Kim Davis Is Winning

[NYcarbineer]

That's why the people of Ohio and Indiana like to think of the Ohio River as a moat.

 

[ElmerMudd]

Now you're defending her breaking the law.

You Communists are such hypocrites.

Civil disobedience has a long tradition on the left. Are you suddenly outraged by it, because the hated enemy of the party engages in it.

BTW, Davis is a party member. What will you do? Will you hold a public purge to oust her from the GLORIOUS peoples party?

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? .

If they consider it punishment to be required by law to recognize gay marriage as a right and act accordingly,

then yes, they must be punished.

Glad you feel that away because the lefts new leaders coming forth agree with you on that being forced into believing in something that you don't.

Kim does not have to believe anything different than she does today, she just has to do her job.

 

[Debra K]

Nothing about just some deviant sex behaviors in the 14th. Neither is there anything about "everyone in the US has the right to marry anyone they want without consent of the governed."

The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the state from depriving ANY PERSON of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or equal protection under the law. Due process means that states may not arbitrarily deprive people of their liberty interests. The Constitution doesn't mention hats or bedtimes, but the government doesn't have the power to arbitrarily deprive people of the right to wear a hat or the right to decide for themselves what time to go to bed. Insisting that the entire universe of rights must be listed in a constitution before it can be protected against government deprivations is foolish. We are not a pure democracy. A group of people cannot abuse the power of the state to impose their morals on the rest of society. No one cares that you personally think the private sexual practices of two consenting adults is deviant. We are not ruled by missionaries who command the natives engage only in missionary style sex.

 

[Redfish]

Now you're defending her breaking the law.

You Communists are such hypocrites.

Civil disobedience has a long tradition on the left. Are you suddenly outraged by it, because the hated enemy of the party engages in it.

BTW, Davis is a party member. What will you do? Will you hold a public purge to oust her from the GLORIOUS peoples party?

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? .

If they consider it punishment to be required by law to recognize gay marriage as a right and act accordingly,

then yes, they must be punished.

Glad you feel that away because the lefts new leaders coming forth agree with you on that being forced into believing in something that you don't.

Kim does not have to believe anything different than she does today, she just has to do her job.

Does the muslim flight attendent who refused to serve alcohol also "just have to do her job" ?

Does a muslim woman have the right to have her drivers license picture taken with her face covered?

This shit has to go both ways.

 

[Redfish]

Nothing about just some deviant sex behaviors in the 14th. Neither is there anything about "everyone in the US has the right to marry anyone they want without consent of the governed."

The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the state from depriving ANY PERSON of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or equal protection under the law. Due process means that states may not arbitrarily deprive people of their liberty interests. The Constitution doesn't mention hats or bedtimes, but the government doesn't have the power to arbitrarily deprive people of the right to wear a hat or the right to decide for themselves what time to go to bed. Insisting that the entire universe of rights must be listed in a constitution before it can be protected against government deprivations is foolish. We are not a pure democracy. A group of people cannot abuse the power of the state to impose their morals on the rest of society. No one cares that you personally think the private sexual practices of two consenting adults is deviant. We are not ruled by missionaries who command the natives engage only in missionary style sex.

You make some valid points. But on counter point. Society as a whole should decide what is to be considered right and wrong and moral and immoral. Those decisions should be made by everyone based on votes, not by 5 unelected old farts in black robes.

the SC decision on gay marriage WILL be used as a valid precedent for multiple marriage, polygamy, sibling marriage, and all other forms of human grouping.

 

[Seawytch]

Now you're defending her breaking the law.

You Communists are such hypocrites.

Civil disobedience has a long tradition on the left. Are you suddenly outraged by it, because the hated enemy of the party engages in it.

BTW, Davis is a party member. What will you do? Will you hold a public purge to oust her from the GLORIOUS peoples party?

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? .

If they consider it punishment to be required by law to recognize gay marriage as a right and act accordingly,

then yes, they must be punished.

Glad you feel that away because the lefts new leaders coming forth agree with you on that being forced into believing in something that you don't.

