here:

"By punishing people for trying to live by their beliefs, by forcing people to do things that are against their beliefs.

"big brother is watching you" Orwell

Thought control is very dangerous."

Yes we punish anti-abortion extremists who try to live by their beliefs by blowing up clinics or murdering abortion doctors -
we force them as best we can to do what is against their beliefs.

And likewise we punish people like Kim Davis who in the course of trying to live by their beliefs, deny civil rights to others contrary to the law of the land.

To you in both cases that is Orwellian thought control.

 

[Redfish]

Not at all, I said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

I asked you if american citizens should be ALLOWED to hold beliefs different from what the government dictates.

For example: are americans allowed to believe that the muslim religion preaches destruction of all non muslims even though obama and his minions declare that that is not true?

Who is trying deny anyone a belief? How would you even do that?

By punishing people for trying to live by their beliefs, by forcing people to do things that are against their beliefs.

"big brother is watching you" Orwell

Thought control is very dangerous. Its happening today in north korea. People who express any thinking that is in conflict with the government mandated thinking are killed.

See, now you're asserting her right to ignore the law, despite your earlier claim she didn't have that right.

Is it thought control to make shooting abortion doctors a crime?

You totally missed the point of the thread. She is winning because she is out of jail, back at her job, and does not have to put her name on gay marriage licenses.

Why you think abortion doctor shootings have anything to do with this, only you know.

She lost because gays are getting married.

many say that society lost because gays are getting married.

So back to my basic question. Should american citizens be punished because they believe that gay marriage is wrong? Or, if you like, turn it around. Should american citizens be punished because they believe that gay marriage is right?

The point is that we should all be allowed to live our lives by the principles and beliefs that we hold as true as long as they do not violate any law.

The gay agenda's goal is to use the power of govt to mandate societal acceptance of homosexuality as a normal human condition. The vast majority of human beings on planet earth disagree with that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Now you're defending her breaking the law.

Not at all, I said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

I asked you if american citizens should be ALLOWED to hold beliefs different from what the government dictates.

For example: are americans allowed to believe that the muslim religion preaches destruction of all non muslims even though obama and his minions declare that that is not true?

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Do you understand that issues like abortion should be decided by society as a whole, not 5 unelected old farts in black robes?

before you answer, remember the next time those 5 could be conservatives.

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

You are impossible to reason with because you have no clue what the Court's function is.

The Court struck down unconstitutional state laws.

 

[Redfish]

Not at all, I said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

I asked you if american citizens should be ALLOWED to hold beliefs different from what the government dictates.

For example: are americans allowed to believe that the muslim religion preaches destruction of all non muslims even though obama and his minions declare that that is not true?

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Of course, can you cite where I ever condoned killing abortion doctors?

You're calling it thought control.

Did you miss your meds this morning? Better call the nurse.

You said right here:

"By punishing people for trying to live by their beliefs, by forcing people to do things that are against their beliefs.

"big brother is watching you" Orwell

Thought control is very dangerous."

Yes we punish anti-abortion extremists who try to live by their beliefs by blowing up clinics or murdering abortion doctors -
we force them as best we can to do what is against their beliefs.

And likewise we punish people like Kim Davis who in the course of trying to live by their beliefs, deny civil rights to others contrary to the law of the land.

To you in both cases that is Orwellian thought control.

as usual, you are making absurd comparisons. No one has ever condoned murder.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Who is trying deny anyone a belief? How would you even do that?

By punishing people for trying to live by their beliefs, by forcing people to do things that are against their beliefs.

"big brother is watching you" Orwell

Thought control is very dangerous. Its happening today in north korea. People who express any thinking that is in conflict with the government mandated thinking are killed.

See, now you're asserting her right to ignore the law, despite your earlier claim she didn't have that right.

Is it thought control to make shooting abortion doctors a crime?

You totally missed the point of the thread. She is winning because she is out of jail, back at her job, and does not have to put her name on gay marriage licenses.

Why you think abortion doctor shootings have anything to do with this, only you know.

She lost because gays are getting married.

many say that society lost because gays are getting married.

So back to my basic question. Should american citizens be punished because they believe that gay marriage is wrong? Or, if you like, turn it around. Should american citizens be punished because they believe that gay marriage is right?

The point is that we should all be allowed to live our lives by the principles and beliefs that we hold as true as long as they do not violate any law.

The gay agenda's goal is to use the power of govt to mandate societal acceptance of homosexuality as a normal human condition. The vast majority of human beings on planet earth disagree with that.

