Kim Davis Is Rosa Parks

[daws101]

[

thanks for proving me right.

Most Democrats are delusional and don't know they are scumbags. It is a good thing to remind them every once in awhile, especially when they get on a high horse ranting against freedom of religion.

It is just as valid for Kim Davis to challenge an unjust arrest as it was Rosa Parks.

Both were faced with unjust laws that the government sanctioned.

Way to contradict yourself.

 

[daws101]

Right, there are/were plenty of racist conservative democrats back then, I'm not contesting that. But you also said liberals and progressives...so, start naming names.

democrat/liberal/progressive is same damn thing. They have just changed who they hate now.

That's factually incorrect. Strom Thurmond was a conservative and a Democrat. The Democrats were in control in the South during the civil war but it's Republicans who keep that vial dream alive.

Now, pull the stick out and name a prominent liberal who persecuted Rosa Parks.

Oh, good God.

The Democrats have always been to the political left of the Republicans in this country. Always. They are the exact same people and party, ideologically speaking, that they always have been, although their need to constantly push the envelope and blur boundary lines has taken them to previously unimagined extremes lately.

No amount of playing with and redefining terms is ever going to change the fact that you own every nasty thing the Democrat Party has ever done, and always will. It's yours. Suck it up, and if you're really that ashamed of the past,maybe you should reflect on what that means about being associated with that party now.

anybody with a functioning cerebral cortex would want to left of this : There is also general consensus that the Right includes: capitalists, conservatives, fascists, monarchists, nationalists, neoconservatives, neoliberals, reactionaries, right-libertarians, social-authoritarians, theocrats and traditionalists.[8]

Like you would know about functioning cerebral cortexes. I flush more intelligent matter than you carry between your ears.

Dreamin' is free.

 

[Asclepias]

It's a metaphor, stupid. And it is very appropriate, if you can 'get' the metaphor. Which, limited as you are, seems unlikely.

Metaphor isn't defined as "made-up piece of shit". Just FYI.

Obviously you don't like the comparison, but it is a metaphor whether you agree with the comparison or not. LOL All you showed by your post is your ignorance of rhetorical techniques. Pathetic.

Yeah, I'm funny about wanting English to be used properly, and things people say making sense. It's a quirk.

Just for future reference, you should never assume people are telling you you're a dumbass because they're angry at how right you are. In your case, it's far more likely that you're just a dumbass.

Using metaphorical languague and rhetorical techniques IS using English properly. That you don't understand figurative languge and rhetoric seems to be the problem. As far as who is the "dumbass," your assertion is quintessentially ironic. LOL

That you think you're being brilliant and profound is the actual problem.

Let me reiterate: you're a dumbass.

The only problem is that you embody the dumbassedness you ascribe to others as a projection of your true self.

 

[Kondor3]

...How many times have you read on various threads that she was hypocritical in her pick & choose bible thumping?...

And how many times - up until then - had somebody asked the question, about the timing for any of her so-called 'sins', and how many times was that answered?

I got sick-and-tired of the Light-in-the-Loafers-Brigade calling the woman a hypocrite, when pointing to things she supposedly did BEFORE her conversion.

It is no hypocrisy to hold fast to a range of religiously-motivated beliefs that contrast with your own previous mistakes, if you were not operating under the jurisdiction or fiat of those religious beliefs at the time the transgressions were committed.

So, I asked questions about (1) timing and (2) denominational membership.

...I don't make claims I can't back up...

What claims would those be?

Unless you are claiming that she was a hypocrite, and that she committed those transgressions AFTER she came under the jurisdiction or fiat of that denomination she belongs to.

Is that what you're claiming?

...I don't take the word of anybody left or right as fact or bullshit without checking it out first b4 I reply... that much you will come to know about me...

How nice for you.

...AND if I am shown to be wrong about something, or someone goes thru the process of showing me some FACTS, I am not above saying thanks, or at least clicking that little 'i' button to show I've learned something...

Indeed. A characteristic that is quite widespread in these environs. Including yours truly.

...That, Babette, is definitely a difference I've noticed about you.

Or so your limited and biased observations have led you to believe, Princess.

 

[Kondor3]

Notice how Kondor3 starts with the homosexual innuendo / slurs when it can't refute your arguments?

Starts calling people " Princess " etc. etc. insinuating they are homosexuals.

I think it's time for Kondor to join the Honor Roll of Ignorant Ignored.

Yes.

Ignore me.

Thank you.

If I want to find you again, I'll turn on the Wankervision Channel.

Buh-bye.

Buy bonds.

 

[daws101]

Ah here you are inflicting yourself on another Kim Davis thread instead of doing your homework assignment that I gave you. (#11300 ) Kentucky Clerk Jailed for Contempt of Court | Page 113 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum What's the matter, is this all that you can manage with the brain cells that you have you have ?

