Court rules Kim Davis violated Gay Couples rights

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Legislating from the bench is the poorest way to establish law and order. However, if the state legislature stated one way or another that year that same-sex marriages were disallowed, the law should dictate the rightness or wrongness of the action and nothing else.

Not sure what you are trying to say here . It's a bit garbled but I will try to make sense out of it

I agree that legislation is preferable to litigation. However, sometimes litigation is the only way. When states willfully violate the constitution and deny equal protection under the law and due process to a group, it is the roles of the courts to step in which they did.

The states that were banning same sex marriage were struggling to present the courts with a compelling government or societal interest in not allowing gay people to marry. They mostly failed

You said that the "law should dictate the rightness or wrongness of the action and nothing else" What the hell does that mean? Nothing else? Like "oh that's wrong, but you should fix it, not us" ?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

We have better things to do right now like write out a check to the Red Cross whose abilities are drained when we focus on petty matters that grab headlines and put one group against another in the same way it happened just before the War between the States

Gish Gallop. Throw more dung at the wall why don't you?

 

[Polishprince]

The Constitution mandates that states honor the contracts and laws of other state

You can’t have a marriage that exists in one state but not in another

Good point, actually. Now, when will they extend it to concealed carry permits granted in the County of Mercer when I decide to travel to New York City?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Of course I have that right too. It's in the Constitution and shall not be abridged by "Substantive" beliefs of Bible deniers. We also have our Due Process as well. Not just atheists and fake religious people like Judge Jackson who have not walked her talk. All people in the U.S. have the right to vote their conscience. Do you know what a conscience is? Religion directly influences a person's conscience. Are you suggesting that you have a right to force me to vote only your way or the highway?

Actually, I agree with most of what you say, although I don't know what that stuff about Judge Jacson is. I would not tell you what to say or how to vote. Nor would I tell you how to live or who to love

However, it is clear to me that you think that you have the right to impose your religious beliefs on others and I have a big problem with that. You have no respect for the beliefs of other or for the constitution.

Remember this from your post #52" If those with religious convictions are not allowed to "tell" others how to live and believe, then atheists should also not be allowed to "tell" others how to live and believe."

As I pointed out to you then, neither Atheists nor anyone else is telling you how to live or what to believe. But you think that you can tell others how to live and what to believe. You have no way out of that one.

You are a theocrat who would prefer a system of government that favored, promoted and imposed your religious views on others. You have made that case against yourself. I rest mine

 

[rightwinger]

Good point, actually. Now, when will they extend it to concealed carry permits granted in the County of Mercer when I decide to travel to New York City?

I agree with you
Concealed carry should be like a Drivers License

 

[beautress]

Gish Gallop. Throw more dung at the wall why don't you?

You don't mean it, do ya. Why is it the progressives start pulling the purse strings tight when the Red Cross is overwhelmed with serving humanity as a friend to those suffering at the hands of a dictator who is trying to put back together a communist regime? Why don't you provide just one meal for a family of 4? Chances are they need it because they spent last week mourning and not eating because daddy died as one of Putin's weaponized missiles blew up his company's hideout and killed him and the daddies of a thousand other families of young children who will have hardships and broken hearts for the lifetime they have ahead. How about a glass of milk for 50 schoolchildren? Picnic boxes for two families? Anything. Send what you can if you can. Just put redcross in your search engine and insert "Ukraine" somewhere in your search. Maybe you have a church that's getting care packages together to send over there. There must be a thousand ways to make sure help is on the way from the grassroots of America. And my prayer is that all those who got separated from their daddy will be reunited if he's still alive and fighting for them, or at least some closure if his body was so blown up all that was left was his wristwatch or driver's license, anything that would help them know what happened to their Ukrainian hero father. Anything, TPP. You could help somebody who desperately needs help or closure or just a hot cup of chocolate. Some farm families in Poland housed a dozen families in their cleaned up barn, parking lot turned into a tent city, gave up prized family heirloom quilts. Just anything would be an act of mercy. I really do not understand your response, but you're a free person, you do not have to account to me.

In Ukraine: Aid Amidst the Violence

Under mortal danger to themselves, Red Cross teams are still working tirelessly to help people and communities impacted by conflict. Significant infrastructure damage has left hundreds of thousands of people without electricity or water, while damaged roads have disrupted supply chains, leaving communities cut off from food and basic supplies.

