“When law and religion conflict, choices have to be made.”

[Iceweasel]

As long as it's consistent and in line with the Constitution. However, people like you and Jillian are pick and choose.

Examples?

Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?

Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?

That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.

Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.

Is someone saying that? You however aren't the arbiter of what laws to follow. The Supreme Court is. And if you understood the issue, you would understand that a state can always give greater rights than the Feds, never fewer.

Yiu might want to read up on that.

Governments don't give rights, by definition. Rights are inalienable, something you have by way of birth. Governments can only restrict rights. What happened was the SCOTUS took the rights of citizens of the state away to define marriage.

 

[sealybobo]

Yes

According to the writing of the Constitution, they are all state level things. That you support federal level application of them proves what I said about you picking and choosing. Thanks for the proof.

I admit we pick and choose, same way Republicans in Michigan don't like that we voted to legalize pot so Republicans here are using federal law as their reason for fighting the will of the people. Go figure.

The argumentss you lose are because your state laws are deemed unconstitutional, no?

So you are a hypocrite? Just as I thought.

If your States laws are unconstitutional it's up to the feds to get you in line. That's your problem. You want to be unconstitutional in your laws.

When we (the feds) tell you what to do its because you want to be unconstitutional. But then you want to cherry pick out of the constitution the part that says States rights? Do you see how you're wrong?

So a state making a law when the STATE is supposed to be the one making the law is being out of line? My problem is when the Constitution indicates a state has the authority to make laws in areas not specifically delegated to the federal government yet the federal government goes against it's own Constitution.

When the Constitution indicates it is a states' right situation and the federal government chooses to do it anyway, that's wrong.

Unless you can show me where the term abortion, marriage, social welfare, etc. are in the Constitution as a federal authority, it's a state authority. When 5 people incorrectly decide it belongs to the federal government, it's because they WANT it to be not because it has the authority to be.

You can't descriminate against gays in your laws. See, your laws that are unconstitutional are always telling people they can't do something. Gays can't marry, women can't get abortions, blacks can't get welfare only whites can, blacks can't go to white schools, etc.

You right wingers just don't see why you can't use the constitution to be unconstitutional

 

[Tommy Tainant]

What happened to letting States decide?

Bottom line is when law and religion don't agree, law rules

As long as it's consistent and in line with the Constitution. However, people like you and Jillian are pick and choose.

Examples?

Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?

Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?

That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.

Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.

If you dont like the law then you should vote in those who will change it to your satisfaction. There are many laws that are unpopular, the answer is to change the law not sulk like a child.

 

[sealybobo]

Examples?

Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?

Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?

That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.

Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.

Is someone saying that? You however aren't the arbiter of what laws to follow. The Supreme Court is. And if you understood the issue, you would understand that a state can always give greater rights than the Feds, never fewer.

Yiu might want to read up on that.

Governments don't give rights, by definition. Rights are inalienable, something you have by way of birth. Governments can only restrict rights. What happened was the SCOTUS took the rights of citizens of the state away to define marriage.

Like your right to not let black kids go to your white schools or sit at the front of the bus?

 

[PredFan]

The top court in this state could sack this judge who keeps refusing to marry gays

Yup, like its time to get another job you backward bigot.

Normally I side with religious freedom, the 1st Amendment, but in this case if you are that strongly against it, why would you have a job where you knew ahead of time that this was part of your duties?

There is another question though, what other options are therefor gay couples in that town? Certainly there are notary publics. If this is a case where gays are purposely attempting to get this one judge to marry them when there are other choices then **** them. That makes the decision easy.

 

[Papageorgio]

The top court in this state could sack this judge who keeps refusing to marry gays

Yup, like its time to get another job you backward bigot.

they're going to have to remove him from the bench. some state yahoo can't override federal law. period.

He is a woman I believe. Its hard to tell these days.

It's obvious she didn't read the article, nice trying to cover for her. Lol!