Calm yourself, Princess...

I'm quite calm bubba. I take that response as your acceptance of a failing grade for your assignment. It's apparent to all who are paying attention that you are an intellectual lightweight who can do nothing more than make idiotic assertions that you can't back up. Do you even have the slightest idea of how foolish you appear?

Oh, dear-me, are you operating under the delusion that you are in someway my schoolmaster, or my superior, intellectually or otherwise?

Yer a funny wee little boggit, aren't you?

Nope, I don't think that I'm your schoolmaster. Can't be. I'm not certified for special ed.

I have proven.....no you have proven, beyond a doubt that you are a mental midget who just spews stupidity and insanity that has no basis in reality and that you can't back up. You have nothing but hateful and delusional horseshit to offer.

Mind your manners, new meat.

I saw your so-called 'homework assignment' yesterday, but we had friends coming over, and I had to sign off the computer, and engage elsewhere for the day.

It wasn't a matter of "couldn't", my aggressive-regressive little Toilet Turd - it was a matter of "don't want to".

But I waste time, explaining myself to a myopic, agenda-driven little fart-in-the-wind such as yourself.

Time to go that second cup of coffee... a task far more important than indulging you.

You have friends?

 

[Arizona Willie]

She issued and signed Divorce Certificates and divorce is ALSO against her claimed " religion ".

And just because you say " I'm born again and believe Jesus died for my sins " doesn't make what you did hunky dory. Especially when you harmed other people.

And now it's time for you to join the Legion of Ignorant Ignored.

You aren't worth wasting any more electrons with.

============

[


It is no hypocrisy to hold fast to a range of religiously-motivated beliefs that contrast with your own previous mistakes, if you were not operating under the jurisdiction or fiat of those religious beliefs at the time the transgressions were committed.

 

[playtime]

...How many times have you read on various threads that she was hypocritical in her pick & choose bible thumping?...

And how many times - up until then - had somebody asked the question, about the timing for any of her so-called 'sins', and how many times was that answered?

I got sick-and-tired of the Light-in-the-Loafers-Brigade calling the woman a hypocrite, when pointing to things she supposedly did BEFORE her conversion.

It is no hypocrisy to hold fast to a range of religiously-motivated beliefs that contrast with your own previous mistakes, if you were not operating under the jurisdiction or fiat of those religious beliefs at the time the transgressions were committed.

So, I asked questions about (1) timing and (2) denominational membership.

...I don't make claims I can't back up...

What claims would those be?

Unless you are claiming that she was a hypocrite, and that she committed those transgressions AFTER she came under the jurisdiction or fiat of that denomination she belongs to.

Is that what you're claiming?

...I don't take the word of anybody left or right as fact or bullshit without checking it out first b4 I reply... that much you will come to know about me...

How nice for you.

...AND if I am shown to be wrong about something, or someone goes thru the process of showing me some FACTS, I am not above saying thanks, or at least clicking that little 'i' button to show I've learned something...

Indeed. A characteristic that is quite widespread in these environs. Including yours truly.

...That, Babette, is definitely a difference I've noticed about you.

Or so your limited and biased observations have led you to believe, Princess.

I said she was a hypocrite for signing off on divorce decrees & issuing marriage licenses to those same people when her beliefs include that divorce persons are committing adultery if they marry again... but that doesn't seem to dissuade her & she hasn't refused to do that based on her so called religious beliefs, because those decrees/licenses are for hetero couples.. ie... HYPOCRISY.... or that her religion dictates that one shouldn't take any oaths & to respect governmental authority.... neither of which she obeys... ie... MORE HYPOCRISY.

Any thoughts on that since I've enlightened you to those hard facts or will you still be closing your eyes & putting your fingers in your ears while muttering la-la-la ?

Sources stating she is an Apostolic Christian:

Kim Davis' lawyer files new appeal to free jailed Kentucky clerk - Religion News Service

The Many Faces of "Kim Davis"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ing-gay-people-the-right-to-wed-10481399.html

Federal judge: Apostolic Christian clerk must issue same-sex marriage licenses | Christian Examiner Newspapers


is that enough for ya?

 

[Arizona Willie]

Right.

To start with she only refused licenses to homos and then when she lost the last round she started refusing to issue to anyone because her lawyer told her she was committing a HATE CRIME under Federal Law. She denied homosexuals their civil rights under the Constitution as determined by the Supreme Court.

Each and every time she denied licenses to homos it was a HATE CRIME and a FELONY under Federal Law.

Just because she began refusing anyone, doesn't abrogate her refusal to give a license to homos originally and the charges for each time she refused them and denied them their rights.

She is just very very lucky that none of the homos she refused has gotten a lawyer ( as far as I know ) and filed charges against her.

