Ted Cruz backs county clerks denying marriage licenses to gay couples

[Syriusly]

...Conservatives sure do want Big Brother policing our bedrooms again so that they can mandate exactly what kind of sex they will approve of

Nahhhhh... Conservatives just don't want the United States legitimizing and mainstreaming sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality).

I.E.- Conservatives want to go back to the old days when they could criminalize sexual relations- and send the police into everyone's bedrooms making sure that we only have 'approved' sexual relations.

 

[Syriusly]

Arrest her. Emily, the clerk's belief is not protected under the Constitution.

The clerk's beliefs (i.e., that marriage is between a man and a woman) are protected ... she has the right to believe whatever she wants. It's her CONDUCT (noncompliance with the law) that is not protected.

Exactly correct.

 

[007]

Well of course he does, because he a tedious partisan hack, rightwing loon, and hostile to the rule of law.

Hold on... you're talking about obama, right?

Because no president in history has soaked down the constitution with more of his piss than Barry.

 

[Skylar]

Link? You've seen her contract?

It's a Class A misdemeanor in Kentucky — first-degree official misconduct — if "a public servant ... refrains from performing a duty imposed upon him by law or clearly inherent in the nature of his office."

In Kentucky, misdemeanors are crimes that are punishable by up to 12 months in county or local jail.

In Nazi Germany it was a crime to do business with Jews.
Your pount?

Her point is this ***** for Jesus should have already been fired, for not obeying the laws of this nation and not doing her goddamned job. Since she is breaking the law when they do fire her, she won't get dime one from the county, including unemployment. Just watch, a bit longer...

It is illegal to fire someone over their religious beliefs. First Amendment and all that.

If she was an employee rather than an elected official, then her employer would have an obligation under Title VII to provide reasonable accommodation for her religious beliefs so long as her employer was not substantially burdened. An example of a reasonable accommodation might be assigning the duty to another employee who did not object. But an elected official is NOT an employee. An elected official's personal religious beliefs are not superior to the law of the land. An elected official does not have a "First Amendment" right to promulgate an official policy that imposes her religious beliefs on the people she serves.

Nope. To use the government to impose one's religious beliefs upon the public is an express violation of the 1st amendment. As it establishes religion.

 

[007]

. Even Kim Davis, the elected official, could have assigned the duty of issuing marriage licenses to qualified applicants to one of her 6 deputy clerks. Instead, she instituted an unconstitutional official policy that gives supremacy to her own personal religious beliefs.

And that, right there, is where even a semblance of 'religious freedom' just disintegrates. She has no only refused to issue the licenses, she's forbidden anyone else in her office from doing so. She's imposing her religious beliefs on unwilling people using the power of the State.

Twice.

Excellent.

The Supreme Court was wrong to land on the side of sexual deviants and perverts (homosexuals).

The People will fix that.

Conservatives sure do want Big Brother policing our bedrooms again so that they can mandate exactly what kind of sex they will approve of.

Conservatives sure do want Big Brother policing our bedrooms again so that they can mandate exactly what kind of sex they will approve of

Liberals sure do want to piss on the Bible and Christianity by bastardizing marriage which is the holy union of a man and woman in the eyes of God.

 

[Kondor3]

I.E.- Conservatives want to go back to the old days when they could criminalize sexual relations- and send the police into everyone's bedrooms making sure that we only have 'approved' sexual relations.

No cops went into the bedroom in the old days, and there is no reason to do that now, either.

Merely to de-legitimize and de-mainstream sexual deviance and perversity (homosexuality) in public life.

 

[Kondor3]

It's a Class A misdemeanor in Kentucky — first-degree official misconduct — if "a public servant ... refrains from performing a duty imposed upon him by law or clearly inherent in the nature of his office."

In Kentucky, misdemeanors are crimes that are punishable by up to 12 months in county or local jail.

In Nazi Germany it was a crime to do business with Jews.
Your pount?

Her point is this ***** for Jesus should have already been fired, for not obeying the laws of this nation and not doing her goddamned job. Since she is breaking the law when they do fire her, she won't get dime one from the county, including unemployment. Just watch, a bit longer...

It is illegal to fire someone over their religious beliefs. First Amendment and all that.

If she was an employee rather than an elected official, then her employer would have an obligation under Title VII to provide reasonable accommodation for her religious beliefs so long as her employer was not substantially burdened. An example of a reasonable accommodation might be assigning the duty to another employee who did not object. But an elected official is NOT an employee. An elected official's personal religious beliefs are not superior to the law of the land. An elected official does not have a "First Amendment" right to promulgate an official policy that imposes her religious beliefs on the people she serves.

Nope. To use the government to impose one's religious beliefs upon the public is an express violation of the 1st amendment. As it establishes religion.

