Ted Cruz backs county clerks denying marriage licenses to gay couples

[The Rabbi]

7 black robed judges, 4 of which are hard left should not decide on gay marriage when the vast majority are against it.

First: There are nine (9) Supreme Court Justices.
Second: The vast majority are not against equal protection under the law for homosexual persons. The vast majority are not against homosexual persons having the same right that heterosexual persons have to marry the person of their choice.

The decision was 5-4. How is that a vast majority?
You are clearly a dunce.

 

[Ravi]

What are you talking about. I simply said that gay people should form a religion and then kooks like you couldn't discriminate against them.

They could, but, ultimately, it would be a false religion.
It may hold weight in this world but this is Satan' world (for now) - I pray you will see truth one day.....

With regard to US law, it doesn't matter if it is a false religion or not.

Well you put your "stake" in with "the law" of man.
Your choice. Good luck with that.

Now you get it.

Unfortunately, unless your heart is moved, you will be the one "getting it"............

Immaterial. The fact of the matter is that the US constitution forbids discrimination based on religion. God could give a hoot about the subject. Therefore, gay people are free to form their own religion and you would not be able to discriminate against them.

 

[Bonzi]

They could, but, ultimately, it would be a false religion.
It may hold weight in this world but this is Satan' world (for now) - I pray you will see truth one day.....

With regard to US law, it doesn't matter if it is a false religion or not.

Well you put your "stake" in with "the law" of man.
Your choice. Good luck with that.

Now you get it.

Unfortunately, unless your heart is moved, you will be the one "getting it"............

Immaterial. The fact of the matter is that the US constitution forbids discrimination based on religion. God could give a hoot about the subject. Therefore, gay people are free to form their own religion and you would not be able to discriminate against them.

Nope. I, personally, am powerless. Correct.

 

[paddymurphy]

What are you talking about. I simply said that gay people should form a religion and then kooks like you couldn't discriminate against them.

They could, but, ultimately, it would be a false religion.
It may hold weight in this world but this is Satan' world (for now) - I pray you will see truth one day.....

With regard to US law, it doesn't matter if it is a false religion or not.

Well you put your "stake" in with "the law" of man.
Your choice. Good luck with that.

The bible is the law of men; men dead for over 2000 years. Men wrote it; men took out and added parts as they saw fit; men have translated it and men presume to tell others what they think the words mean.

The Holy Spirit guided men to write the Bible.
Can you say the same about US law?

As easily and with as much chance of being right as you had with your comment. You know nothing about who wrote most of the bible. Frankly, I think god has inspired all persons of all faiths. I think god inspired Martin Luther King to say the things he said and write the things he did. God inspired Ghandi and god inspires all men and women, or whatever faith or no faith who live decent lives. The notion that god would punish a good man who happens to be a Buddhist or a Jew or a Muslim because they remained in the faith of their families is ludicrous. The god you right wing nut jobs have created is in your image; hateful, ignorant, arrogant and hugely judgmental of things you do not understand.

 

[paddymurphy]

Dear OKTexas
Shouldn't people have access to change jobs?

For example if a Muslim Hindu or Vegan doesn't believe in serving certain types of meat, isn't it better to get a job in the public schools somewhere else besides the kitchen if they serve those foods there.

I understand people could argue against being fired, but what about relocating them to equal pay jobs
that don't require things they don't believe in. Similar to people who can't serve in the military in combat
positions if they don't believe in killing in war, but they could serve in other areas instead.

False analogy, clerks are elected.

So when the laws change, and if clerks have a religious conflict,
can they be changed to other positions or allow other people or clerks to do that.

What if I am a clerk, someone speaks Bangladesh and I need someone else to handle that person.
What if someone just got robbed or assaulted, I happen to resemble the attacker,
and they don't want to look at me because I trigger PTSD and anxiety attacks.*

Can't someone else help or assist without it becoming a federal issue?