Kim does not have to believe anything different than she does today, she just has to do her job.

Does the muslim flight attendent who refused to serve alcohol also "just have to do her job" ?

Does a muslim woman have the right to have her drivers license picture taken with her face covered?

This shit has to go both ways.

It wasn't simply that Davis refused, herself, to issue licenses. A religious accommodation could be made for her.

Davis ordered her entire office, even if willing, not to issue them.

 

[Redfish]

The gay marriage agenda is not about gay rights, the constitution, or the supreme court rulings.

the gay agenda is:

criminalize Christianity
force societal acceptance of homosexuality as normal by government dictate

 

[Seawytch]

The gay marriage agenda is not about gay rights, the constitution, or the supreme court rulings.

the gay agenda is:

criminalize Christianity
force societal acceptance of homosexuality as normal by government dictate

Repeating your hyperbolic nonsense doesn't make it true.

 

[Debra K]

Nothing about just some deviant sex behaviors in the 14th. Neither is there anything about "everyone in the US has the right to marry anyone they want without consent of the governed."

The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the state from depriving ANY PERSON of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or equal protection under the law. Due process means that states may not arbitrarily deprive people of their liberty interests. The Constitution doesn't mention hats or bedtimes, but the government doesn't have the power to arbitrarily deprive people of the right to wear a hat or the right to decide for themselves what time to go to bed. Insisting that the entire universe of rights must be listed in a constitution before it can be protected against government deprivations is foolish. We are not a pure democracy. A group of people cannot abuse the power of the state to impose their morals on the rest of society. No one cares that you personally think the private sexual practices of two consenting adults is deviant. We are not ruled by missionaries who command the natives engage only in missionary style sex.

You make some valid points. But on counter point. Society as a whole should decide what is to be considered right and wrong and moral and immoral. Those decisions should be made by everyone based on votes, not by 5 unelected old farts in black robes.

the SC decision on gay marriage WILL be used as a valid precedent for multiple marriage, polygamy, sibling marriage, and all other forms of human grouping.

Moral disapproval alone is not a legitimate government basis for restricting rights or doling them out to special groups while denying those same rights to others. The people don't want the morality police nosing about in every intimate corner of their lives.

 

[Redfish]

Nothing about just some deviant sex behaviors in the 14th. Neither is there anything about "everyone in the US has the right to marry anyone they want without consent of the governed."

The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the state from depriving ANY PERSON of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or equal protection under the law. Due process means that states may not arbitrarily deprive people of their liberty interests. The Constitution doesn't mention hats or bedtimes, but the government doesn't have the power to arbitrarily deprive people of the right to wear a hat or the right to decide for themselves what time to go to bed. Insisting that the entire universe of rights must be listed in a constitution before it can be protected against government deprivations is foolish. We are not a pure democracy. A group of people cannot abuse the power of the state to impose their morals on the rest of society. No one cares that you personally think the private sexual practices of two consenting adults is deviant. We are not ruled by missionaries who command the natives engage only in missionary style sex.

You make some valid points. But on counter point. Society as a whole should decide what is to be considered right and wrong and moral and immoral. Those decisions should be made by everyone based on votes, not by 5 unelected old farts in black robes.

the SC decision on gay marriage WILL be used as a valid precedent for multiple marriage, polygamy, sibling marriage, and all other forms of human grouping.

Moral disapproval alone is not a legitimate government basis for restricting rights or doling them out to special groups while denying those same rights to others. The people don't want the morality police nosing about in every intimate corner of their lives.

Talk about hypocrisy. you say that but support mandating that people accept gay marriage as normal. YOU are the ones intruding on people's lives.

I agree, I don't give a shit what you and your partner or partners do in private. But I don't want the government telling me that I must condone it.

 

[g5000]

Talk about hypocrisy. you say that but support mandating that people accept gay marriage as normal. YOU are the ones intruding on people's lives.

Please explain how two guys filing a joint tax return is intruding on your life.

"I suddenly have an inexplicable desire to smoke poles."

 

[Redfish]

Talk about hypocrisy. you say that but support mandating that people accept gay marriage as normal. YOU are the ones intruding on people's lives.

