Here We Go Again - Kentucky Clerk Refuses To Give Gay Couple Marriage License
- Thread starter What Would Jesus Do?
- Start date
the bible and god's word are indeed real and tangible, he will bring tangible fire upon folks, and it's really, really hot. he has done that in the past, and will do it again. what is not tangible is the fake laws made by the black robes of death
Oh, you're against marriages being a government issue then? Because that's the only way. Good luck with that in, America. Are you completely naive to our legal system?
Okay, at least you're admitting you're an idiot. That's a step in right direction for you.
Thd Bible is not, in and of itself, tangible evidence of anything.
what? of course I'm against any license at all being issued by government, I'm a libertarian, that's in our platform: don't issue license to work, drive, so on. marriage should not be a governmental issue at all. since the supremes and their black robes of death think they can suddenly insert themselves, let them issue the darn things, or stay out of it completely. see, I happen to know for a fact that the activists are not just going to stop at getting some sort of certificate. the next thing is: they come after businesses and the church. total takedown.
yes, but fire is. god says he shall rain down fire. he says it in the bible, then he does it. the fire is tangible evidence.
Ummm, fire was around long before the Bible was written.
Furthermore, you can't prove that any of the text of the Bible comes from a god.
Try again.
If it's strictly your belief, that's one thing. But, if you're trying to pass it off as some sort of irrefutable truth then I'm afraid you're brain is not working in a manner that would be considered "normal."
fire may have been around prior to jesus but fire would not exist without god, keep in mind I do not think jesus and god are the same, some people do think that
I also think god granted us our rights and America would not exist without god
and the reason America is being ripped apart right now is because the people have forgotten god
I think god might possibly be of some sort of alien origin and America was an experiment, but that's beside the point, no matter what I think he is, he does stuff, tangible stuff, and his word is his word
I have seen it and lived it, because you have not lived it nor seen it, the way I have, apparently, you have no way of knowing about it, which is fine. the world has all kinds of folks in it, I don't pretend to know how you live and what you believe, yet you are 100% certain what I believe is false. I know there are many different people with many different beliefs, but I also know in history god has proven what he does and does not like. I do not like to push the issue and gamble too much. I think this current administration and the USA likes to push the issue and gamble too much. This experiment was set and set aside to be one certain way, and mankind has changed it. We shall see what the price is to pay for changing it.
I also think god granted us our rights and America would not exist without god
and the reason America is being ripped apart right now is because the people have forgotten god
I think god might possibly be of some sort of alien origin and America was an experiment, but that's beside the point, no matter what I think he is, he does stuff, tangible stuff, and his word is his word
I have seen it and lived it, because you have not lived it nor seen it, the way I have, apparently, you have no way of knowing about it, which is fine. the world has all kinds of folks in it, I don't pretend to know how you live and what you believe, yet you are 100% certain what I believe is false. I know there are many different people with many different beliefs, but I also know in history god has proven what he does and does not like. I do not like to push the issue and gamble too much. I think this current administration and the USA likes to push the issue and gamble too much. This experiment was set and set aside to be one certain way, and mankind has changed it. We shall see what the price is to pay for changing it.
The Bible is also not tangible evidence against something. The argument seems to be you can't believe the Bible so Jesus must not have been the son of God. One does not necessarily follow the other.
I'd quibble with this. Errors in the Bible are tangible proof of a holy book riddled with mistakes.
Here is an excellent read from the Atlantic on this issue. They state outright that if her 'religious beliefs' conflict with her job as a public servant, she has BOTH a legal AND an ethical obligation to resign.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...freedom-gay-marriage/401390/?utm_source=yahoo
Is it possible to agree on what religious freedom is not? It’s not a right to wear a Marine uniform but refuse to fight. It’s not a right to be a county clerk and decide which citizens you will serve and which you won’t. Religious “accommodation” doesn’t mean what Liberty Counsel thinks it means. If a person can perform the duties of a job with some adjustment for religious belief, that’s an accommodation. If they’re not willing to do the job, they have to leave. That’s not just a requirement of law; honor requires it as well.
Government in particular has an obligation to dismiss any employee who claims a right to discriminate against citizens. It’s not good enough to say, “Go to another county if you want a license.” It’s not good enough to say, “I won’t let anyone get married.” Those aren’t a clerk’s decisions to make.
Government in particular has an obligation to dismiss any employee who claims a right to discriminate against citizens. It’s not good enough to say, “Go to another county if you want a license.” It’s not good enough to say, “I won’t let anyone get married.” Those aren’t a clerk’s decisions to make.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...freedom-gay-marriage/401390/?utm_source=yahoo
But, again, what if she were a clerk in Nazi German refusing to authorize trainload of Jews being sent to concentration camps. Would you (or the Atlantic) say she has a MORAL obligation to resign and let someone else allow this to happen?
Yes, yes, she's not preventing or even delaying Jews from being murdered, she's preventing or delaying a same-sex couple from being married. But she (I assume) believes just as strongly that this is wrong as our hypothetical German clerk did.
The part about government having an obligation to dismiss employees who discriminate on these grounds sounds right. Although then you could get into Saturday Night Massacre territory. Bork fired Cox after Richardson and Ruckelshouse refused. Suppose successive supervisors won't fire our miscreant clerk?
What an amazingly confusing post. You start with "yes" and then clarify with something completely different. Answer the question:
Local/State government issues marriage certificates.
Should a local/State government employee, who is Catholic, be allowed to refuse certificates to non-Catholics?
Just because you can't follow it doesn't mean it's pointless. It just means I either underestimated my audience or didn't really care if they were smart enough.
the reason I did that is the end game is thus: the activists are going after the church. period. they are using the excuse that it's about the clerk of courts, and the forcing of a county employee to marry folks. but eventually they will force churches to marry folks. like the wwjd example above: they will force catholics to re-marry divorced folks if they have to. it's power and control and force. that's what the end game is here. yes, a state or county employee should be allowed to refuse anything they want on religious grounds per the first amendment. they also should be allowed to take a walk and not work there. I would say if a wicca cult came in there and started demanding stuff, the clerk should be able to say no. and yes, I think same sex marriage is on a level with a wicca cult. yes. so the end game for me is: let's not have clerks of court issue the licenses. there is a bill in TX to have notaries of public marry folks or issue the licenses, I think that's fine. nobody in an official capacity should be messing with this stuff.
the very definition of a libertarian or someone who seeks liberty, is for one to despise our tyrannical government.
You really do not understand the First (or really any other) Amendment. That much is quite clear.
I say we get a Wicca POTUS who then just refuses to do anything with non-Wiccans. Sounds like OiT would applaud.
You know, because he is a "libertarian".
A church is not government, the fact that you get confused by that simple distinction is astonishing.
