Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Lol nah, it was on purpose.Shes not atoning, shes going from one form of douchenaggery to another...I have to disagree on the whole bringing up her divorcees as a vehicle to attack her position. She is a saved woman so using her past transgressions against her now is pretty cheap.
Yes, because once you get "saved", it's like the best etch-a-sketch moment that Mitt Romney didn't get to enjoy.
Seriously?
Serial-killer? Did you dismember people? Eat some vital organs? But you're now saved, you say? Well, then, what's a little cannibalism among friends?!?!?
Damn, this saved stuff is an outstanding racket.
Free from sin and free from all past responsibilities.
Heavenly, just heavenly.
I think her legal reasoning is faulty and foolish but she found redemption. I'll attack the shit out her legally position but I think it is untoward to attack the past of a woman that is trying to atone for her past. Just my two cents on that matter.
Serial divorcee to digging her heels in the dirt bigot.
All evil like her should be shunned. Salami and bacon, mdk.
It isn't my place to judge her either way for her past. I don't think she is evil, misguided in her role as an elected official but evil, no. I wish nothing but the best for her and family. She still can't deny marriage licenses on the basis of her faith though.
I know 'douchenaggery' was a spelling error but I think you just invited my new favorite word. lol
And its more like who is SHE to judge you. And not only that, but to take it a step further and attempt to use her position of power to deny you rights.
The gay marriage issue is as clear as day in my eyes good versus evil.
I cannot reconcile in my brain how you could be an honest and open minded good person while also seeing others the way they do and taking it a step further and even acting on it.
It is irreconcilable, to me.
This fails as a false comparison fallacy, and is comprehensively ignorant as well.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is over reach and then some.
Mlk would have been riding with the gays for equal access to civil marriage had he not lived in that era but this.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is overc reach and then some.
Thats quite obvious
Yea well.....Ill lay it on the line in battle with evil people until the demon rider inside of my stomach's flames wither, and his motorcycle dies.Lol nah, it was on purpose.Shes not atoning, shes going from one form of douchenaggery to another...Yes, because once you get "saved", it's like the best etch-a-sketch moment that Mitt Romney didn't get to enjoy.
Seriously?
Serial-killer? Did you dismember people? Eat some vital organs? But you're now saved, you say? Well, then, what's a little cannibalism among friends?!?!?
Damn, this saved stuff is an outstanding racket.
Free from sin and free from all past responsibilities.
Heavenly, just heavenly.
I think her legal reasoning is faulty and foolish but she found redemption. I'll attack the shit out her legally position but I think it is untoward to attack the past of a woman that is trying to atone for her past. Just my two cents on that matter.
Serial divorcee to digging her heels in the dirt bigot.
All evil like her should be shunned. Salami and bacon, mdk.
It isn't my place to judge her either way for her past. I don't think she is evil, misguided in her role as an elected official but evil, no. I wish nothing but the best for her and family. She still can't deny marriage licenses on the basis of her faith though.
I know 'douchenaggery' was a spelling error but I think you just invited my new favorite word. lol
And its more like who is SHE to judge you. And not only that, but to take it a step further and attempt to use her position of power to deny you rights.
The gay marriage issue is as clear as day in my eyes good versus evil.
I cannot reconcile in my brain how you could be an honest and open minded good person while also seeing others the way they do and taking it a step further and even acting on it.
It is irreconcilable, to me.
She can judge me all she wishes, until the cows come home even. Davis doesn't have any power over me whatsoever but her office still has to issue marriage licences. I know there is a lot of people that do not like me from the get go and frankly I don't give a shit. It is their loss actually b/c as it turns out I am pretty fucking awesome person. Also modest. lol.
Douchenaggery. lol.
Nope. Not gonna give up. Take this all the way to SC and then ignore their ruling if they rule wrongly again. By then figure legislature will be back in session to either impeach her (doubtful) or fix the laws in Kentucky like North Carolina has and its working.This graphic tells it all:
And here is the actual document denying her injunction:
103-ORDER-denying-injunction-pending-appeal.pdf
BOOM.
FYI.
Discuss. Is Kim Davis smart enough to know when to give up and simply be a human being?
This fails as a false comparison fallacy, and is comprehensively ignorant as well.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is over reach and then some.
Unlike MLK, Davis was jailed for being in contempt of court, having nothing to do with violating a given law or measure.
No.Mlk would have been riding with the gays for equal access to civil marriage had he not lived in that era but this.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is overc reach and then some.
Thats quite obvious
So in your mind homos only came along during the Carter years just like the New religion of atheism?
Check...