No one is punishing their beliefs. I just tried to explain to you the difference between a belief and acting on a belief but amazingly you don't seem to grasp that simple concept.

 

[Redfish]

Not at all, I said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

I asked you if american citizens should be ALLOWED to hold beliefs different from what the government dictates.

For example: are americans allowed to believe that the muslim religion preaches destruction of all non muslims even though obama and his minions declare that that is not true?

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Do you understand that issues like abortion should be decided by society as a whole, not 5 unelected old farts in black robes?

before you answer, remember the next time those 5 could be conservatives.

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

You are impossible to reason with because you have no clue what the Court's function is.

The Court struck down unconstitutional state laws.

Yes, 5 unelected old farts in black robes ruled that those state laws violated the constitution. A different court could have ruled just the opposite-----------------------thats the point I am trying to get through your thick skull.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Of course, can you cite where I ever condoned killing abortion doctors?

You're calling it thought control.

Did you miss your meds this morning? Better call the nurse.

You said right here:

"By punishing people for trying to live by their beliefs, by forcing people to do things that are against their beliefs.

"big brother is watching you" Orwell

Thought control is very dangerous."

Yes we punish anti-abortion extremists who try to live by their beliefs by blowing up clinics or murdering abortion doctors -
we force them as best we can to do what is against their beliefs.

And likewise we punish people like Kim Davis who in the course of trying to live by their beliefs, deny civil rights to others contrary to the law of the land.

To you in both cases that is Orwellian thought control.

as usual, you are making absurd comparisons. No one has ever condoned murder.

Civil rights don't begin and end with life threatening situations. The people who killed abortion doctors condoned murder,

in fact, most of them believed that God endorsed their actions.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Do you understand that issues like abortion should be decided by society as a whole, not 5 unelected old farts in black robes?

before you answer, remember the next time those 5 could be conservatives.

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

You are impossible to reason with because you have no clue what the Court's function is.

The Court struck down unconstitutional state laws.

Yes, 5 unelected old farts in black robes ruled that those state laws violated the constitution. A different court could have ruled just the opposite-----------------------thats the point I am trying to get through your thick skull.

So what?

 

[Redfish]

By punishing people for trying to live by their beliefs, by forcing people to do things that are against their beliefs.

"big brother is watching you" Orwell

Thought control is very dangerous. Its happening today in north korea. People who express any thinking that is in conflict with the government mandated thinking are killed.

See, now you're asserting her right to ignore the law, despite your earlier claim she didn't have that right.

Is it thought control to make shooting abortion doctors a crime?

You totally missed the point of the thread. She is winning because she is out of jail, back at her job, and does not have to put her name on gay marriage licenses.

Why you think abortion doctor shootings have anything to do with this, only you know.

She lost because gays are getting married.

many say that society lost because gays are getting married.

So back to my basic question. Should american citizens be punished because they believe that gay marriage is wrong? Or, if you like, turn it around. Should american citizens be punished because they believe that gay marriage is right?

The point is that we should all be allowed to live our lives by the principles and beliefs that we hold as true as long as they do not violate any law.

The gay agenda's goal is to use the power of govt to mandate societal acceptance of homosexuality as a normal human condition. The vast majority of human beings on planet earth disagree with that.

No one is punishing their beliefs. I just tried to explain to you the difference between a belief and acting on a belief but amazingly you don't seem to grasp that simple concept.

Ok, lets see here. when a gay couple goes to a baker that they know does not approve of gay marriage, when there are several bakers who do approve of gay marriage---------------------that is not forcing someone to violate their beliefs? Come on, you cannot be that stupid.

 

[Redfish]

Of course, can you cite where I ever condoned killing abortion doctors?

You're calling it thought control.

Did you miss your meds this morning? Better call the nurse.

You said right here:

"By punishing people for trying to live by their beliefs, by forcing people to do things that are against their beliefs.

"big brother is watching you" Orwell

Thought control is very dangerous."

Yes we punish anti-abortion extremists who try to live by their beliefs by blowing up clinics or murdering abortion doctors -
we force them as best we can to do what is against their beliefs.

And likewise we punish people like Kim Davis who in the course of trying to live by their beliefs, deny civil rights to others contrary to the law of the land.

To you in both cases that is Orwellian thought control.

as usual, you are making absurd comparisons. No one has ever condoned murder.