Please explain how two guys filing a joint tax return is intruding on your life.

"I suddenly have an inexplicable desire to smoke poles."

I didn't say it was intruding on MY life. I said I don't give a shit what two fags or lesbians do to each other in private.

What I said is that IMO, sanctioning gay marriage will lead to sanctioning other forms of marriage like multiples, polygamy, sibling, parent/child etc--------------because its about money.

We are willing to sacrifice our culture so that a minority can get a larger tax refund.

 

[g5000]

Talk about hypocrisy. you say that but support mandating that people accept gay marriage as normal. YOU are the ones intruding on people's lives.

Please explain how two guys filing a joint tax return is intruding on your life.

"I suddenly have an inexplicable desire to smoke poles."

I didn't say it was intruding on MY life.

Evasion.

What I said is that IMO, sanctioning gay marriage will lead to sanctioning other forms of marriage like multiples, polygamy, sibling, parent/child etc--------------because its about money.

No, you quite plainly said they were intruding on other people's lives.

Explain how two men filing a joint tax return are intruding on other people's lives.

And by the way, you just added a slippery slope fallacy to your argument. Bogus.

We are willing to sacrifice our culture so that a minority can get a larger tax refund.

Our "culture" of oppression of minorities is being sacrificed. You say that as though it was a bad thing.

This is how you bigots reveal your bigotry without realizing it.

"We've always oppressed these people" is neither a legal nor a moral argument.

 

[Slyhunter]

Talk about hypocrisy. you say that but support mandating that people accept gay marriage as normal. YOU are the ones intruding on people's lives.

Please explain how two guys filing a joint tax return is intruding on your life.

"I suddenly have an inexplicable desire to smoke poles."

I'm waiting for them to house people based on gender and not actual sex. Waiting and watching for the rash of pregnant women in our prisons.

 

[g5000]

What I said is that IMO, sanctioning gay marriage will lead to sanctioning other forms of marriage like multiples, polygamy, sibling, parent/child etc--------------because its about money.

I have debunked this slippery slope fallacy so many times it isn't even funny.

I can show how allowing adult/child sexual relationships causes harm. No one has ever shown how adult gay relationships cause harm.

Apples and oranges. Slippery slope. Et cetera, et cetera.

And the bigotry is once again exposed without the bigot even realizing it, by equating gays with pedophiles.

The bigots do this EVERY time. Without fail.

And they actually have the audacity to get all upset when I say minorities won't vote for a party which so clearly HATES them. Can you believe that?

 

[Slyhunter]

What I said is that IMO, sanctioning gay marriage will lead to sanctioning other forms of marriage like multiples, polygamy, sibling, parent/child etc--------------because its about money.

I have debunked this slippery slope fallacy so many times it isn't even funny.

I can show how allowing adult/child sexual relationships cause harm. No one has ever shown how adult/adult relationships cause harm.

Apples and oranges. Slippery slope. Et cetera, et cetera.

And the bigotry is once again exposed without the bigot even realizing it, by equating gays with pedophiles.

The bigots do this EVERY time. Without fail.

no you haven't. To debunked means prove it wrong. You thrown stuff out there but it doesn't prove it wrong.

 

[Redfish]

Talk about hypocrisy. you say that but support mandating that people accept gay marriage as normal. YOU are the ones intruding on people's lives.

Please explain how two guys filing a joint tax return is intruding on your life.

"I suddenly have an inexplicable desire to smoke poles."

I didn't say it was intruding on MY life.

Evasion.

What I said is that IMO, sanctioning gay marriage will lead to sanctioning other forms of marriage like multiples, polygamy, sibling, parent/child etc--------------because its about money.

No, you quite plainly said they were intruding on other people's lives.

Explain how two people filing a joint tax return are intruding on other people's lives.

And by the way, you just added a slippery slope fallacy to your argument. Bogus.

We are willing to sacrifice our culture so that a minority can get a larger tax refund.

Our "culture" of oppression of minorities is being sacrificed. You say that as though it was a bad thing.