Around the clock, teams are providing emergency aid amid fear and uncertainty. Since the conflict intensified on February 24, Red Cross teams have:

• Distributed more than 90,000 food and hygiene parcels to families on the move across Ukraine, including to Mariupol.
• Supported the evacuation of over 57,000 people from the towns of Energodar and Sumy and the Kviy, Kharkiv and Kherson regions.
• Provided first aid training to more than 42,000 people across the country.
• Delivered more than 400 tons of food, blankets, medicine, medical supplies, trauma kits and household items.
• Assisted with the evacuation of people with disabilities.
• Supported logistics pipelines into Ukraine to ensure critical items can be delivered.

In the coming weeks, Red Cross volunteers will increase their work reuniting separated families, providing food and other household items, and increasing awareness about areas contaminated by unexploded ordnance. The current needs are tremendous, critical among them include water delivery, support to health facilities and medical care for families wounded.

Devastation in Ukraine: How the Red Cross is Helping

As conflict devastates Ukraine, Red Cross and Red Crescent partners in the region are rolling up their sleeves to assist with the dire humanitarian crisis as it unfolds

www.redcross.org

Anything.

 

[IamZ]

If anybody’s interested in setting Kim money please send me a direct message I’ll send you a link she’s a patriot and needs our help
Right now we made her a millionaire hehe

 

[Wyatt earp]

Seems like at easy ruling. County is a government agency.

She was a county clerk before the new law was passed the homos specifically targeted her.

 

[Wyatt earp]

We shall see what damages and punitive damages are

It will get appealed they have been judge shopping

 

[Wyatt earp]

Translation: You Americanskis are homo lovers. Dear Leader has banned homosexuality in Mother Russia.

Nyet, comrade, we Americans support freedom for all human beings because, as our Declaration of Independence states, we're all born with unalienable rights which includes the right of marriage. No authoritarian idiots should deprive anyone of their unalienable rights.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

Why is the government involved in a religous ceremony ?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Kim Davis has no one to blame but herself.

Nothing stopped her from quitting the job if it affected her sense of morality….

Where would she work, IHOP?

 

[Divine Wind]

Why is the government involved in a religous ceremony ?

Taxes and legal shit: rights of survivorship, legacy, etc. IIRC, there's over 1100 Federal laws that give benefits to married couples.

IMO, the whole problem is based on the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection clause. Eliminate any conflicts and it's not a problem.

 

[Divine Wind]

You can vote any way you wish for whatever reason

You can’t force your religious views on others. Which is what Davis tried to do

Agreed. She deserves what she gets for violating the law and the rights of Americans. She should have just abstained or quit her job. It would have been the honest, American thing to do.

 

[Cougarbear]

You can vote any way you wish for whatever reason

You can’t force your religious views on others. Which is what Davis tried to do

That's just hypocritical of you. You can't force your non-religious views on Davis either or anyone else. Aside from that fact, you still don't know what voting one's conscience is. Religious views make up the majority of voter's conscience. So, yes. Religious views most certainly can be forced upon you through voting. Now, it's also done by judicial legislation with Substantive Due Process. This allows judges like your liberal nutcases to vote (judge) based on their personal religious or non-religious views. As long as it goes your way, it's okay with you. If it doesn't, then it's a "FORCE!" Hypocrite!

 

[rightwinger]

That's just hypocritical of you. You can't force your non-religious views on Davis either or anyone else. Aside from that fact, you still don't know what voting one's conscience is. Religious views make up the majority of voter's conscience. So, yes. Religious views most certainly can be forced upon you through voting. Now, it's also done by judicial legislation with Substantive Due Process. This allows judges like your liberal nutcases to vote (judge) based on their personal religious or non-religious views. As long as it goes your way, it's okay with you. If it doesn't, then it's a "FORCE!" Hypocrite!

Davis can marry anyone she wants……she has already done that four times

What she can’t do is force others to make sacrifices for her religious intolerance. Religion says YOU must make sacrifices not that you can force others to make sacrifices

 

[Cougarbear]

Actually, I agree with most of what you say, although I don't know what that stuff about Judge Jacson is. I would not tell you what to say or how to vote. Nor would I tell you how to live or who to love

However, it is clear to me that you think that you have the right to impose your religious beliefs on others and I have a big problem with that. You have no respect for the beliefs of other or for the constitution.

Remember this from your post #52" If those with religious convictions are not allowed to "tell" others how to live and believe, then atheists should also not be allowed to "tell" others how to live and believe."

As I pointed out to you then, neither Atheists nor anyone else is telling you how to live or what to believe. But you think that you can tell others how to live and what to believe. You have no way out of that one.