Civil rights don't begin and end with life threatening situations. The people who killed abortion doctors condoned murder,

in fact, most of them believed that God endorsed their actions.

they were wrong on both counts. But so were the abortion doctors who committed murder.

 

[Redfish]

Do you understand that issues like abortion should be decided by society as a whole, not 5 unelected old farts in black robes?

before you answer, remember the next time those 5 could be conservatives.

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

You are impossible to reason with because you have no clue what the Court's function is.

The Court struck down unconstitutional state laws.

Yes, 5 unelected old farts in black robes ruled that those state laws violated the constitution. A different court could have ruled just the opposite-----------------------thats the point I am trying to get through your thick skull.

So what?

How many times before it sinks in? those 5 assholes are making law. That act is unconstitutional.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Do you understand that issues like abortion should be decided by society as a whole, not 5 unelected old farts in black robes?

before you answer, remember the next time those 5 could be conservatives.

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

You are impossible to reason with because you have no clue what the Court's function is.

The Court struck down unconstitutional state laws.

Yes, 5 unelected old farts in black robes ruled that those state laws violated the constitution. A different court could have ruled just the opposite-----------------------thats the point I am trying to get through your thick skull.

Then should we be surprised that you didn't express those sentiments during or after the Hobby Lobby decision,

or did you?

 

[bodecea]

Now you're defending her breaking the law.

Not at all, I said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

I asked you if american citizens should be ALLOWED to hold beliefs different from what the government dictates.

For example: are americans allowed to believe that the muslim religion preaches destruction of all non muslims even though obama and his minions declare that that is not true?

Do you understand there's a difference between believing that abortion is murder,

and shooting an abortion doctor because you believe abortion is murder?

Do you understand that issues like abortion should be decided by society as a whole, not 5 unelected old farts in black robes?

before you answer, remember the next time those 5 could be conservatives.

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

That is correct. And in this case they didn't make law...they struck down some unConstitutional laws.

 

[bodecea]

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

You are impossible to reason with because you have no clue what the Court's function is.

The Court struck down unconstitutional state laws.

Yes, 5 unelected old farts in black robes ruled that those state laws violated the constitution. A different court could have ruled just the opposite-----------------------thats the point I am trying to get through your thick skull.

So what?

How many times before it sinks in? those 5 assholes are making law. That act is unconstitutional.

They did not make law, they struck down bad law. Can you not see the difference? Apparently not.

 

[Redfish]

Do you understand that issues like abortion should be decided by society as a whole, not 5 unelected old farts in black robes?

before you answer, remember the next time those 5 could be conservatives.

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

You are impossible to reason with because you have no clue what the Court's function is.

The Court struck down unconstitutional state laws.

Yes, 5 unelected old farts in black robes ruled that those state laws violated the constitution. A different court could have ruled just the opposite-----------------------thats the point I am trying to get through your thick skull.

Then should we be surprised that you didn't express those sentiments during or after the Hobby Lobby decision,

or did you?

Thats exactly the point. We support SC decisions that we agree with. But you continue to miss what I am trying to get across to you. Those 5 people are making law that affects 330,000,000 people. That was never the intent of the drafters of the constitution.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Nope, you are wrong again. The majority have said that she has to comply with the law whether she likes it or not.

The hypocrisy is coming from those lefties like you who denigrate this woman for standing behind her beliefs and praise idiots like OWS, the gay mafia, and black lives matter for rioting in support of their beliefs

You're assuming that people support black people who riot and whatever the hell "the gay mafia" is.

I don't support rioting. I might understand why it happens. There are two very different things.

 

[frigidweirdo]

'Society' did decide it when they elected the presidents and senators who put the judges on the courts.

SCOTUS does not exist to make law. Its job is to rule on the legality of lower court decisions.

You are impossible to reason with because you have no clue what the Court's function is.

The Court struck down unconstitutional state laws.

Yes, 5 unelected old farts in black robes ruled that those state laws violated the constitution. A different court could have ruled just the opposite-----------------------thats the point I am trying to get through your thick skull.

Then should we be surprised that you didn't express those sentiments during or after the Hobby Lobby decision,

or did you?

Thats exactly the point. We support SC decisions that we agree with. But you continue to miss what I am trying to get across to you. Those 5 people are making law that affects 330,000,000 people. That was never the intent of the drafters of the constitution.

The law was made by 2/3 of both houses of Congress and 2/3s of the states. How is that 5 people? Are you saying there were only 8 people in the US in 1868? I don't think so.

The Supreme Court is NOT making law at all. They're interpreting the law.