This is how you bigots reveal your bigotry without realizing it.

"We've always oppressed these people" is neither a legal nor a moral argument.

if homosexuality is to be equated to race in terms on minority status, then males should also be given minority status since females outnumber them.

you entire logic is bunk.

but I get it, You just feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel sorry for them. You emmmmmmmmmmmmpathize with them. you woooooooooooooorrrry about them.

But you assholes support muslim countries where gays are executed, women are raped for the acts of their brothers, and Christians are beheaded for being Christians. You are lunatics.

Homosexuality is NOT anywhere near the most important issue facing this country, but yous libs are obsessed with it because you think it helps you politically.

You are sick.

 

[Redfish]

What I said is that IMO, sanctioning gay marriage will lead to sanctioning other forms of marriage like multiples, polygamy, sibling, parent/child etc--------------because its about money.

I have debunked this slippery slope fallacy so many times it isn't even funny.

I can show how allowing adult/child sexual relationships cause harm. No one has ever shown how adult gay relationships cause harm.

Apples and oranges. Slippery slope. Et cetera, et cetera.

And the bigotry is once again exposed without the bigot even realizing it, by equating gays with pedophiles.

The bigots do this EVERY time. Without fail.

And they actually have the audacity to get all upset when I say minorities won't vote for a party which so clearly HATES them. Can you believe that?

OK, great. so you support all forms of marriage including child/adult. Are you a nambla member or a muslim?

 

[g5000]

What I said is that IMO, sanctioning gay marriage will lead to sanctioning other forms of marriage like multiples, polygamy, sibling, parent/child etc--------------because its about money.

I have debunked this slippery slope fallacy so many times it isn't even funny.

I can show how allowing adult/child sexual relationships cause harm. No one has ever shown how adult gay relationships cause harm.

Apples and oranges. Slippery slope. Et cetera, et cetera.

And the bigotry is once again exposed without the bigot even realizing it, by equating gays with pedophiles.

The bigots do this EVERY time. Without fail.

And they actually have the audacity to get all upset when I say minorities won't vote for a party which so clearly HATES them. Can you believe that?

OK, great. so you support all forms of marriage including child/adult.

Nope. Now you are just being willfully retarded since you know you lost the argument.

Still waiting for you to explain how two men filing a joint tax return are intruding on other people's lives.

Are you a nambla member or a muslim?

Wow. You are really showing your stripes now, equating Muslims with pedophiles.

Please...keep going. Need a bigger shovel?

 

[g5000]

Talk about hypocrisy. you say that but support mandating that people accept gay marriage as normal. YOU are the ones intruding on people's lives.

Please explain how two guys filing a joint tax return is intruding on your life.

"I suddenly have an inexplicable desire to smoke poles."

I didn't say it was intruding on MY life.

Evasion.

What I said is that IMO, sanctioning gay marriage will lead to sanctioning other forms of marriage like multiples, polygamy, sibling, parent/child etc--------------because its about money.

No, you quite plainly said they were intruding on other people's lives.

Explain how two people filing a joint tax return are intruding on other people's lives.

And by the way, you just added a slippery slope fallacy to your argument. Bogus.

We are willing to sacrifice our culture so that a minority can get a larger tax refund.

Our "culture" of oppression of minorities is being sacrificed. You say that as though it was a bad thing.

This is how you bigots reveal your bigotry without realizing it.

"We've always oppressed these people" is neither a legal nor a moral argument.

if homosexuality is to be equated to race in terms on minority status, then males should also be given minority status since females outnumber them.

you entire logic is bunk.

but I get it, You just feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel sorry for them. You emmmmmmmmmmmmpathize with them. you woooooooooooooorrrry about them.

But you assholes support muslim countries where gays are executed, women are raped for the acts of their brothers, and Christians are beheaded for being Christians. You are lunatics.

Homosexuality is NOT anywhere near the most important issue facing this country, but yous libs are obsessed with it because you think it helps you politically.

You are sick.

I see lots and lots of smoke from your crack pipe, but no explanation of how two men filing a joint tax return are intruding on other people's lives.