Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Seawytch]

To go to jail like that lady was ordered to by a judge, says it all doesn't it. Kidding me right ?

No, it doesn't. She was denying services of her office to citizens. Her religious belief has nothing to do with her duties.

So your ordered to jail instead of being fired ?????? What was the government afraid of here ? I mean having to make a statement like that instead of just firing the lady says it all to me.... It is agenda driven is what it is, and that agenda will fail us all eventually, just wait and see.

What do you think happens when you're held in contempt of court?

She can't be fired, you realize that, right?

Never should have went to court period... Like I said the government feared this lady or it wouldn't have been so heavy handed upon her.

Heavy handed? Do you have any idea how it all went down? Davis brought it all upon herself. There were people in her office willing to issue marriage licenses and she would not have had to do a thing. She decided that instead of just letting them accommodate her religious belief, she would impose her beliefs on her entire county and ordered her clerks not to issue ANY licenses. Naturally she was sued (just like a vegetarian clerk who refused to issue hunting licenses would be) and she lost. She appealed, she lost, she appealed, she lost. She continued to go against the judges orders and was held in contempt. She wasn't targeted or picked on. She picked this fight, lost and now wants to play the victim.

 

[Silhouette]

Heavy handed? Do you have any idea how it all went down? Davis brought it all upon herself. There were people in her office willing to issue marriage licenses and she would not have had to do a thing. She decided that instead of just letting them accommodate her religious belief, she would impose her beliefs on her entire county and ordered her clerks not to issue ANY licenses. Naturally she was sued (just like a vegetarian clerk who refused to issue hunting licenses would be) and she lost. She appealed, she lost, she appealed, she lost. She continued to go against the judges orders and was held in contempt. She wasn't targeted or picked on. She picked this fight, lost and now wants to play the victim.

Well, that's PART of the story.

The other part is that any license issued by any of her understaff would have had "Kim Davis, County Clerk" written on them. And since she's a Christian she can't take any part whatsoever in normalizing homosexuality; especially abusing God's sublime social contract with her name printed on it!

You believe in people's constitutional civil rights, right? If you don't and your argument is "not when they impinge on others", then how to you feel about gay marriage impinging on children forced into an institution guaranteed to provide them no mother or father for life?

If my memory is clear of your ilk's rebuttal to this question I'll answer for you...

..."Children aren't part of the marriage contract!"...."Marriage isn't about children!"...."Children will just have to adapt!"..."Marriage is only about consenting adults!"...

..and my all time favorite..."children aren't fledged citizens and they can't vote or affect their world as viable citizens so they have no voice here!" Which, if you examine the civil rights movements throughout time, you find that those in them are precisely those most disenfranchised as to that exact description..

...Hypocrites...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Silhouette is a nominal Christian, she is unqualified to elucidate on Kim's religious motivations, and religious motivations and beliefs do not shield a public official from doing her or his job.

Kim's duty is to serve all of the public, not just the public whose behavior she approves.

The law is clear on this issue.

 

[beagle9]

Silhouette is a nominal Christian, she is unqualified to elucidate on Kim's religious motivations, and religious motivations and beliefs do not shield a public official from doing her or his job.

Kim's duty is to serve all of the public, not just the public whose behavior she approves.

The law is clear on this issue.

The law is purely promoting sin in the eyes of millions of Americans, and that Law is something that has been pushed down their throats against their will.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Silhouette is a nominal Christian, she is unqualified to elucidate on Kim's religious motivations, and religious motivations and beliefs do not shield a public official from doing her or his job.

Kim's duty is to serve all of the public, not just the public whose behavior she approves.

The law is clear on this issue.

The law is purely promoting sin in the eyes of millions of Americans, and that Law is something that has been pushed down their throats against their will.

The Klan certainly thought so. The Muslims certainly think that we sin in giving our women the same amount of freedom in our law as we males.

Paul's and St. Mark's comments are so wise, reminding us to leave morality to God and to live our lives the best we can daily.

I am not going to marry a man. I counsel you that you do not, either.

 

[beagle9]

Silhouette is a nominal Christian, she is unqualified to elucidate on Kim's religious motivations, and religious motivations and beliefs do not shield a public official from doing her or his job.

Kim's duty is to serve all of the public, not just the public whose behavior she approves.

The law is clear on this issue.

The law is purely promoting sin in the eyes of millions of Americans, and that Law is something that has been pushed down their throats against their will.

The Klan certainly thought so. The Muslims certainly think that we sin in giving our women the same amount of freedom in our law as we males.