*I had one Vet tell me I freaked him out wearing black and giving him flashbacks of VietCong.
He was showing me and my bf an apartment, but had to stop because I made him so nervous.
If people have issues, I'd rather be honest, and not force them to do business if they have personal problems.
I had another job application get turned down because I was Asian and the Asian businessman wanted
an American secretary to help him with his English and was too embarrassed and uncomfortable with another Asian.

Why does this have to be a big deal? If people aren't comfortable, can't this be worked around?

If people are going to be this picky about marriage, why not separate it by party and reward
citizens for managing their own benefits under the terms of their choice. Like breaking up a trust
and allowing different companies to provide the same services. Can't the civil contracts be
administered through the state, as neutral business and legal agreements between two parties and not get into the personal details of their social relationship, and leave the other social and financial terms to the parties.

Either agree on terms, or create separate tracks.
Given the environment in Texas, I would think both parties would love to run their own machines
and decide their own policies by their own members democratically. They'd have full control that way.
Would love to see something like that work, and might solve other problems with
disagreement over prison and immigration, amnesty and restitution, education, lots of areas
might benefit by separating by party and rewarding citizens for investing in the programs they believe in.
Instead of having to fight other parties and waste billions of dollars that could be invested directly in solutions.

What is it you didn't understand when I said they could easily find another clerk, just as they could find another baker or photographer? That's not what they want, they want to force acceptance and destroy anyone who disagrees. Is the the America you want to live in?

Except the clerk in whatever the **** backwater we're talking about here...is refusing to allow her entire office to issue the licenses. It's not just her and her personal religious beliefs but she is imposing them on others.

Tell me...if a Muslim County Clerk refused to issue marriage licenses to "infidels", what do you think should happen to that individual?

We're not talking about Muslims.
I guess the staff could quit if they really had a problem. BUt I'd bet they dont.
Good for the clerk. Resistence to state tyranny is the civil rights movement of the 21st century. I applaud the clerk.

Maybe she can work for you when she loses this job.

 

[paddymurphy]

And you are acting in accord with the activity of Satan. You are being deceived by Satan.

It is possible. Anyone can be deceived by Satan. In this case, no.

You would not know if you were so deceived.

John 14:6 - Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

That is one version. There are others. The notion that god is so arrogant and prickly that, in addition to living a good life, a person has to acknoweldge him as God is asinine.

but it's OK for HUMANS to be arrogant... professing to know what's best. right?

You are the one professing to know what is best for others; telling them that if they do not share your conservative christian faith their faith is wrong.

 

[paddymurphy]

You are calling someone emotional and demanding that they stop and think and you claim that people who have a different opinion of you are blinded by some imaginary creature?

Nope. I'm saying consider all sides. I have. I used to be an Atheist.

But, according to you, any side but yours is false and satanic.

It's not my side. It's God's

No. It is your version of god. Others have a different view of god and what god wants.

But there is only ONE true God. ONE true way.

That is what they all say. There may be one true god, but he appears to different people differently. The fact is that all faiths worship the same god.

 

[Bonzi]

They could, but, ultimately, it would be a false religion.
It may hold weight in this world but this is Satan' world (for now) - I pray you will see truth one day.....

With regard to US law, it doesn't matter if it is a false religion or not.

Well you put your "stake" in with "the law" of man.
Your choice. Good luck with that.

The bible is the law of men; men dead for over 2000 years. Men wrote it; men took out and added parts as they saw fit; men have translated it and men presume to tell others what they think the words mean.

The Holy Spirit guided men to write the Bible.
Can you say the same about US law?

As easily and with as much chance of being right as you had with your comment. You know nothing about who wrote most of the bible. Frankly, I think god has inspired all persons of all faiths. I think god inspired Martin Luther King to say the things he said and write the things he did. God inspired Ghandi and god inspires all men and women, or whatever faith or no faith who live decent lives. The notion that god would punish a good man who happens to be a Buddhist or a Jew or a Muslim because they remained in the faith of their families is ludicrous. The god you right wing nut jobs have created is in your image; hateful, ignorant, arrogant and hugely judgmental of things you do not understand.