Then it sounds like we need a Constitutional Amendment declaring homosexuality a public danger and un-doing some of the LGBT legal victories of recent times and barring future ones.

That way, SCOTUS can't say shit about it.

 

[Debra K]

...Conservatives sure do want Big Brother policing our bedrooms again so that they can mandate exactly what kind of sex they will approve of

Nahhhhh... Conservatives just don't want the United States legitimizing and mainstreaming sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality).

In other words, conservatives want the government to abuse its power to oppress and to discriminate against people whom conservatives hate and brand as deviant.

 

[Debra K]

Arrest her. Emily, the clerk's belief is not protected under the Constitution.

The clerk's beliefs (i.e., that marriage is between a man and a woman) are protected ... she has the right to believe whatever she wants. It's her CONDUCT (noncompliance with the law) that is not protected.

That hasn't been decided just yet, the 6th Circuit Court is hearing the appeal

Do you have a link to that case?

U.S. judge stays order for Kentucky clerk on gay marriage licenses - Yahoo News

It is standard procedure to issue a stay in order to preserve the status quo while an appeal is pending.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Arrest her. Emily, the clerk's belief is not protected under the Constitution.

The clerk's beliefs (i.e., that marriage is between a man and a woman) are protected ... she has the right to believe whatever she wants. It's her CONDUCT (noncompliance with the law) that is not protected.

That hasn't been decided just yet, the 6th Circuit Court is hearing the appeal

Do you have a link to that case?

U.S. judge stays order for Kentucky clerk on gay marriage licenses - Yahoo News

It is standard procedure to issue a stay in order to preserve the status quo while an appeal is pending.

It still ain't over, I'm married to an attorney, I don't need your legal advice

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I.E.- Conservatives want to go back to the old days when they could criminalize sexual relations- and send the police into everyone's bedrooms making sure that we only have 'approved' sexual relations.

No cops went into the bedroom in the old days, and there is no reason to do that now, either.

Merely to de-legitimize and de-mainstream sexual deviance and perversity (homosexuality) in public life.

Too late pal. What is being de legitimized is bigotry and discrimination in public life.

 

[Kondor3]

...Conservatives sure do want Big Brother policing our bedrooms again so that they can mandate exactly what kind of sex they will approve of

Nahhhhh... Conservatives just don't want the United States legitimizing and mainstreaming sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality).

In other words, conservatives want the government to abuse its power to oppress and to discriminate against people whom conservatives hate and brand as deviant.

Incorrect.

Conservatives want government to change the law so that it is possible to un-do the wicked and wrongful LGBT legal gains of recent years.

Pushing them back into the closet where they belong and re-establishing a sane environment whereby people are not driven by law to violate their religious beliefs.

The present Dictatorship of the Three Percent cannot keep the other Ninety-Seven Percent at-bay indefinitely.

To mimic the title of an old 70s WWII movie, you have gone "A Bridge Too Far" - and this will become clear to you in the coming years.

 

[Kondor3]

I.E.- Conservatives want to go back to the old days when they could criminalize sexual relations- and send the police into everyone's bedrooms making sure that we only have 'approved' sexual relations.

No cops went into the bedroom in the old days, and there is no reason to do that now, either.

Merely to de-legitimize and de-mainstream sexual deviance and perversity (homosexuality) in public life.

Too late pal. What is being de legitimized is bigotry and discrimination in public life.

It is not bigotry to identify and to call-out and to shun Wickedness and Perversity - a.k.a. Homosexuality.

Do not rest too easily on the perch of recent legal victories.

The Opposition is going to be coming for you to strip-away those victories, and sooner than you think.

What can be done, can be un-done.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

In Nazi Germany it was a crime to do business with Jews.
Your pount?

Her point is this ***** for Jesus should have already been fired, for not obeying the laws of this nation and not doing her goddamned job. Since she is breaking the law when they do fire her, she won't get dime one from the county, including unemployment. Just watch, a bit longer...

It is illegal to fire someone over their religious beliefs. First Amendment and all that.

If she was an employee rather than an elected official, then her employer would have an obligation under Title VII to provide reasonable accommodation for her religious beliefs so long as her employer was not substantially burdened. An example of a reasonable accommodation might be assigning the duty to another employee who did not object. But an elected official is NOT an employee. An elected official's personal religious beliefs are not superior to the law of the land. An elected official does not have a "First Amendment" right to promulgate an official policy that imposes her religious beliefs on the people she serves.

Nope. To use the government to impose one's religious beliefs upon the public is an express violation of the 1st amendment. As it establishes religion.

Then it sounds like we need a Constitutional Amendment declaring homosexuality a public danger and un-doing some of the LGBT legal victories of recent times and barring future ones.