Paul's and St. Mark's comments are so wise, reminding us to leave morality to God and to live our lives the best we can daily.

I am not going to marry a man. I counsel you that you do not, either.

How about you talking with some sort of decency about yourself. Instead of pulling every excuse or trick that you have in that little bag of bad that you carry around with you in these conversations. I mean come on you got to use the clan now ? How desperate are you that you try and gain support by pushing the buttons (trying to combine the issues), on seperate issues in which you are doing in order to try and gain or keep your support you may or may not have here.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Silhouette is a nominal Christian, she is unqualified to elucidate on Kim's religious motivations, and religious motivations and beliefs do not shield a public official from doing her or his job.

Kim's duty is to serve all of the public, not just the public whose behavior she approves.

The law is clear on this issue.

The law is purely promoting sin in the eyes of millions of Americans, and that Law is something that has been pushed down their throats against their will.

The Klan certainly thought so. The Muslims certainly think that we sin in giving our women the same amount of freedom in our law as we males.

Paul's and St. Mark's comments are so wise, reminding us to leave morality to God and to live our lives the best we can daily.

I am not going to marry a man. I counsel you that you do not, either.

How about you talking with some sort of decency about yourself. Instead of pulling every excuse or trick that you have in that little bag of bad that you carry around with you in these conversations. I mean come on you got to use the clan now ? How desperate are you that you try and gain support by pushing the buttons (trying to combine the issues), on seperate issues in which you are doing in order to try and gain or keep your support you may or may not have here.

You once again talk like a doosh. I counsel to you to follow Paul and St. Mark instead of your old dark fears of whatever. LGBT marriage does not harm you. It does not harm me. That is between them and God. You don't have a thing to do with it or say about it legally. You need not worry about me, but rather you should ponder scripture and not try to counsel the Lord.

 

[Skylar]

Silhouette is a nominal Christian, she is unqualified to elucidate on Kim's religious motivations, and religious motivations and beliefs do not shield a public official from doing her or his job.

Kim's duty is to serve all of the public, not just the public whose behavior she approves.

The law is clear on this issue.

Yeah, but the law is subbordinate to religion.....if you're a Christian. And if you're discriminating against gays. At least in Silo's mind.

Back in reality, Kim Davis was offered a perfectly reasonably accommodation: allow another clerk to issue the licenses. She refused, insisting she would do everything in her power to prevent the issuance of such licenses.

Using the power of the State to force people to obey your religion is a violation of the 1st amendment's establishment clause. And Kim Davis did exactly that. Which is why she lost. And will continue to lose.

 

[beagle9]

Silhouette is a nominal Christian, she is unqualified to elucidate on Kim's religious motivations, and religious motivations and beliefs do not shield a public official from doing her or his job.

Kim's duty is to serve all of the public, not just the public whose behavior she approves.

The law is clear on this issue.

Yeah, but the law is subbordinate to religion.....if you're a Christian. And if you're discriminating against gays. At least in Silo's mind.

Back in reality, Kim Davis was offered a perfectly reasonably accommodation: allow another clerk to issue the licenses. She refused, insisting she would do everything in her power to prevent the issuance of such licenses.

Using the power of the State to force people to obey your religion is a violation of the 1st amendment's establishment clause. And Kim Davis did exactly that. Which is why she lost. And will continue to lose.

The state should have relieved her of her position then, therefore taking full responsibility for their stance on the new issue, but the state must have been unsure of the backlash, so it hoped that Kim would make it easy for them on the matter. Now it still doesn't mean that the state is right for what it's defending now. In fact the state has been placed into a hec of a situation by a few who have bullied their way into forcing the state or feds by way of activist judges to go along with something that a majority of the nation is not for.

You used the term USING the state to force your religion upon, but I say to you what is the difference then in either of these fights taking place in this nation ? Both have or need the state to protect there beliefs, there culture and/or etc. OK so who is more right and who could be most wrong in what they expect the state to do for them? The state isn't supposed to be used you say, so how does it get out of these delema's? I'll tell you how it does... It listens to the people is what it does, but then it can't do that because the devils will resort to the black struggle by tapping into that time period in order to shield their issue from the state for whom may be thinking that it could get out of the situation by listening to the people on this issue. The devils will tell the state that it was wrong to do it back then, so of course it would be wrong to listen to the people now. Now even though the issues and causes are completely different, the devils are tying them together for a shield and usery to push the state to stand against the majority on this issue even though there is no relation between the two.

 

[JakeStarkey]

beagle, only the state Senate, which did not want to be called into session (and made the Governor well aware of that sentiment), can remove Davis by impeachment, trial, and conviction. The judge was very lenient in permitting her to have her name removed from the certificates.

