The Phoenix Just Burned Again: Cheif Justice Moore Of Alabama: Should We Go-Fund Him?

[Silhouette]

Keeping an eye on the heresy punishment by the Church of LGBT of Justice Moore of Alabama...He's a judge that tenaciously keeps standing by his/the American principles and keeps getting burned by the Church of LGBT for doing so. And, his voters keep re-electing him in spite of it! He is like the phoenix. We are all like the phoenix.

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore suspended for rest of term

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore has been suspended from the bench for telling probate judges to defy federal orders regarding gay marriage.

The Alabama Court of the Judiciary (COJ) issued the order Friday suspending Moore from the bench for the remainder of his term after an unanimous vote of the nine-member board.

But the unanimous court offered a caveat to the Church of LGBT:

"At the outset, this court emphasizes that this case is concerned only with alleged violations of the Canons of Judicial Ethics," the COJ states. "This case is not about whether same-sex marriage should be permitted: indeed, we recognize that a majority of voters in Alabama adopted a constitutional amendment in 2006 banning same-sex marriage, as did a majority of states over the last 15 years."

Ouch! Wanna bet the voters of Alabama will elect Justice Moore for the next term? (Again)..

He wasn't disbarred. He wasn't removed. He was suspended without pay. The guy should start a "go fund me" account. I'd donate immediately. If nothing else it would reflect a polling of sorts of the American public. He could donate the proceeds to charity if he likes. Maybe a favorite legal fund? *smiles*

 

[IsaacNewton]

By state law he's too old to serve again. His career is over.

 

[irosie91]

By state law he's too old to serve again. His career is over.

oh well----DA WHOLE THING is moot-----he made his point-----
....... maybe he is glad

 

[Silhouette]

mdk seems to think he has his eye on becoming Governor of Alabama. In any event, his dethroning by the Church of LGBT at this particular point in time will result in more votes for republican Congresspeople on the ballot this November. (And not JUST in Alabama if Fox News runs the story). Seems Fox owes the GOP quite a few favors for being the vehicle that propelled the swine Donald Trump to stain the republican ticket.

 

[mdk]

mdk seems to think he has his eye on becoming Governor of Alabama. In any event, his dethroning by the Church of LGBT at this particular point in time will result in more votes for republican Congresspeople on the ballot this November. (And not JUST in Alabama if Fox News runs the story). Seems Fox owes the GOP quite a few favors for being the vehicle that propelled the swine Donald Trump to stain the republican ticket.

Alabama law prohibits Moore from holding judicial office again as a result of his age.

It is well known that Moore wants to climb his old ass into the governor's chair. He ran twice and lost in the GOP primaries for the office both times. Whether he can use this case to propel himself into another office remains to be seen. Either way, I am pleased as punch that dick weed was removed from the bench.

 

[Silhouette]

Justice Moore will be seen as a hero when the Brown polygamy case makes its way up to SCOTUS and not just on a lower court technicality.

Also, beware of the law of unintended consequences. This will render more votes for republican judges and Congresspeople across the nation. People can only take so much fascism before they snap. And though your inquisition army is stationed far and wide, burning heretics that don't bow to your cult, they have not yet reached behind the privacy of the voting curtain.

Enjoy your "victory" mdk...

 

[bendog]

Keeping an eye on the heresy punishment by the Church of LGBT of Justice Moore of Alabama...He's a judge that tenaciously keeps standing by his/the American principles and keeps getting burned by the Church of LGBT for doing so. And, his voters keep re-electing him in spite of it! He is like the phoenix. We are all like the phoenix.

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore suspended for rest of term

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore has been suspended from the bench for telling probate judges to defy federal orders regarding gay marriage.

The Alabama Court of the Judiciary (COJ) issued the order Friday suspending Moore from the bench for the remainder of his term after an unanimous vote of the nine-member board.

But the unanimous court offered a caveat to the Church of LGBT:

"At the outset, this court emphasizes that this case is concerned only with alleged violations of the Canons of Judicial Ethics," the COJ states. "This case is not about whether same-sex marriage should be permitted: indeed, we recognize that a majority of voters in Alabama adopted a constitutional amendment in 2006 banning same-sex marriage, as did a majority of states over the last 15 years."

