CDZ Kim Davis And The Rule Of Law

[Boss]

Stop flailing over your bigotry.

YOU are the bigot. Not me.

 

[Boss]

No THATS a bad analogy. Cuz shes not HERSELF getting gay married.

Okay... the store also can't compel her to serve the bacon, dress like a pig, participate in any way with the campaign she has moral objections to on a religious basis. She has the 1st Amendment Constitutional protection against discrimination on the basis of her religion.

No, same as she cant say fuck you to her boss without fear of repurcussion based on the 1st amendment.

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with what can or can't be said to your employer. It is about government restricting your right to political expression. You don't understand that? Really? What grade are you in?

 

[G.T.]

I habe a hard time believing grown folks cant tell the difference between religious discrimination (mistreatment BASED on your religion), and requiring ALL employees to perform what the job entails.

I mean, you have to be being dissonant or......REALLY that bad at thinking. Or doshonest. Its a tough call.

 

[G.T.]

No THATS a bad analogy. Cuz shes not HERSELF getting gay married.

Okay... the store also can't compel her to serve the bacon, dress like a pig, participate in any way with the campaign she has moral objections to on a religious basis. She has the 1st Amendment Constitutional protection against discrimination on the basis of her religion.

No, same as she cant say fuck you to her boss without fear of repurcussion based on the 1st amendment.

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with what can or can't be said to your employer. It is about government restricting your right to political expression. You don't understand that? Really? What grade are you in?

Same with religious derp derp. THATS the point.

Its not carte blanche you get to DICTATE bits and pieces of your job youll do to your employer under the guise of your religion


Have some grown folks in real life try explaining that to you, youre clearly unable to comprehend.

 

[Boss]

I habe a hard time believing grown folks cant tell the difference between religious discrimination (mistreatment BASED on your religion), and requiring ALL employees to perform what the job entails.

I mean, you have to be being dissonant or......REALLY that bad at thinking. Or doshonest. Its a tough call.

Since when did "discrimination" become synonymous with perceived "mistreatment" in this country? It did not "mistreat" Rosa Parks to require her to sit in a different seat. It didn't "mistreat" blacks to give them "separate but equal" facilities. Denying women and blacks the vote wasn't mistreatment.... we can go on and on.

What you have is a bigoted viewpoint that no one can penetrate. You can't see beyond your zeal to see gay marriage legitimized. That is the only "rights" you seem to be able to comprehend. It's a problem because we can't seem to communicate with zealots and bigots very well. You don't seem to realize there are OTHER constitutional rights at stake. They are not going to be trampled.

 

[G.T.]

I habe a hard time believing grown folks cant tell the difference between religious discrimination (mistreatment BASED on your religion), and requiring ALL employees to perform what the job entails.

I mean, you have to be being dissonant or......REALLY that bad at thinking. Or doshonest. Its a tough call.

Since when did "discrimination" become synonymous with perceived "mistreatment" in this country? It did not "mistreat" Rosa Parks to require her to sit in a different seat. It didn't "mistreat" blacks to give them "separate but equal" facilities. Denying women and blacks the vote wasn't mistreatment.... we can go on and on.

What you have is a bigoted viewpoint that no one can penetrate. You can't see beyond your zeal to see gay marriage legitimized. That is the only "rights" you seem to be able to comprehend. It's a problem because we can't seem to communicate with zealots and bigots very well. You don't seem to realize there are OTHER constitutional rights at stake. They are not going to be trampled.

Umm...rosa parks was forced to sit in a different seat BECAUSE of her color.

THATS discrimination.

This woman is not tasked with issuing licenses BECAUSE of her Religion. EVERYONE in her position is tasked to do so, she is not SONGLED OUT B.C. OF RELIGION.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

[Boss]

Umm...rosa parks was forced to sit in a different seat BECAUSE of her color.

THATS discrimination.

Right... it wasn't mistreatment.

 

[G.T.]

Umm...rosa parks was forced to sit in a different seat BECAUSE of her color.

THATS discrimination.

Right... it wasn't mistreatment.

Umm..discrimination IS mistreatment, based on your predisposition. Omg.

 

[G.T.]

im out. This is pretty ridiculous! Hah

 

[Boss]

This woman is not tasked with issuing licenses BECAUSE of her Religion. EVERYONE in her position is tasked to do so, she is not SONGLED OUT B.C. OF RELIGION.

Religious discrimination has nothing to do with whether others are singled out or expected to do whatever... This woman cannot be "tasked" with anything she doesn't believe conforms to her religious views. She has the right to refuse to participate. Since her "job" happens to be required in order for gay people to get their marriage license, you have a problem because she can't do her job because of her religious beliefs and cannot be forced to do so.