A majority of the nation does favor LGBT marriage, but that is immaterial. What is material is that marriage equality is the law of the land. Christians can disagree, they can try to get the law overturned, but until that time, the people must obey the law./

 

[Skylar]

Silhouette is a nominal Christian, she is unqualified to elucidate on Kim's religious motivations, and religious motivations and beliefs do not shield a public official from doing her or his job.

Kim's duty is to serve all of the public, not just the public whose behavior she approves.

The law is clear on this issue.

Yeah, but the law is subbordinate to religion.....if you're a Christian. And if you're discriminating against gays. At least in Silo's mind.

Back in reality, Kim Davis was offered a perfectly reasonably accommodation: allow another clerk to issue the licenses. She refused, insisting she would do everything in her power to prevent the issuance of such licenses.

Using the power of the State to force people to obey your religion is a violation of the 1st amendment's establishment clause. And Kim Davis did exactly that. Which is why she lost. And will continue to lose.

The state should have relieved her of her position then, therefore taking full responsibility for their stance on the new issue, but the state must have been unsure of the backlash, so it hoped that Kim would make it easy for them on the matter. Now it still doesn't mean that the state is right for what it's defending now. In fact the state has been placed into a hec of a situation by a few who have bullied their way into forcing the state or feds by way of activist judges to go along with something that a majority of the nation is not for.

And by 'activist judges', you mean any ruling you disagree with. Yeah, the validity of a court ruling isn't defined by your agreement with it. And with 47 of 49 federal courts ruling with the USSC....its clearly not 'activist judges'. Its the overwhelming weight of legal judgment of the federal judiciary.

2 of 49? That would more closely match your 'judicial activist model'.

 

[Skylar]

beagle, only the state Senate, which did not want to be called into session (and made the Governor well aware of that sentiment), can remove Davis by impeachment, trial, and conviction. The judge was very lenient in permitting her to have her name removed from the certificates.

A majority of the nation does favor LGBT marriage, but that is immaterial. What is material is that marriage equality is the law of the land. Christians can disagree, they can try to get the law overturned, but until that time, the people must obey the law./

And this gets right to the heart of the matter: many Christians don't believe that the same rules apply to them that apply to everyone else. They believe that they are better, that they are special, and that they should be able to ignore any law they wish.

The courts are rather elegantly disabusing them of this sordid misconception.

 

[Rustic]

Hell no, I don't want force some poor pastor towards hell...

 

[Skylar]

beagle, only the state Senate, which did not want to be called into session (and made the Governor well aware of that sentiment), can remove Davis by impeachment, trial, and conviction. The judge was very lenient in permitting her to have her name removed from the certificates.

To the best of my knowledge, the judge didn't allow her to remove her names from the licenses. Kim Davis did that on her own. And then declared that because they lack her name, they are invalid and void.

The judge asked the 6 deputy clerks if they would issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. All but Davis' son agreed. With 5 of 6 clerks willing to do their job, the judge offered Kim Davis a comprimise: don't interfere with these clerks issuing the licenses instead of you....and you won't be in contempt.

Davis refused, insisting that she would do everything in her power to prevent any clerk from issuing those licenses.

 

[Skylar]

Hell no, I don't want force some poor pastor towards hell...

If your choice is hell or a job, the choice seems pretty obvious.

 

[JakeStarkey]

beagle, only the state Senate, which did not want to be called into session (and made the Governor well aware of that sentiment), can remove Davis by impeachment, trial, and conviction. The judge was very lenient in permitting her to have her name removed from the certificates.

To the best of my knowledge, the judge didn't allow her to remove her names from the licenses. Kim Davis did that on her own. And then declared that because they lack her name, they are invalid and void.

The judge asked the 6 deputy clerks if they would issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. All but Davis' son agreed. With 5 of 6 clerks willing to do their job, the judge offered Kim Davis a comprimise: don't interfere with these clerks issuing the licenses instead of you....and you won't be in contempt.

Davis refused, insisting that she would do everything in her power to prevent any clerk from issuing those licenses.

She is allowing, as I understand it, the clerks to issue the certificates, but her name and office are not on them.

 

[Syriusly]

Why do Christians believe that they are above the law?

Because the Court handed down a series of ill-considered decisions that have promoted that view.

We our secular nation governed by secular law not religious law.

How do you claim that our laws have been somehow separated from our spiritual and religious beliefs in which was the very instruments used to create this nation and our laws?