Ouch! Wanna bet the voters of Alabama will elect Justice Moore for the next term? (Again)..

He wasn't disbarred. He wasn't removed. He was suspended without pay. The guy should start a "go fund me" account. I'd donate immediately. If nothing else it would reflect a polling of sorts of the American public. He could donate the proceeds to charity if he likes. Maybe a favorite legal fund? *smiles*

Stick him on the ark and put a torpedo in it

 

[JakeStarkey]

Moore stumbled yesterday, broke wind, coughed, then belched.

 

[mdk]

Justice Moore will be seen as a hero when the Brown polygamy case makes its way up to SCOTUS and not just on a lower court technicality.

Also, beware of the law of unintended consequences. This will render more votes for republican judges and Congresspeople across the nation. People can only take so much fascism before they snap. And though your inquisition army is stationed far and wide, burning heretics that don't bow to your cult, they have not yet reached behind the privacy of the voting curtain.

Enjoy your "victory" mdk...

I will enjoy my victory as well as your sullen tears. Nom nom nom!

In what way will Moore be seen as the hero when it comes to the Brown family? I doubt he is supporting the religious freedoms and privacy claims of the Brown family. You claimed Moore was going to tear gay marriage to shreds by using the Infancy Doctrine and stating that children are parties to the marriage contract of their parents. Guess what? None of your delusional bullshit came to pass and Moore has been removed from the bench. You lost. Get over it.

 

[Silhouette]

^^ How are you enjoying the Hively v Ivy Tech Ruling in the 7th circuit mdk?

..nom nom nom...

************ http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-b...8/C:15-1720:J:Rovner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1801805:S:0

ROVNER, Circuit Judge. Once again this court is asked to consider whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from or offers redress for discrimination based on sexual orientation. This time, however, we do so in the shadow of a criticism from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that this court and others have continued to reflexively declare that sexual orientation is not cognizable under Title VII without due analysis or consideration of intervening case law. The EEOC's criticism has created a groundswell of questions about the rationale for denying sexual orientation claims while allowing nearly indistinguishable gender non-conformity claims, which courts have long recognized as a form of sex-based discrimination under Title VII. After a careful analysis of our precedent, however, this court must conclude that Kimberly Hively has failed to state a claim under Title VII for sex discrimination; her claim is solely for sexual orientation discrimination which is beyond the scope of the statute. Consequently, we affirm the decision of the district court....

......we came to this conclusion by considering the ordinary meaning of the word "sex" in Title VII, as enacted by Congress, and by determining that "[t]the phrase in Title VII prohibiting discrimination based on sex, in its plain meaning, implies that it is unlawful to discriminate against women because they are women and against men because they are men."...We also considered the legislative history of Title VII, explaining that it ws primarily meant to remedy racial discrimination, with sex discrimination thrown in at the final hour in an attempt to thward adoption of the Civil Rights Act as a whole...Therefore, we concluded, "Congress had a narrow view of sex in mind when it passed the Civil Rights Act."......."we were confident that Congress had nothing more than the traditional notion of 'sex' in mind when it voted to outlaw sex discrimination, and that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and transsexualism, for example, did not fall within the purview of Title VII." Doe by Doe v City of Belleville, Ill., ...(citing Ulane...aborgated by Oncale v Sundowner Offshore Servs, Inc...)

......We are preemptively bound by our own precedent in Hamner, Spearman, Muhammad, Hamm, Schroeder, and Ulane. "Principles of stare decisis require that we give considerable weight to prior decisions of this court unless and until they have been overruled or undermined by the decisions of a higher court, or other supervening developments, such as a statutory overruling."..Our precedent has been unequivocal in holding that Title VII does not redress sexual orientation discrimination. That holding is in line with all other circuit courts to have decided or opined about the matter....

...Our holdings and those of other courts reflect the fact that despite multiple efforts, Congress has repeatedly rejected legislation that would have extended Title VII to cover sexual orientation...