The evidence is overwhelming.

===============

...How many times have you read on various threads that she was hypocritical in her pick & choose bible thumping?...

And how many times - up until then - had somebody asked the question, about the timing for any of her so-called 'sins', and how many times was that answered?

I got sick-and-tired of the Light-in-the-Loafers-Brigade calling the woman a hypocrite, when pointing to things she supposedly did BEFORE her conversion.

It is no hypocrisy to hold fast to a range of religiously-motivated beliefs that contrast with your own previous mistakes, if you were not operating under the jurisdiction or fiat of those religious beliefs at the time the transgressions were committed.

So, I asked questions about (1) timing and (2) denominational membership.

...I don't make claims I can't back up...

What claims would those be?

Unless you are claiming that she was a hypocrite, and that she committed those transgressions AFTER she came under the jurisdiction or fiat of that denomination she belongs to.

Is that what you're claiming?

...I don't take the word of anybody left or right as fact or bullshit without checking it out first b4 I reply... that much you will come to know about me...

How nice for you.

...AND if I am shown to be wrong about something, or someone goes thru the process of showing me some FACTS, I am not above saying thanks, or at least clicking that little 'i' button to show I've learned something...

Indeed. A characteristic that is quite widespread in these environs. Including yours truly.

...That, Babette, is definitely a difference I've noticed about you.

Or so your limited and biased observations have led you to believe, Princess.

I said she was a hypocrite for signing off on divorce decrees & issuing marriage licenses to those same people when her beliefs include that divorce persons are committing adultery if they marry again... but that doesn't seem to dissuade her & she hasn't refused to do that based on her so called religious beliefs, because those decrees/licenses are for hetero couples.. ie... HYPOCRISY.... or that her religion dictates that one shouldn't take any oaths & to respect governmental authority.... neither of which she obeys... ie... MORE HYPOCRISY.

Any thoughts on that since I've enlightened you to those hard facts or will you still be closing your eyes & putting your fingers in your ears while muttering la-la-la ?

 

[Kondor3]

...I said she was a hypocrite for signing off on divorce decrees & issuing marriage licenses to those same people when her beliefs include that divorce persons are committing adultery if they marry again...

Yes, you did.

I was coming at it from the angle of Personal Actions (her own divorces and adultery)... which was the tack being taken by other rock-throwers, earlier in the thread, and elsewhere, as opposed to the divorce-decree and marriage-license thing... and I lost sight of the job-related emphasis that you were trying to advance.

That was my fault... my bad... and I apologize.

...but that doesn't seem to dissuade her & she hasn't refused to do that based on her so called religious beliefs, because those decrees/licenses are for hetero couples.. ie... HYPOCRISY.... or that her religion dictates that one shouldn't take any oaths & to respect governmental authority.... neither of which she obeys... ie... MORE HYPOCRISY...

Quite possibly.

Which plays to the Denomination question.

I don't know what denomination of Christianity she belongs to, so I can't say whether her "flavor" merely winks at divorce and re-marriage, or whether those are considered Mortal Sins, so to speak, that should have sparked a similar reaction out of Davis.

..Any thoughts on that since I've enlightened you to those hard facts or will you still be closing your eyes & putting your fingers in your ears while muttering la-la-la ?

I wasn't putting my fingers in my ears to begin with, and, I've just served-up my own personal reaction on that, above.

Close enough, for Gubmint Work.

 

[daws101]

Now that she's got huckabuck on her side , it's only a matter of time before Jesus busts her out of the slammer.

 

[playtime]

...I said she was a hypocrite for signing off on divorce decrees & issuing marriage licenses to those same people when her beliefs include that divorce persons are committing adultery if they marry again...

Yes, you did.

I was coming at it from the angle of Personal Actions (her own divorces and adultery)... which was the tack being taken by other rock-throwers, earlier in the thread, and elsewhere, as opposed to the divorce-decree and marriage-license thing... and I lost sight of the job-related emphasis that you were trying to advance.

That was my fault... my bad... and I apologize.

...but that doesn't seem to dissuade her & she hasn't refused to do that based on her so called religious beliefs, because those decrees/licenses are for hetero couples.. ie... HYPOCRISY.... or that her religion dictates that one shouldn't take any oaths & to respect governmental authority.... neither of which she obeys... ie... MORE HYPOCRISY...

Quite possibly.

Which plays to the Denomination question.

I don't know what denomination of Christianity she belongs to, so I can't say whether her "flavor" merely winks at divorce and re-marriage, or whether those are considered Mortal Sins, so to speak, that should have sparked a similar reaction out of Davis.

..Any thoughts on that since I've enlightened you to those hard facts or will you still be closing your eyes & putting your fingers in your ears while muttering la-la-la ?

