Kentucky clerk who refused gay couples taken into federal custody; ordered jailed

republicanchick

New member
Nope. She refused to do the job she was elected to and being paid to do, and wouldn't let her deputy clerks do it either.

She denied citizens their civil rights and unlawfully imposed her religious values on those who don't share them.

spoken like a true heathen

you make Catholics look not only bad

but VERY bad... no wonder poeple leave the Church.. or don't go near it in the 1st place


Obviously, you will be held accountable in the End

Oh, it looks like u aren't claiming 2b Catholic anymore... well... some good news (sorta... but not)


++
 

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
spoken like a true heathen

you make Catholics look not only bad

but VERY bad... no wonder poeple leave the Church.. or don't go near it in the 1st place


Obviously, you will be held accountable in the End

Oh, it looks like u aren't claiming 2b Catholic anymore... well... some good news (sorta... but not)


++


:chuckle:
 

StanJ

New member
This has probably been mentioned before but I just read that the judge actually gave a compromise to Davis which said she could continue not issuing licenses and avoid jail if she only said she wouldn't interfere in her deputy clerks from doing it. She refused. That makes her even less of a victim in my eyes. If her objection is that issuing licenses is a violation of her beliefs, what's her objection with the deputy clerks doing it? Does she think it's still attached to her in some way because it's still her office doing it? :idunno:


There is NO logic in biased people....only prejudice.
 

republicanchick

New member
T

Approaching such laws today without a critical mindset is quite dangerous, and very selective when it comes to homosexuality.

t.

didnt read your whole post, but here's a Q

Would YOU engage in homosexual acts?

This is important b/c if YOU wouldn't... then there is a very valid reason WHY you woldn't...

and maybe that reason is

that it is unnatural? immoral? perverse? all of the above?




___
 

StanJ

New member
her name is on the license
do you get it now?

No I don't...her name is also on divorce certificates, business licences for porn shops and bars, so this is strictly a personal vendetta against a legal citizen of Kentucky. It is nothing more than religious bigotry hiding behind the freedom of religion, which is not even a defensible stance in the U.S., because of it being illegal to force your religious beliefs on anyone, plus the fact that the Bible does NOT condone legislated morality.
 

WizardofOz

New member


didnt read your whole post, but here's a Q

Would YOU engage in homosexual acts?

This is important b/c if YOU wouldn't... then there is a very valid reason WHY you woldn't...

and maybe that reason is

that it is unnatural? immoral? perverse? all of the above?

___
Perhaps because, oh I don't know, Selaphiel isnt a homosexual! :duh:
 

republicanchick

New member
No I don't...her name is also on divorce certificates, business licences for porn shops and bars, so this is strictly a personal vendetta against a legal citizen of Kentucky. It is nothing more than religious bigotry hiding behind the freedom of religion, which is not even a defensible stance in the U.S., because of it being illegal to force your religious beliefs on anyone, plus the fact that the Bible does NOT condone legislated morality.

if u were honest (but we know u r not)

you would DELETE asap

in the sidebox here

the word Christian




___
 

Selaphiel

Well-known member


didnt read your whole post, but here's a Q

Would YOU engage in homosexual acts?

This is important b/c if YOU wouldn't... then there is a very valid reason WHY you woldn't...

and maybe that reason is

that it is unnatural? immoral? perverse? all of the above?


No, I would not. For the simple reason that I'm not a homosexual, not because it is immmoral. Doesn't follow from that that it is immoral, unnatural or perverse.

In fact, homosexuality is natural. It occurs in many other species, which means that it is a biological phenomena, not a choice.

Immoral? Let us hear your argument then: Why is it immoral? What harm does it cause per se? Perverse? Well, that depends on you being able to argue that it is immoral.

Present an argument for your claim.
 

republicanchick

New member
Perhaps because, oh I don't know, Selaphiel isnt a homosexual! :duh:

well, that rather proves my point

If YOU think something is ammoral and hideous...

gosh

maybe it is...

again... society these days seems to have little interest in OBJECTIVE moral truth/reality


well, eveyrone will someday

in the next life we will all "know" what some of us know today

of course by then it will probably be too late for many


+
 

StanJ

New member
Injustice is not putting Sodomites ([Ex 20:14] heterosexual [Lev. 20:10–12]/homosexual [Lev. 20:10,13]) to death (Nu 35:31, Eccl 10:2, Jn 10:10).


News flash!!!!

We are NOT under the OT Mosaic Law, we are NOW under the LAW of love.
I'm always amazed at how quickly some Christians resort to quoting the OBSOLETE OT laws.
 

StanJ

New member
yes but not our supreme courts interpretation of it
so
what is your point here?
and
you never answered the question

are you okay with your name on the license for same sex marriage?


Democracy has NO place in the church, and the church has NO PLACE in the democracy of the nation. Did Jesus not make that clear enough for you by His words? Was Paul's instruction and admonition not good enough for you?
 

Selaphiel

Well-known member
well, that rather proves my point

If YOU think something is ammoral and hideous...

Not being a homosexual does not equal thinking that it is immoral (why would you say amoral?) and hideous.

again... society these days seems to have little interest in OBJECTIVE moral truth/reality

If it is objective, then you should be able to present an argument for why it is immoral using reason and empirical facts.
 

republicanchick

New member
No, I would not. For the simple reason that I'm not a homosexual, not because it is immmoral. Doesn't follow from that that it is immoral, unnatural or perverse.

In fact, homosexuality is natural.
all human urges could be called "natural". Killing your children when angry is "natural" b/c anger is "natural"--doesn't follow that Natural is always good, much less desirable for a so called civilized society

s It occurs in many other species, which means that it is a biological phenomena, not a choice.
see above answer
Immoral? Let us hear your argument then: Why is it immoral? What harm does it cause per se?
it is a fact that when a man is murdered, the cops first think: Homosexual partner.. b/c homos kill ea other at a higher rate than normal people.

Perverse? Well, that depends on you being able to argue that it is immoral.

Present an argument for your claim.

3 words

The Catholic Church

no one who is truly Catholic would EVER accept such PERVERSE actions... and if he ever fell into such due to weakness... being human... being a sinner, as we all are... He would immediately seek forgiveness.... and even if he fell 20 times, he would still seek forgiveness... As per Romans chapter ONE

man is without excuse... The Holy Spirit tells eveyone what is right and wrong... problem is some have told the HS to take a hike...


and when we sin egregoiusly, the HS does just that...



___
 
Top