...Congress's refusal to expand the reach of Title VII is strong evidence of congressional intent in the face of consistent judicial decisions refusing to interpret "sex" to include sexual orientation...

...We could end the discussion there, but we would be remiss not to consider the EEOC's recent decision in which it concluded that "sexual orientation is inherently a 'sex-based consideration,' and an allegation of discrimination based on sexual orientation is necessarily an allegation of sex discrimination under Title VII...it explained that "sexual orientation discrimination is also sex discrimination because it is associational discrimination on the basis of sex," in which an employer discriminates against lesbian, gay or bisexual employees based on who they date or marry...as a form of discrimination based on gender sterotypes in which employees are harassed or punished for failing to live up to societal norms about appropriate masculine or feminine behaviors, mannerisms, and appearances...noted that even the Supreme Court, when applying Title VII's prohibition on "sex" discrimination to same-sex sexual harassment, stated that "statutory prohibitions often go beyond the principal evil to cover reasonably comparable evils, and it is ultmately the provisions of our laws rather than the principal concerns of our legislators by which we are governed.."

...Whatever deference we might owe to the EEOC's adjudications, we conclude for the reasons that follow, that Title VII as it stands, does not reach discrimination based on sexual orientation...the district courts, which are the front line experimenters in the laboratories of the difficult legal questions, are beginning to question the doctrinaire distinction between gender non-conformity discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination and coming up short on rational answers..

*******

I guess the real pickle the 7th circuit is noticing is that when the premise of "is sex (gender) equal to sexual behaviors or non-conforming mannerisms (behavior also)." The answer is "no". And they correctly indicate that the only folks who can change that Act is the Congress that drew it up in the first place..

 

[TheOldSchool]

Silh you're a fucking trip

 

[OldLady]

Keeping an eye on the heresy punishment by the Church of LGBT of Justice Moore of Alabama...He's a judge that tenaciously keeps standing by his/the American principles and keeps getting burned by the Church of LGBT for doing so. And, his voters keep re-electing him in spite of it! He is like the phoenix. We are all like the phoenix.

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore suspended for rest of term

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore has been suspended from the bench for telling probate judges to defy federal orders regarding gay marriage.

The Alabama Court of the Judiciary (COJ) issued the order Friday suspending Moore from the bench for the remainder of his term after an unanimous vote of the nine-member board.

But the unanimous court offered a caveat to the Church of LGBT:

"At the outset, this court emphasizes that this case is concerned only with alleged violations of the Canons of Judicial Ethics," the COJ states. "This case is not about whether same-sex marriage should be permitted: indeed, we recognize that a majority of voters in Alabama adopted a constitutional amendment in 2006 banning same-sex marriage, as did a majority of states over the last 15 years."

Ouch! Wanna bet the voters of Alabama will elect Justice Moore for the next term? (Again)..

He wasn't disbarred. He wasn't removed. He was suspended without pay. The guy should start a "go fund me" account. I'd donate immediately. If nothing else it would reflect a polling of sorts of the American public. He could donate the proceeds to charity if he likes. Maybe a favorite legal fund? *smiles*

He is like the phoenix. We are all like the phoenix.
Don't kid yourself. You're more like insecticide-resistant roaches. Or zombies. Evil, hating, pests that just like in the movies are so damned hard to destroy.

 

[Syriusly]

Watching Silhouette's head spin around from this is sadly entertaining.

Her hatred of Americans who happen to be gay is tragic, sad and disgusting.

 

[Silhouette]

Watching Silhouette's head spin around from this is sadly entertaining.

Her hatred of Americans who happen to be gay is tragic, sad and disgusting.

For more "hatred" of Americans, examine post #10. It outlines the specifics on why the federal appeals system is having difficulty maintaining an erection for the LGBT movement. Seems the word 'behaviors' is getting in the way of a clear legal distinction in class-qualification..

Gonna take an Act of Congress to clear up the "hate". Get busy threatening, blackmailing...er..I mean phoning and petitioning your representatives!