Theyre not all of this view. Just the evil ones.How do homophobes wrap their heads around the fact that we are a national of many beliefs, faiths, cultures, religions, and secular philosophies. And when you take a government job, the understanding is that you will serve them all, despite your own faith.
How the fuck does that work? You believe in this country and freedom of religion (including the right to not believe in God) and yet you think your religion should trump them all.
This fails as a false comparison fallacy, and is comprehensively ignorant as well.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is over reach and then some.
Unlike MLK, Davis was jailed for being in contempt of court, having nothing to do with violating a given law or measure.
Ignorance notwithstanding as an excuse, they are at the very leasy practicing evil.Theyre not all of this view. Just the evil ones.How do homophobes wrap their heads around the fact that we are a national of many beliefs, faiths, cultures, religions, and secular philosophies. And when you take a government job, the understanding is that you will serve them all, despite your own faith.
How the fuck does that work? You believe in this country and freedom of religion (including the right to not believe in God) and yet you think your religion should trump them all.
The non-evil homophobes.
Actually, I don't think most homophobes are "evil" just the ones who commit violent acts and protest funerals. But I guess Kim Davis is just a slightly watered down version of Phelps family.
Nope. Not gonna give up. Take this all the way to SC and then ignore their ruling if they rule wrongly again. By then figure legislature will be back in session to either impeach her (doubtful) or fix the laws in Kentucky like North Carolina has and its working.
And here is an example of the ignorance, fear, and hate the Constitution guards against.Mlk would have been riding with the gays for equal access to civil marriage had he not lived in that era but this.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is overc reach and then some.
Thats quite obvious
So in your mind homos only came along during the Carter years just like the New religion of atheism?
Check...
No, they checked a law with the constitution.This fails as a false comparison fallacy, and is comprehensively ignorant as well.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is over reach and then some.
Unlike MLK, Davis was jailed for being in contempt of court, having nothing to do with violating a given law or measure.
So you agree the Supremes legistrated a law from the bench...
Check...
The comparison you're looking for is George wallace.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society.
Not MLK.
"Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is overc reach and then some."
It's over. Your side lost.
Deal with it.
And here's an example of the contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and the rule of law common to many on the right.Nope. Not gonna give up. Take this all the way to SC and then ignore their ruling if they rule wrongly again. By then figure legislature will be back in session to either impeach her (doubtful) or fix the laws in Kentucky like North Carolina has and its working.This graphic tells it all:
And here is the actual document denying her injunction:
103-ORDER-denying-injunction-pending-appeal.pdf
BOOM.
FYI.
Discuss. Is Kim Davis smart enough to know when to give up and simply be a human being?
You read readers digest?A homophone is a word that sounds like another. Sorry, Homophobe. Readers Digest doesn't use that one much,I don't care what you label me, homosexuals all have the same rights as me, and if that isn't good enough, tough. I don't care, all things being equal. Waa waa boo hoo.
No.Mlk would have been riding with the gays for equal access to civil marriage had he not lived in that era but this.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is overc reach and then some.
Thats quite obvious
So in your mind homos only came along during the Carter years just like the New religion of atheism?
Check...
In my mind people were more closed minded back then, and society is evolving for the better and there is a breath of clarity occuring thats pretty nice to be witness to.
I missed the civil rights era, but am happy to have been a party to the end of homophobic douchnaggery.
No, they checked a law with the constitution.This fails as a false comparison fallacy, and is comprehensively ignorant as well.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is over reach and then some.
Unlike MLK, Davis was jailed for being in contempt of court, having nothing to do with violating a given law or measure.
So you agree the Supremes legistrated a law from the bench...
Check...
Like theyrr supposed to.
And it died.
Like it should have.
Umm...laws against gay marriage were ruled unconstitutional.No.Mlk would have been riding with the gays for equal access to civil marriage had he not lived in that era but this.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is overc reach and then some.
Thats quite obvious
So in your mind homos only came along during the Carter years just like the New religion of atheism?
Check...
In my mind people were more closed minded back then, and society is evolving for the better and there is a breath of clarity occuring thats pretty nice to be witness to.
I missed the civil rights era, but am happy to have been a party to the end of homophobic douchnaggery.
I have said this many times, gays and lesbians don't bother me, in fact I like t
No, they checked a law with the constitution.This fails as a false comparison fallacy, and is comprehensively ignorant as well.MLK got thrown in jail for violating perfectly valid laws, too. The point is whether those laws are ethical or moral, or benefit society. Marriage equality? No. Gays may need protection, but this is over reach and then some.
Unlike MLK, Davis was jailed for being in contempt of court, having nothing to do with violating a given law or measure.
So you agree the Supremes legistrated a law from the bench...
Check...
Like theyrr supposed to.
And it died.
Like it should have.
What law?
They made it up...
