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

TracerBullet

New member
Ah, yes, the old "biology is the same as behavior" trope.

It was wrong when it was first used, and it's still wrong today. The behavior of a man lying with a man as with a woman is not biology. It can be done regardless of one's DNA... or not. And since the behavior is bad not only for society but for the individuals that engage in said behavior, everyone in society and the law should do what they can to discourage the behavior or at least keep it in the closet.

Pretending that what is biology in you is behavior in others is not just a trope it is dishonest
 

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Considering the couple she has worked so hard to discriminate against has been together for 18 years I think she would do better to try and learn something from them rather than play "moral" judge

So ... they have been more consistent and devoted to their ONE, long term relationship as compared to her ... four marriages? There's a shocker ... but at least she made the news.
 

bybee

New member
Pretending that what is biology in you is behavior in others is not just a trope it is dishonest

Pretending? Human anatomy is pretty standard. We are all variations on the same theme.
Whilst chemistry affects behavior in different ways. Our minds would appear to serve us best by discerning what is good for us and what is bad for us.
Conforming to natures plan would appear to be good for us.
Behavior in other's is their business.
Nowadays I must avert my eyes and cover my ears so as not to be offended or disgusted by blatantly crass behavior in public.
 

StanJ

New member
Pretending? Human anatomy is pretty standard. We are all variations on the same theme.
Whilst chemistry affects behavior in different ways. Our minds would appear to serve us best by discerning what is good for us and what is bad for us.
Conforming to natures plan would appear to be good for us.
Behavior in other's is their business.
Nowadays I must avert my eyes and cover my ears so as not to be offended or disgusted by blatantly crass behavior in public.

Human anatomy is as corrupted as human nature is...because of sin. One can only deal with their particular lot in life and trust God, but they first have to accept Him before they trust Him. Otherwise they fend for themselves in whatever way they can.

I'm know for a fact that Jesus didn't walk around with eyes wide shut!!!

He looked for people in need and reached out to them, like we must.
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
So it's the legislature's job to create law, and the courts job to make sure the previously written constitution says the new law is OK to be enforced. Is that what you are saying here?
Let me try it this way.

The legislative branch creates and passes law.
The executive branch signs laws into effect and enforces them.
The judiciary's involvement in law comes by way of review, when an objection is made concerning the foundation of a law or its application and the question becomes is that foundation and/or application Constitutional. The Court ultimately determines, by review, whether or not that law or particular application of it should stand/is Constitutional.

Hopefully that clears up any misunderstanding.
 

lovemeorhateme

Well-known member
The bible also prohibits divorce, wedding rings, Christmas trees, women wearing pants, cutting your hair and wearing poly-cotton blends.

No one here is arguing that divorce is okay according to the scriptures as far as I can see? As for wedding rings and Christmas trees, I don't see any prohibition against them in the Bible. Nor do I see one against women wearing trousers.

As for cutting hair and wearing mixed fibres, neither of those rules apply today and one doesn't need to study much theology to understand that. There is a division between the moral and ceremonial law; something which theologians as far back as Thomas Aquinas recognised.

However, even if everything you said were true it would not change the fact that sexual activity between two members of the same sex is a sin. In fact, all sex outside of marriage - and by marriage I mean the biblical definition of marriage, is a sin.
 

Sitamun

New member
Let me try it this way.

The legislative branch creates and passes law.
The executive branch signs laws into effect and enforces them.
The judiciary's involvement in law comes by way of review, when an objection is made concerning the foundation of a law or its application and the question becomes is that foundation and/or application Constitutional. The Court ultimately determines, by review, whether or not that law or particular application of it should stand/is Constitutional.

Hopefully that clears up any misunderstanding.

That's pretty much standard grade school social studies, it's a shame you need to remind adults...
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
:jawdrop: So she was a promiscuous adulteress as well as thrice married divorcee!

Yeah, such a judge of character and marriage ...

Yes, all before repenting and being saved and now following the Lord.

Praise His Holy Name!
 

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame
Susan Atkins and Tex Watson became a Christian while serving their lifelong prison sentence (and no, I am not comparing what she did to murder).

The point is ... conversion (in the here and now) doesn't mean our personal mistakes or criminal actions are wiped clean. They are part of person's lifetime record.

Certainly. But I agree with A4T's response, which is that if you are trying to determine hypocrisy then you need to focus on what she believes now.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
Her actions are a statement of WHAT marriage should and shouldn't be. She has no discernment to judge who is or is not fit for marriage UNLESS she actually knows those involved.

According to her standard, if she puts her signature on the marriage of a heterosexual couple and one of them ends up murdering the other and their child, she endorsed and gave her seal of approval for *their* marriage.

IF she wishes to only endorse those marriages that she approves of, that means she endorses everything that goes on in those marriages ... via her own logic.

Sure she does, the bible says a man and a woman, no other caveats are given. (like being a believer, married before, etc) the law on marriage is a man and a woman, period.

Thats all she needs to know.
 

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame
She refused that option as well. She ordered all her staff to not issue any marriage licenses to anyone at all. And now that she's in jail, the office has been issuing licenses and she's saying they aren't valid because they don't have her signature on them.

So she's even refusing reasonable compromises that would allow her to not violate her faith while allowing the taxpayers of the county to receive the legal services her office exists to provide.

:think:
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame

Only its not up to her to allow others to sign them, its a state law that only she can. (only the lead official clerk can)

The state has to change that. Thats why some attorneys are saying the licenses that are unsigned, aren't legal.

The judge broke the law when he said to issue them anyway, thats a violation of kentucky law.
 
Top