 

[mdk]

^^ How are you enjoying the Hively v Ivy Tech Ruling in the 7th circuit mdk?

..nom nom nom...

************ http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-b...8/C:15-1720:J:Rovner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1801805:S:0

ROVNER, Circuit Judge. Once again this court is asked to consider whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from or offers redress for discrimination based on sexual orientation. This time, however, we do so in the shadow of a criticism from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that this court and others have continued to reflexively declare that sexual orientation is not cognizable under Title VII without due analysis or consideration of intervening case law. The EEOC's criticism has created a groundswell of questions about the rationale for denying sexual orientation claims while allowing nearly indistinguishable gender non-conformity claims, which courts have long recognized as a form of sex-based discrimination under Title VII. After a careful analysis of our precedent, however, this court must conclude that Kimberly Hively has failed to state a claim under Title VII for sex discrimination; her claim is solely for sexual orientation discrimination which is beyond the scope of the statute. Consequently, we affirm the decision of the district court....

......we came to this conclusion by considering the ordinary meaning of the word "sex" in Title VII, as enacted by Congress, and by determining that "[t]the phrase in Title VII prohibiting discrimination based on sex, in its plain meaning, implies that it is unlawful to discriminate against women because they are women and against men because they are men."...We also considered the legislative history of Title VII, explaining that it ws primarily meant to remedy racial discrimination, with sex discrimination thrown in at the final hour in an attempt to thward adoption of the Civil Rights Act as a whole...Therefore, we concluded, "Congress had a narrow view of sex in mind when it passed the Civil Rights Act."......."we were confident that Congress had nothing more than the traditional notion of 'sex' in mind when it voted to outlaw sex discrimination, and that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and transsexualism, for example, did not fall within the purview of Title VII." Doe by Doe v City of Belleville, Ill., ...(citing Ulane...aborgated by Oncale v Sundowner Offshore Servs, Inc...)

......We are preemptively bound by our own precedent in Hamner, Spearman, Muhammad, Hamm, Schroeder, and Ulane. "Principles of stare decisis require that we give considerable weight to prior decisions of this court unless and until they have been overruled or undermined by the decisions of a higher court, or other supervening developments, such as a statutory overruling."..Our precedent has been unequivocal in holding that Title VII does not redress sexual orientation discrimination. That holding is in line with all other circuit courts to have decided or opined about the matter....

...Our holdings and those of other courts reflect the fact that despite multiple efforts, Congress has repeatedly rejected legislation that would have extended Title VII to cover sexual orientation...

...Congress's refusal to expand the reach of Title VII is strong evidence of congressional intent in the face of consistent judicial decisions refusing to interpret "sex" to include sexual orientation...

...We could end the discussion there, but we would be remiss not to consider the EEOC's recent decision in which it concluded that "sexual orientation is inherently a 'sex-based consideration,' and an allegation of discrimination based on sexual orientation is necessarily an allegation of sex discrimination under Title VII...it explained that "sexual orientation discrimination is also sex discrimination because it is associational discrimination on the basis of sex," in which an employer discriminates against lesbian, gay or bisexual employees based on who they date or marry...as a form of discrimination based on gender sterotypes in which employees are harassed or punished for failing to live up to societal norms about appropriate masculine or feminine behaviors, mannerisms, and appearances...noted that even the Supreme Court, when applying Title VII's prohibition on "sex" discrimination to same-sex sexual harassment, stated that "statutory prohibitions often go beyond the principal evil to cover reasonably comparable evils, and it is ultmately the provisions of our laws rather than the principal concerns of our legislators by which we are governed.."

...Whatever deference we might owe to the EEOC's adjudications, we conclude for the reasons that follow, that Title VII as it stands, does not reach discrimination based on sexual orientation...the district courts, which are the front line experimenters in the laboratories of the difficult legal questions, are beginning to question the doctrinaire distinction between gender non-conformity discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination and coming up short on rational answers..