You are a theocrat who would prefer a system of government that favored, promoted and imposed your religious views on others. You have made that case against yourself. I rest mine

You are almost getting it. Are we a Democracy or a Constitutional Republic with elections to elect our representatives? A Representative Constitutional Republic? We are not a Democracy. This is used so much and is so incorrect. If we did not have a judicial branch of the government, we would be a democracy or as Russia is, a Communist democracy. They do vote and have representation. But, the Head nutcase can override everyone and kills his/her detractors. Kind of like Hillary has done over the years with the dead 53 persons. Anyways, we have a Constitution. Both Religious conservatives and Atheist liberals can vote their conscience which is mostly at odds with each other. The religious trying to keep sanity against WOKISM and the Atheists trying to create anarchy with WOKISM. The majority in elections wins and the other side has to suffer. The 3 branches of government are to be EQUAL in power. So, the President can veto legislation or sign legislation. The Judicial can accept legislation as Constitutional or it can reject legislation as un-Constitutional. The problem is, the Judicial has introduced Substantive Due Process to insert judges personal beliefs either religious or non-religious. Judges like Thomas are strict Constitutionalists and do not use Substantive Due Process. They use only the exact words of the Constitution and keep their personal beliefs out of their decisions. Roberts, a conservative, doesn't. He is persuaded by the social climate and sometimes uses Substantive Due Process and thus legislates from the bench. The President can write Executive Orders as well, usurping the Legislative Branch. It's used way too much and the courts have allowed it far too often. It's supposed to be used only for national emergencies. But, it's not.
The bottom line is, your continued rant about religious people telling others how to live is a copout lie. It's no more that what you personally are doing telling religious people what they can do, say and vote their conscience. It's better to just understand we vote our conscience in the United States of America whether you like it or not. The majority rules far too much but that is what has happened in recent years.

 

[rightwinger]

Kind of like Hillary has done over the years with the dead 53 persons

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You are almost getting it. Are we a Democracy or a Constitutional Republic with elections to elect our representatives? A Representative Constitutional Republic? We are not a Democracy. This is used so much and is so incorrect. If we did not have a judicial branch of the government, we would be a democracy or as Russia is, a Communist democracy. They do vote and have representation. But, the Head nutcase can override everyone and kills his/her detractors. Kind of like Hillary has done over the years with the dead 53 persons. Anyways, we have a Constitution. Both Religious conservatives and Atheist liberals can vote their conscience which is mostly at odds with each other. The religious trying to keep sanity against WOKISM and the Atheists trying to create anarchy with WOKISM. The majority in elections wins and the other side has to suffer. The 3 branches of government are to be EQUAL in power. So, the President can veto legislation or sign legislation. The Judicial can accept legislation as Constitutional or it can reject legislation as un-Constitutional. The problem is, the Judicial has introduced Substantive Due Process to insert judges personal beliefs either religious or non-religious. Judges like Thomas are strict Constitutionalists and do not use Substantive Due Process. They use only the exact words of the Constitution and keep their personal beliefs out of their decisions. Roberts, a conservative, doesn't. He is persuaded by the social climate and sometimes uses Substantive Due Process and thus legislates from the bench. The President can write Executive Orders as well, usurping the Legislative Branch. It's used way too much and the courts have allowed it far too often. It's supposed to be used only for national emergencies. But, it's not.
The bottom line is, your continued rant about religious people telling others how to live is a copout lie. It's no more that what you personally are doing telling religious people what they can do, say and vote their conscience. It's better to just understand we vote our conscience in the United States of America whether you like it or not. The majority rules far too much but that is what has happened in recent years.

Holy shit! That is quite an unhinged rant. Nothing that you are saying in any way defends, or even tries to defend against my assessment of you as a theocrat. In fact you further indict yourself

The religious trying to keep sanity against WOKISM and the Atheists trying to create anarchy with WOKISM.

Once again I rest my case

 

[Cougarbear]

Holy shit! That is quite an unhinged rant. Nothing that you are saying in any way defends, or even tries to defend against my assessment of you as a theocrat. In fact you further indict yourself


Once again I rest my case

Ahhh...Insanity. You are saying the same thing over and over expecting different results. The Progressive Insanity...

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Ahhh...Insanity. You are saying the same thing over and over expecting different results. The Progressive Insanity...

No theocrat. That is what YOU ARE DOING. I am not expecting a different result. I do not need a different result. I have nailed you. I know, we all know, that you are a THEOCRAT who has no respect or understanding for the Constitution, the concept of a Constitutional Republic, or the rights of those who do not share your oppressive religious beliefs. You can go now but I will be watching.