Now you may issue licenses without her signature, you may change the law requiring her signature, you may remove her official capacity to approve your so-called "right" to marry... but you cannot make her violate her religious beliefs or fire her for sticking to them.

 

[Boss]

Umm..discrimination IS mistreatment, based on your predisposition. Omg.

Then you are also mistreating Ms. Davis based on your predisposition. OMG

 

[Stephanie]

I habe a hard time believing grown folks cant tell the difference between religious discrimination (mistreatment BASED on your religion), and requiring ALL employees to perform what the job entails.

I mean, you have to be being dissonant or......REALLY that bad at thinking. Or doshonest. Its a tough call.

Since when did "discrimination" become synonymous with perceived "mistreatment" in this country? It did not "mistreat" Rosa Parks to require her to sit in a different seat. It didn't "mistreat" blacks to give them "separate but equal" facilities. Denying women and blacks the vote wasn't mistreatment.... we can go on and on.

What you have is a bigoted viewpoint that no one can penetrate. You can't see beyond your zeal to see gay marriage legitimized. That is the only "rights" you seem to be able to comprehend. It's a problem because we can't seem to communicate with zealots and bigots very well. You don't seem to realize there are OTHER constitutional rights at stake. They are not going to be trampled.

I think people are waking up to how they are being Trampled. first the cakes and now having a woman thrown in jail over a Piece of paper because two woman homosexuals couldn't go to another place down the street for a damn license . they said it was: humiliating. well they are humiliating and stirring up people to see THEY COULD be the one getting trampled on next. .

 

[G.T.]

Umm..discrimination IS mistreatment, based on your predisposition. Omg.

Then you are also mistreating Ms. Davis based on your predisposition. OMG

Umm..no.

Shes not being mistreated at all, and its also not based on her religion.

Shes being scrutinized for attempting to dictate her job to her employer. 1st amendment doesnt grant you that.

You have the issue backasswords. As usual.

 

[Boss]

Umm..discrimination IS mistreatment, based on your predisposition. Omg.

Then you are also mistreating Ms. Davis based on your predisposition. OMG

Umm..no.

Shes not being mistreated at all, and its also not based on her religion.

Shes being scrutinized for attempting to dictate her job to her employer. 1st amendment doesnt grant you that.

You have the issue backasswords. As usual.

I think that throwing her in jail for refusing to violate her religious beliefs is mistreatment. Sorry.

Dictating her job to her employer? When did she do that?

 

[G.T.]

Umm..discrimination IS mistreatment, based on your predisposition. Omg.

Then you are also mistreating Ms. Davis based on your predisposition. OMG

Umm..no.

Shes not being mistreated at all, and its also not based on her religion.

Shes being scrutinized for attempting to dictate her job to her employer. 1st amendment doesnt grant you that.

You have the issue backasswords. As usual.

I think that throwing her in jail for refusing to violate her religious beliefs is mistreatment. Sorry.

Dictating her job to her employer? When did she do that?

When she refused to comply with the duties of the job and thought hmmf...im religious was a good enough reason.

 

[paperview]

Umm..discrimination IS mistreatment, based on your predisposition. Omg.

Then you are also mistreating Ms. Davis based on your predisposition. OMG

Umm..no.

Shes not being mistreated at all, and its also not based on her religion.

Shes being scrutinized for attempting to dictate her job to her employer. 1st amendment doesnt grant you that.

You have the issue backasswords. As usual.

I think that throwing her in jail for refusing to violate her religious beliefs is mistreatment. Sorry.

Dictating her job to her employer? When did she do that?

Stop it.

She was put in jail for Contempt of court.

 

[Boss]

When she refused to comply with the duties of the job and thought hmmf...im religious was a good enough reason.

She refused to comply on the basis that her duties conflict with her religious views.

 

[G.T.]

When she refused to comply with the duties of the job and thought hmmf...im religious was a good enough reason.

She refused to comply on the basis that her duties conflict with her religious views.

Then she needs a new job.

A job entailing specific duties is not religious descrimination, and neither is enforcing that the job be done. Durrr

 

[Boss]

When she refused to comply with the duties of the job and thought hmmf...im religious was a good enough reason.

She refused to comply on the basis that her duties conflict with her religious views.

Then she needs a new job.

A job entailing specific duties is not religious descrimination, and neither is enforcing that the job be done. Durrr

Sorry, you can't fire her because of her religious views. That IS religious discrimination.

You can't enforce the requirement of employees to surrender their Constitutional rights.

 

[koshergrl]

This is just more posturing and flailing by the continuously irrelevant anti gay marriage crowd. The final kicking and screaming on an issue the clear majority is past.

Boo hoo.

Her rights are not being violated, thats completely absurd.

No her rights are not being violated, she refused to allow you violate them and you put her in jail.

These idiots pretend disagreement is discrimination. They use that to justify their own discrimination.