Ultimately, we all have our own beliefs and revelations.... I can only share my own person ones........

 

[Bonzi]

It is possible. Anyone can be deceived by Satan. In this case, no.

You would not know if you were so deceived.

John 14:6 - Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

That is one version. There are others. The notion that god is so arrogant and prickly that, in addition to living a good life, a person has to acknoweldge him as God is asinine.

but it's OK for HUMANS to be arrogant... professing to know what's best. right?

You are the one professing to know what is best for others; telling them that if they do not share your conservative christian faith their faith is wrong.

I believe there is one God, and one way to salvation. Yes. But I don't take ownership of it. I am part and parcel of it, but, it's God's plan and will... that all might be saved.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

7 black robed judges, 4 of which are hard left should not decide on gay marriage when the vast majority are against it.

First: There are nine (9) Supreme Court Justices.
Second: The vast majority are not against equal protection under the law for homosexual persons. The vast majority are not against homosexual persons having the same right that heterosexual persons have to marry the person of their choice.

The decision was 5-4. How is that a vast majority?
You are clearly a dunce.

I would not have said vast but the majority opinion, which doesn't matter a damn either way, is at 60% who approve of marriage equality. That's not why you lost in the courts but it's a nice thing.

 

[The Rabbi]

False analogy, clerks are elected.

So when the laws change, and if clerks have a religious conflict,
can they be changed to other positions or allow other people or clerks to do that.

What if I am a clerk, someone speaks Bangladesh and I need someone else to handle that person.
What if someone just got robbed or assaulted, I happen to resemble the attacker,
and they don't want to look at me because I trigger PTSD and anxiety attacks.*

Can't someone else help or assist without it becoming a federal issue?

*I had one Vet tell me I freaked him out wearing black and giving him flashbacks of VietCong.
He was showing me and my bf an apartment, but had to stop because I made him so nervous.
If people have issues, I'd rather be honest, and not force them to do business if they have personal problems.
I had another job application get turned down because I was Asian and the Asian businessman wanted
an American secretary to help him with his English and was too embarrassed and uncomfortable with another Asian.

Why does this have to be a big deal? If people aren't comfortable, can't this be worked around?

If people are going to be this picky about marriage, why not separate it by party and reward
citizens for managing their own benefits under the terms of their choice. Like breaking up a trust
and allowing different companies to provide the same services. Can't the civil contracts be
administered through the state, as neutral business and legal agreements between two parties and not get into the personal details of their social relationship, and leave the other social and financial terms to the parties.

Either agree on terms, or create separate tracks.
Given the environment in Texas, I would think both parties would love to run their own machines
and decide their own policies by their own members democratically. They'd have full control that way.
Would love to see something like that work, and might solve other problems with
disagreement over prison and immigration, amnesty and restitution, education, lots of areas
might benefit by separating by party and rewarding citizens for investing in the programs they believe in.
Instead of having to fight other parties and waste billions of dollars that could be invested directly in solutions.

What is it you didn't understand when I said they could easily find another clerk, just as they could find another baker or photographer? That's not what they want, they want to force acceptance and destroy anyone who disagrees. Is the the America you want to live in?

Except the clerk in whatever the **** backwater we're talking about here...is refusing to allow her entire office to issue the licenses. It's not just her and her personal religious beliefs but she is imposing them on others.

Tell me...if a Muslim County Clerk refused to issue marriage licenses to "infidels", what do you think should happen to that individual?

We're not talking about Muslims.
I guess the staff could quit if they really had a problem. BUt I'd bet they dont.
Good for the clerk. Resistence to state tyranny is the civil rights movement of the 21st century. I applaud the clerk.

Maybe she can work for you when she loses this job.

Butthurt is tough but you'll get over it.

 

[Bonzi]

Nope. I'm saying consider all sides. I have. I used to be an Atheist.

But, according to you, any side but yours is false and satanic.

It's not my side. It's God's

No. It is your version of god. Others have a different view of god and what god wants.

But there is only ONE true God. ONE true way.

