Silhouette
Gold Member
- Jul 15, 2013
- 25,815
- 1,938
- 265
- Thread starter
- #21
The Supreme Court of course did no such thing. Just your fantasies again.
Uh . . . SaintSil . . . the showdown in Court was decided last week.
This is over.
Perhaps you failed to read this on the last page in your zeal to spam it into oblivion?
No, no it isn't actually...
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) -- A few court clerks in Kentucky were refusing to issue marriage licenses to any couple Monday as an objection to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriage....Casey County Clerk Casey Davis said his Christian beliefs would not allow him to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples..."My religious convictions will not allow me to in good conscience issue same-sex marriage licenses," Davis said....Clerks in Rowan and Lawrence counties also have halted issuing all marriage licenses in response to the Supreme Court ruling, The Lexington Herald-Leader first reported Monday. Repeated calls to those offices were not answered...
The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky said its lawyers would be willing to represent same-sex couples who are refused a marriage license in Kentucky...."It's our contention that government officials' personal objections are insufficient to justify refusing to do what they have been elected by the people to do, Same-sex marriage Kentucky court clerks refuse to issue licenses - San Jose Mercury News
And so, the infamous pending case of "the cult of LGBT v Christians" begins its march right back up to SCOTUS. The premise of LGBTs being behaviors that they themselves don't really understand is going to be finally discussed. They are not a race. This isn't even in the same ballpark as race since for the first time in human history, we are being asked to accept motherless or fatherless "marriages" as "acceptable bests for raising kids. While in practice they are inferior: Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
They are behaviors (just the Court's favorites remember) getting a "special favorites pass" from SCOTUS to circumvent regulation, while polygamy and incest don't get that pass. This is actually inequality, fascism and new legislation from the judicial branch, which is FORBIDDEN.
So it's far, far from over. This has just begun. But you knew it would be this way. You knew from Hobby Lobby that it would be this way. And the Court did too. Which is why it is still unfathomable to me that they did what they did last Friday. They are in such a conflict of interest quagmire that I actually feel sorry for them at this point.
The 9th Amendment says that no provision of the Constitution or its interpretation may squelch the rights of another. And that other in question now as you know full well and always knew would be is the 1st Amendment practice of one's faith in day to day life. When the practice of one's faith in daily life hurts someone, as in sharia law, it cannot be. But to passively resist joining in behaviors hurts not one person and the punishment promised for failure to do so as warned in Jude 1 of the New Testament of Jesus Christ is soul-death.
An alternate title for this case could be "The 9th Amendment Case"..