That way, SCOTUS can't say shit about it.

Good luck with that. What is the public danger?

 

[Kondor3]

Good luck with that. What is the public danger?

Does it matter?

Your Opposition will dream-up some line of bullshit or another that will withstand a closer scrutiny, and then make its move.

 

[Syriusly]

I.E.- Conservatives want to go back to the old days when they could criminalize sexual relations- and send the police into everyone's bedrooms making sure that we only have 'approved' sexual relations.

No cops went into the bedroom in the old days, and there is no reason to do that now, either.

Merely to de-legitimize and de-mainstream sexual deviance and perversity (homosexuality) in public life.

Too late pal. What is being de legitimized is bigotry and discrimination in public life.

The Opposition is going to be coming for you to strip-away those victories, and sooner than you think..

Oh I am sure that there are those of you who enjoy the thought of Conservative blackboots attacking homosexuals and liberals and anyone else who you think is preventing you from policing American bedrooms.

 

[Syriusly]

...Conservatives sure do want Big Brother policing our bedrooms again so that they can mandate exactly what kind of sex they will approve of

Nahhhhh... Conservatives just don't want the United States legitimizing and mainstreaming sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality).

In other words, conservatives want the government to abuse its power to oppress and to discriminate against people whom conservatives hate and brand as deviant.

Incorrect.

Pushing them back into the closet where they belong and re-establishing a sane environment whereby people are not driven by law to violate their religious beliefs..

Back in the closet where it was safe for a brave bigot to round up 4 or 5 of his bravest friends to find a lone 'gay' man walking to bravely beat up- you know- to make sure he stayed 'in the closet'.

Or do you the police to do your dirty work again?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Maybe this guy has the answer

Scott Lively: 'Religious Freedom' Only Applies To Christians, And That's Why God’s Punishing Us With Gay Rights

Submitted by Miranda Blue on Tuesday, 8/4/2015 1:01 pm In an interview with The Dove TV on Friday, anti-gay activist Scott Lively insisted that Christians are being denied their First Amendment rights because of gay rights, while simultaneously asserting that the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom applies only to Christians. In fact, Lively explained, it is because the United States has grown to accept “religious pluralism” that God is now punishing us with abortion rights and LGBT equality. - See more at: Scott Lively Religious Freedom Only Applies To Christians And That s Why God s Punishing Us With Gay Rights Right Wing Watch

 

[Seawytch]

. Even Kim Davis, the elected official, could have assigned the duty of issuing marriage licenses to qualified applicants to one of her 6 deputy clerks. Instead, she instituted an unconstitutional official policy that gives supremacy to her own personal religious beliefs.

And that, right there, is where even a semblance of 'religious freedom' just disintegrates. She has no only refused to issue the licenses, she's forbidden anyone else in her office from doing so. She's imposing her religious beliefs on unwilling people using the power of the State.

Twice.

Excellent.

The Supreme Court was wrong to land on the side of sexual deviants and perverts (homosexuals).

The People will fix that.

Conservatives sure do want Big Brother policing our bedrooms again so that they can mandate exactly what kind of sex they will approve of.

Conservatives sure do want Big Brother policing our bedrooms again so that they can mandate exactly what kind of sex they will approve of

Liberals sure do want to piss on the Bible and Christianity by bastardizing marriage which is the holy union of a man and woman in the eyes of God.

Civil and religious marriage have nothing to do with each other. Marriage equality has zero to do with religion.

 

[Seawytch]

In Nazi Germany it was a crime to do business with Jews.
Your pount?

Her point is this ***** for Jesus should have already been fired, for not obeying the laws of this nation and not doing her goddamned job. Since she is breaking the law when they do fire her, she won't get dime one from the county, including unemployment. Just watch, a bit longer...

It is illegal to fire someone over their religious beliefs. First Amendment and all that.

If she was an employee rather than an elected official, then her employer would have an obligation under Title VII to provide reasonable accommodation for her religious beliefs so long as her employer was not substantially burdened. An example of a reasonable accommodation might be assigning the duty to another employee who did not object. But an elected official is NOT an employee. An elected official's personal religious beliefs are not superior to the law of the land. An elected official does not have a "First Amendment" right to promulgate an official policy that imposes her religious beliefs on the people she serves.

Nope. To use the government to impose one's religious beliefs upon the public is an express violation of the 1st amendment. As it establishes religion.

Then it sounds like we need a Constitutional Amendment declaring homosexuality a public danger and un-doing some of the LGBT legal victories of recent times and barring future ones.

That way, SCOTUS can't say shit about it.

That is the only thing you could do...but you can't actually do it. Please keep encouraging your candidates to support such an impossibility though.