*******

I guess the real pickle the 7th circuit is noticing is that when the premise of "is sex (gender) equal to sexual behaviors or non-conforming mannerisms (behavior also)." The answer is "no". And they correctly indicate that the only folks who can change that Act is the Congress that drew it up in the first place..

I've told you numerous on occasions that I think Hively was the correct ruling as the Civil Rights Act does not protect sexual orientation. You pretending this case is some silver bullet to roll back protections for gay Americans is nothing more then another one of your silly pipe dreams. You tired the same lame nonsense with Ferber, Massey, and, the Infancy Doctrine as well. Guess what? Gays can still marry and all you do about is whine about it.

By the way, Roy Moore still got shit canned today. I love how you likened yourself to a Phoenix in the OP, but you should have picked a loon instead. It would been more apt.

 

[Silhouette]

I've told you numerous on occasions that I think Hively was the correct ruling as the Civil Rights Act does not protect sexual orientation. You pretending this case is some silver bullet to roll back protections for gay Americans is nothing more then another one of your silly pipe dreams.

So the federal circuit court of appeals regularly Finding that sexual orientation isn't protected under any Act of Congress or the US Constitution is "no big deal" eh?

Congress having to write new language onto the Civil Rights Act is "piece of cake" for you eh? Not actually being a class of protected people is "no big legal problem for the LGBT gang"? Well folks, there you have it. mdk has spoken

 

[mdk]

I've told you numerous on occasions that I think Hively was the correct ruling as the Civil Rights Act does not protect sexual orientation. You pretending this case is some silver bullet to roll back protections for gay Americans is nothing more then another one of your silly pipe dreams.

So the federal circuit court of appeals regularly Finding that sexual orientation isn't protected under any Act of Congress or the US Constitution is "no big deal" eh?

Congress having to write new language onto the Civil Rights Act is "piece of cake" for you eh? Not actually being a class of protected people is "no big legal problem for the LGBT gang"? Well folks, there you have it. mdk has spoken

There already is a bill pending in Congress. My guess it won't be moved on while the GOP is control.

The court went as so far as to sympathize with the position of EEOC when they stated this in their opinion:

"Perhaps the writing is on the wall. It seems unlikely that our society can continue to condone a legal structure in which employees can be fired, harassed, demeaned, singled out for undesirable tasks, paid lower wages, demoted, passed over for promotions, and otherwise discriminated against solely based on who they date, love, or marry. The agency tasked with enforcing Title VII does not condone it, (see Baldwin, 2015 WL 4397641 at **5,10); many of the federal courts to consider the matter have stated that they do not condone it (see, e.g., Vickers, 453 F.3d at 764‐65; Bibby, 260 F.3d at 265; Simonton, 232 F.3d at 35; Higgins, 194 F.3d at 259; Rene, 243 F.3d at 1209, (Hug, J., dissenting); Kay, 142 F. Appʹx at 51; Silva, 2000 WL 525573, at *1); and this court undoubtedly does not condone it (see Ulane, 742 F.2d at 1084). But writing on the wall is not enough. Until the writing comes in the form of a Supreme Court opinion or new legislation, we must adhere to the writing of our prior precedent, and there‐ fore, the decision of the district court is AFFIRMED."



Besides, the Hively does nothing to change state laws where gay people are legally considered a protected class and nor does it have anything to do with Moore getting shit canned this morning.

 

[Syriusly]

Watching Silhouette's head spin around from this is sadly entertaining.

Her hatred of Americans who happen to be gay is tragic, sad and disgusting.

For more "hatred" of Americans!

I was speaking of your hatred of Americans who are gay.

Which is tragic, sad and disgusting.

 

[Silhouette]

I was speaking of your hatred of Americans who are gay.

Which is tragic, sad and disgusting.

That's weird because I really liked my friend who was molested as a boy, became "gay" that way and who died of AIDS in his early 30s. I think..yep..pretty sure it's the behavior I can't stand. The people doing it need help; they need to discover why they're doing what they're doing compulsively. And from there, hopefully at the very least not try to treat old childhood wounds by reckless sex behaviors.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Moore stumbled yesterday, broke wind, coughed, then belched.

No, that was Hillary.