If you didn't have some sort of belief system that was created within you by the creator who is Holy and good, then you would be lawless just like we see in those who have lost their knowledge of this, and their spiritual compass in life.

Are you an advocate for all things evil in the world? I mean it's because your attitude is what leads up to all things evil in the world eventually. The evidence is there to review, it just depends on how lost you have become in this life.

How do you claim that our laws have been somehow separated from our spiritual and religious beliefs in which was the very instruments used to create this nation and our laws?

Because our laws- starting with the Constitution- were established from the beginning to be separate from our religious beliefs- of course those passing laws often had strong religious beliefs and those laws often sought to impose those moral/religious beliefs on Americans who did not share those same beliefs.

If you didn't have some sort of belief system that was created within you by the creator who is Holy and good, then you would be lawless just like we see in those who have lost their knowledge of this, and their spiritual compass in life.

Rather a circular argument. Essentially you are claiming if it wasn't for your religion you wouldn't know right from wrong. Which is rather sad.

Are you an advocate for all things evil in the world? I mean it's because your attitude is what leads up to all things evil in the world eventually. The evidence is there to review, it just depends on how lost you have become in this life

Are you an advocate for all things evil in the world? Some of the greatest evil in history has wrapped itself in the flag of religion and morality- just like you are doing.

You confuse 'evidence' with your biased opinion.

 

[WorldWatcher]

To the best of my knowledge, the judge didn't allow her to remove her names from the licenses. Kim Davis did that on her own. And then declared that because they lack her name, they are invalid and void.

The judge asked the 6 deputy clerks if they would issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. All but Davis' son agreed. With 5 of 6 clerks willing to do their job, the judge offered Kim Davis a comprimise: don't interfere with these clerks issuing the licenses instead of you....and you won't be in contempt.

Davis refused, insisting that she would do everything in her power to prevent any clerk from issuing those licenses.

This is the license that was issued during her confinement. Her name isn't on it.

It was signed by a Deputy Clerk functioning in that capacity which is authorized under Kentucky law.


>>>>

 

[Syriusly]

You, old duffer, mischaracterize what I say. Our religious and secular values indeed underwrite our legal system. But organized religion, the Bible, or atheist writings do not. The Constitution rules, and that means your organized religion does not. LGBT marriage does not affect me in the slightest or you for that matter. You need to grow up.

Indeed, the Constitution DOES rule. Have you ever actually read the 1st Amendment?

"Your religion" is a CIVIL RIGHT you cannot disenfranchise someone from. I know you don't need to be schooled on how wrong it is to disenfranchise someone from a civil right, right?

Christians have to follow the law also.

Christians are not exempt from the law just because they claim it violates their religion.

 

[Skylar]

To the best of my knowledge, the judge didn't allow her to remove her names from the licenses. Kim Davis did that on her own. And then declared that because they lack her name, they are invalid and void.

The judge asked the 6 deputy clerks if they would issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. All but Davis' son agreed. With 5 of 6 clerks willing to do their job, the judge offered Kim Davis a comprimise: don't interfere with these clerks issuing the licenses instead of you....and you won't be in contempt.

Davis refused, insisting that she would do everything in her power to prevent any clerk from issuing those licenses.

This is the license that was issued during her confinement. Her name isn't on it.

It was signed by a Deputy Clerk functioning in that capacity which is authorized under Kentucky law.


>>>>

I hear you. But the judge didn't allow this, or order it. Kim Davis did. The issue is already being litigated.

According to court documents filed by the American Civil Liberties Union Monday, Davis confiscated licenses issued to gay couples during her short stay in jail and distributed new ones that removed all mention of the county clerk’s office. Instead, the documents include what the ACLU lawyers viewed as a churlish note that they were issued “pursuant to Federal Court Order.”

ACLU: Kentucky clerk Kim Davis is meddling with county’s marriage licenses

This was about 2 weeks ago. What she did was far more than merely remove her name. She removed all mention of the county, all mention of clerks, and wouldn't even allow her clerks to sign the forms.

“Rather than standing aside while Deputy Clerk Mason issued the same marriage licenses upon which this Court relied in its September 8 Order lifting the civil contempt finding and releasing her from custody, Davis “confiscated all the original forms, and provided a changed form which deletes all mentions of the County, fills in one of the blanks that would otherwise be the County with the Court’s styling, deletes her name, deletes all of the deputy clerk references, and in place of deputy clerk types in the name of Brian Mason, and has him initial rather than sign,” Mason said in his notice filed with Bunning.

The licenses issued without her name, but with all County authority while she was in jail aren't what we're discussing.