ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Granite, I served with Sozo. I knew Sozo. Sozo was a friend of mine. Granite, I'm no Sozo.
(with apologies to lloyd bentsen)
Kentucky clerk who refused gay couples taken into federal custody; ordered jailed
- Thread starter GFR7
- Start date
Granite, I served with Sozo. I knew Sozo. Sozo was a friend of mine. Granite, I'm no Sozo.
(with apologies to lloyd bentsen)
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Last edited:
Sure. I don't see that as very comparable to a clerk issuing a license though. Based on my understanding, a clerk issuing marriage licenses isn't actually performing the ceremony or causing them to be married in any sense (religious or civil).
The example that started that line of the conversion was someone selling a pack of condoms. Same answer?
PureX
Well-known member
The idea that we are responsible for the sins of others simply because we didn't actively try to stop them from sinning is both foolish and unChristian. It's a ruse being used by some Christians, who want to control, manipulate, and humiliate other people who they determine to be "sinners" (as if they are not sinners, themselves).
I sympathize with this clerk because I believe she is trying to do the right thing. But she is clearly confused about what it means to be a Christian, and how Christ teaches Christians to respond to the sinners of the world (which is everyone).
I sympathize with this clerk because I believe she is trying to do the right thing. But she is clearly confused about what it means to be a Christian, and how Christ teaches Christians to respond to the sinners of the world (which is everyone).
Yes. There's nothing intrinsically evil about ringing up a pack of condoms. What's intrinsically evil is using contraceptives (and this, qua (i.e., insofar as) contraceptive). The problem here isn't that the clerk does something intrinsically evil. The problem is that he's materially cooperating in the serious sin of someone else. This material cooperation may or may not be justifed in the given circumstances.
Uh huh. Because we all know there are people who buy contraceptives for purposes other than contraception ...
The problem here is how out of touch with reality you are.
1. In principle, you could use them for other things. One could, e.g., poke holes in a condom and use it during normal marital relations in order to obtain a sperm sample for medical purposes (e.g., to determine sperm count). Here, there is the use of a condom, but not as a contraceptive. The marital act remains open to life.
2. 1 is ultimately irrelevent, though. The fact remains that it's the use of a condom, as contraceptive, which constitutes the intrinsic moral evil. Again, I agree that the cashier is probably contributing, materially, to the evil act. Nonetheless, his contribution is indirect and remote. He permits and materially facilitates, very indirectly and remotely, the sinful act.
Ultimately, the cashier has pretty much no say in what the store does and doesn't sell. Of course, if he has the choice between being a cashier at a store that does, and a store that does not, sell contraceptives, all other things being equal, he should prefer to work at the store that doesn't sell contraceptives.
I'm putting you and your pedantic ignorance on ignore. I don't appreciate you neg repping me for no reason and your posts are a distraction.
Caledvwlch
New member
wut
In principal you could try to clean your ears out with a loaded gun.
Or an argument.
A conclusion predicated on an assumption/assertion that has no objective basis in fact.
If, however, it is an evil act then everyone who produces or profits by it is materially engaged in the evil.
Just a guard at a camp, eh? No idea what they're doing in there. I'm must not letting any get away, eh?
It would be naïve to think they sit around doing nothing. Most trolls have several sites going at any one time. BTW, my comment was rhetorical.
It's about being corrupted with uncontestable power. Most people suffer from it, to one degree or another. IMHO, trolls, one identified as actual trolls, should always be banned permanently. The trick is to ensure they are actual trolls, and not just people dissenting about certain issues.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
What difference did it make? Her deputy clerks are issuing the licenses and she's not interfering, something she should have allowed from the beginning (without all the drama).
I don't tend to give trolls that aren't present much thought.
Didn't really come off that way, but I was more interested in addressing a few of the points you made than in getting into a...wait, is this rhetorical too?
I got the inference, I just didn't agree with it entirely.
I suppose then that you don't decide the point, because I like second chances. Third chances now and then. I wouldn't permaban anyone who wasn't routinely and openly blasphemous or profane.
I was especially moved by the press conference she just held to say she doesn't want to be the center of attention.
lain: I thought it had real panache.
I was especially moved by the press conference she just held to say she doesn't want to be the center of attention.
Did she really do that ?? :rotfl:
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I was especially moved by the press conference she just held to say she doesn't want to be the center of attention.
I missed it.
Did they play Eye of the Tiger again?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
This billboard just went up in Morehead:
This billboard just went up in Morehead:
yes, from idiots who dont know anything about christianity.