That is what they all say. There may be one true god, but he appears to different people differently. The fact is that all faiths worship the same god.

THAT is a lie of Satan. You can disagree. I don't deny you that right.

 

[Bonzi]

7 black robed judges, 4 of which are hard left should not decide on gay marriage when the vast majority are against it.

First: There are nine (9) Supreme Court Justices.
Second: The vast majority are not against equal protection under the law for homosexual persons. The vast majority are not against homosexual persons having the same right that heterosexual persons have to marry the person of their choice.

The decision was 5-4. How is that a vast majority?
You are clearly a dunce.

I would not have said vast but the majority opinion, which doesn't matter a damn either way, is at 60% who approve of marriage equality. That's not why you lost in the courts but it's a nice thing.

The US lost. Not me, but, humans. We are losing each and every day as we think we know better than God.

 

[paddymurphy]

With regard to US law, it doesn't matter if it is a false religion or not.

Well you put your "stake" in with "the law" of man.
Your choice. Good luck with that.

The bible is the law of men; men dead for over 2000 years. Men wrote it; men took out and added parts as they saw fit; men have translated it and men presume to tell others what they think the words mean.

The Holy Spirit guided men to write the Bible.
Can you say the same about US law?

As easily and with as much chance of being right as you had with your comment. You know nothing about who wrote most of the bible. Frankly, I think god has inspired all persons of all faiths. I think god inspired Martin Luther King to say the things he said and write the things he did. God inspired Ghandi and god inspires all men and women, or whatever faith or no faith who live decent lives. The notion that god would punish a good man who happens to be a Buddhist or a Jew or a Muslim because they remained in the faith of their families is ludicrous. The god you right wing nut jobs have created is in your image; hateful, ignorant, arrogant and hugely judgmental of things you do not understand.

Ultimately, we all have our own beliefs and revelations.... I can only share my own person ones........

Share all you want. But do not demand that our laws impose your faith on others.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I believe there is one God, and one way to salvation. Yes. But I don't take ownership of it. I am part and parcel of it, but, it's God's plan and will... that all might be saved.

And of all the gods humans have had, you just managed to pick the One True one, same as the religion you were raised in I bet? How convenient for you, very...

 

[OKTexas]

Dear OKTexas
Shouldn't people have access to change jobs?

For example if a Muslim Hindu or Vegan doesn't believe in serving certain types of meat, isn't it better to get a job in the public schools somewhere else besides the kitchen if they serve those foods there.

I understand people could argue against being fired, but what about relocating them to equal pay jobs
that don't require things they don't believe in. Similar to people who can't serve in the military in combat
positions if they don't believe in killing in war, but they could serve in other areas instead.

He does, there's no law in TX that says these county clerks must violate their religious beliefs. the faghadist can find a clerk that will just as easily as they can find another baker or photographer.

False analogy, clerks are elected.

So when the laws change, and if clerks have a religious conflict,
can they be changed to other positions or allow other people or clerks to do that.

What if I am a clerk, someone speaks Bangladesh and I need someone else to handle that person.
What if someone just got robbed or assaulted, I happen to resemble the attacker,
and they don't want to look at me because I trigger PTSD and anxiety attacks.*

Can't someone else help or assist without it becoming a federal issue?

*I had one Vet tell me I freaked him out wearing black and giving him flashbacks of VietCong.
He was showing me and my bf an apartment, but had to stop because I made him so nervous.
If people have issues, I'd rather be honest, and not force them to do business if they have personal problems.
I had another job application get turned down because I was Asian and the Asian businessman wanted
an American secretary to help him with his English and was too embarrassed and uncomfortable with another Asian.

Why does this have to be a big deal? If people aren't comfortable, can't this be worked around?

If people are going to be this picky about marriage, why not separate it by party and reward
citizens for managing their own benefits under the terms of their choice. Like breaking up a trust
and allowing different companies to provide the same services. Can't the civil contracts be
administered through the state, as neutral business and legal agreements between two parties and not get into the personal details of their social relationship, and leave the other social and financial terms to the parties.