I wasn't putting my fingers in my ears to begin with, and, I've just served-up my own personal reaction on that, above.

Close enough, for Gubmint Work.

I suppose that's gonna be the best I'll get out of you, & after that first informative post I made yesterday, I have since linked sources as far as what her religion is - so there isn't any more doubt... plenty are saying what denomination of Christianity she belongs to & I have not seen any others saying anything different...plus the way she physically presents herself also is indicative to the Apostolic Christian faith.

I guess this little b/f has played itself out.

 

[hazlnut]

Kim Davis Is Rosa Parks

Weird thing is today's democrats hate this woman for standing for religious freedom,1950-1960's democrats were the members of the klan and the ones that wanted blacks at back of the bus! I see not much has changed.

Yeah, if Rosa Parks was white, drove the bus, and wouldn't let black people on at all.

Dipstick.

 

[Faun]

...Apparently the "unfair law" requiring her to do the job she was elected to.

Apparently, the "unfair law" requiring her to participate in the despicable legitimizing and mainstreaming of sexual deviants (homosexuals).

Still not seeing anything unfair about it.

 

[Asclepias]

...Apparently the "unfair law" requiring her to do the job she was elected to.

Apparently, the "unfair law" requiring her to participate in the despicable legitimizing and mainstreaming of sexual deviants (homosexuals).

Still not seeing anything unfair about it.

There is nothing unfair about it. She doesnt even have to ever do it. She was keeping the other employees from doing it. You see they went right to work after she was put in jail for being a criminal.

 

[Faun]

...How many times have you read on various threads that she was hypocritical in her pick & choose bible thumping?...

And how many times - up until then - had somebody asked the question, about the timing for any of her so-called 'sins', and how many times was that answered?

I got sick-and-tired of the Light-in-the-Loafers-Brigade calling the woman a hypocrite, when pointing to things she supposedly did BEFORE her conversion.

It is no hypocrisy to hold fast to a range of religiously-motivated beliefs that contrast with your own previous mistakes, if you were not operating under the jurisdiction or fiat of those religious beliefs at the time the transgressions were committed.

So, I asked questions about (1) timing and (2) denominational membership.

...I don't make claims I can't back up...

What claims would those be?

Unless you are claiming that she was a hypocrite, and that she committed those transgressions AFTER she came under the jurisdiction or fiat of that denomination she belongs to.

Is that what you're claiming?

...I don't take the word of anybody left or right as fact or bullshit without checking it out first b4 I reply... that much you will come to know about me...

How nice for you.

...AND if I am shown to be wrong about something, or someone goes thru the process of showing me some FACTS, I am not above saying thanks, or at least clicking that little 'i' button to show I've learned something...

Indeed. A characteristic that is quite widespread in these environs. Including yours truly.

...That, Babette, is definitely a difference I've noticed about you.

Or so your limited and biased observations have led you to believe, Princess.

Who the **** gives a shit what her religion is? If she can't provide the government services she was elected to perform because they conflict with her personal beliefs, than she is not fit for that position and she should step down. What she cannot do, and will not be allowed to do -- is violate the Constitution she swore to support simply because she believes the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a ruling she neither likes nor agrees with.

 

[Kondor3]

...Apparently the "unfair law" requiring her to do the job she was elected to.

Apparently, the "unfair law" requiring her to participate in the despicable legitimizing and mainstreaming of sexual deviants (homosexuals).

Still not seeing anything unfair about it.

Yes. And it that difference in perception (there, not there) that forms the foundation for debate in this context.

 

[Faun]

...Apparently the "unfair law" requiring her to do the job she was elected to.

Apparently, the "unfair law" requiring her to participate in the despicable legitimizing and mainstreaming of sexual deviants (homosexuals).

Still not seeing anything unfair about it.

Yes. And it that difference in perception (there, not there) that forms the foundation for debate in this context.

Well if you see something unfair about that law , feel free to elucidate....

 

[NYcarbineer]

She claims to be an Apostolic Christian?

Let me show you what the Apostolic Christian Church says in its Statement of Faith:

17. Governmental authority is respected and obeyed. Members serve in a non-combatant status in the military. Oaths are not taken, but truth is affirmed.

Matthew 22:21
Luke 3:14
Romans 13:1-10
1 Timothy 2:1-2
Hebrews 12:14
James 5:12
1 Peter 2:12-14

Apostolic Christian Church of America: Statement of Faith

 

[daws101]

...Apparently the "unfair law" requiring her to do the job she was elected to.

Apparently, the "unfair law" requiring her to participate in the despicable legitimizing and mainstreaming of sexual deviants (homosexuals).

Still not seeing anything unfair about it.

Yes. And it that difference in perception (there, not there) that forms the foundation for debate in this context.

There is no debate she was not doing her job and hindering the law.