Either agree on terms, or create separate tracks.
Given the environment in Texas, I would think both parties would love to run their own machines
and decide their own policies by their own members democratically. They'd have full control that way.
Would love to see something like that work, and might solve other problems with
disagreement over prison and immigration, amnesty and restitution, education, lots of areas
might benefit by separating by party and rewarding citizens for investing in the programs they believe in.
Instead of having to fight other parties and waste billions of dollars that could be invested directly in solutions.

What is it you didn't understand when I said they could easily find another clerk, just as they could find another baker or photographer? That's not what they want, they want to force acceptance and destroy anyone who disagrees. Is the the America you want to live in?

Except the clerk in whatever the **** backwater we're talking about here...is refusing to allow her entire office to issue the licenses. It's not just her and her personal religious beliefs but she is imposing them on others.

Tell me...if a Muslim County Clerk refused to issue marriage licenses to "infidels", what do you think should happen to that individual?

 

[Bonzi]

I believe there is one God, and one way to salvation. Yes. But I don't take ownership of it. I am part and parcel of it, but, it's God's plan and will... that all might be saved.

And of all the gods humans have had, you just managed to pick the One True one, same as the religion you were raised in I bet? How convenient for you, very...

There IS one true one. Do you think there are multiples?

 

[Bonzi]

Well you put your "stake" in with "the law" of man.
Your choice. Good luck with that.

The bible is the law of men; men dead for over 2000 years. Men wrote it; men took out and added parts as they saw fit; men have translated it and men presume to tell others what they think the words mean.

The Holy Spirit guided men to write the Bible.
Can you say the same about US law?

As easily and with as much chance of being right as you had with your comment. You know nothing about who wrote most of the bible. Frankly, I think god has inspired all persons of all faiths. I think god inspired Martin Luther King to say the things he said and write the things he did. God inspired Ghandi and god inspires all men and women, or whatever faith or no faith who live decent lives. The notion that god would punish a good man who happens to be a Buddhist or a Jew or a Muslim because they remained in the faith of their families is ludicrous. The god you right wing nut jobs have created is in your image; hateful, ignorant, arrogant and hugely judgmental of things you do not understand.

Ultimately, we all have our own beliefs and revelations.... I can only share my own person ones........

Share all you want. But do not demand that our laws impose your faith on others.

I'm still waiting for you to show me where I am demanding anything............

 

[PaintMyHouse]

7 black robed judges, 4 of which are hard left should not decide on gay marriage when the vast majority are against it.

First: There are nine (9) Supreme Court Justices.
Second: The vast majority are not against equal protection under the law for homosexual persons. The vast majority are not against homosexual persons having the same right that heterosexual persons have to marry the person of their choice.

The decision was 5-4. How is that a vast majority?
You are clearly a dunce.

I would not have said vast but the majority opinion, which doesn't matter a damn either way, is at 60% who approve of marriage equality. That's not why you lost in the courts but it's a nice thing.

The US lost. Not me, but, humans. We are losing each and every day as we think we know better than God.

Believing that you know the Will of God is why you are lost, as only God, if He exists, would know. The history shows that man invented God, not the other way around.

 

[Bonzi]

7 black robed judges, 4 of which are hard left should not decide on gay marriage when the vast majority are against it.

First: There are nine (9) Supreme Court Justices.
Second: The vast majority are not against equal protection under the law for homosexual persons. The vast majority are not against homosexual persons having the same right that heterosexual persons have to marry the person of their choice.

The decision was 5-4. How is that a vast majority?
You are clearly a dunce.

I would not have said vast but the majority opinion, which doesn't matter a damn either way, is at 60% who approve of marriage equality. That's not why you lost in the courts but it's a nice thing.

The US lost. Not me, but, humans. We are losing each and every day as we think we know better than God.

Believing that you know the Will of God is why you are lost, as only God, if He exists, would know. The history shows that man invented God, not the other way around.

History according to who/whom?