 

[Iceweasel]

Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?

Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?

That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.

Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.

Is someone saying that? You however aren't the arbiter of what laws to follow. The Supreme Court is. And if you understood the issue, you would understand that a state can always give greater rights than the Feds, never fewer.

Yiu might want to read up on that.

Governments don't give rights, by definition. Rights are inalienable, something you have by way of birth. Governments can only restrict rights. What happened was the SCOTUS took the rights of citizens of the state away to define marriage.

Like your right to not let black kids go to your white schools or sit at the front of the bus?

Who said that? Oh, you did. The state government did not have the authority to treat men differently. In segregation they did, a violation of Constitutionally protected rights.

 

[Papageorgio]

Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.

Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.

Its gays and Muslims who are being oppressed at the moment. Thank God that decent people are willing to stand up for them.

Gays and Muslims are being oppressed claims the Limey bigot.

WRONG.

You should have posted Muslims oppress gays, woman, minorities, non-Muslims. We in the West do not.

Everything you know is WRONG.

This judge is oppressing gays by refusing to marry them.I would also examine the decisions she has made in the past to see if she has actively discriminated against Gay defendants.

funny how you are concerned about oppression, when your nation has oppressed others for centuries.

No doubt you would have little concern about whites or Christians being oppressed.

Do you fail to see the hypocrisy?

I can see a whole load of hypocrisy and a whole load of deflection.
Do you support an Olympic heroines right to free speech ?

She is in Rio, she falls under their jurisdiction, not US law.

Funny how other people of other nations love to go after the US and fail to take care of the problems right in their own country.

 

[Papageorgio]

Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.

Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.

The top court in this state could sack this judge who keeps refusing to marry gays

Yup, like its time to get another job you backward bigot.

they're going to have to remove him from the bench. some state yahoo can't override federal law. period.

You mean like local yahoos creating sanctuary cities despite federal laws related to illegals?

Why don't you just say "can't override federal laws" unless I as a Liberal agree they can.

******* liar.

What happened to letting States decide?

Bottom line is when law and religion don't agree, law rules

Bottom law is, federal law should rule. Should they be states deciding? Yep, but that is not the way it goes. The judge is wrong, the judge can either abide by the law and marry all or not marry anyone.

Marijuana, abortion, marriage laws are all state issues and should be handled as such. Illegal aliens is a federal issue and the only time the feds get involved is when states like Arizona try to uphold the federal law. So try to be consistent Meathead.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.

Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.

Its gays and Muslims who are being oppressed at the moment. Thank God that decent people are willing to stand up for them.

Gays and Muslims are being oppressed claims the Limey bigot.

WRONG.

You should have posted Muslims oppress gays, woman, minorities, non-Muslims. We in the West do not.

Everything you know is WRONG.

This judge is oppressing gays by refusing to marry them.I would also examine the decisions she has made in the past to see if she has actively discriminated against Gay defendants.

1. The Judge should marry them or refuse to marry anyone...

2. Muslims would kill Homosexuals and to claim Muslims are oppressed in America is total bull ******* shit!

When you write about a country you do not reside in make me wonder what the **** is wrong with you?

I am not going to pretend that America does not have it ******* bigots within her borders and Trump is one of them but for you to sit there and write about how Muslims are oppressed is total nonsense on your part!

Muslims are allowed to worship as they please as long as it does not break any of our Federal, State and local laws and yes this country has laws!

So please stop with the bullshit about how Muslims are oppressed and no they should not be allow to practice or enforce their religious laws if it conflicts with this Country Constitution!

 

[Papageorgio]

You are absolutely right, but since Muslims have a right to our country, as you pointed out in another thread, then they have the right to Sharia law, and instead of refusing to marry them, maybe we should skip straight to the beheading?

They have a right.... America is their country.... according to you.

The thread is about a judge who refuses to obey the Constitution and follow the rule of law.

This ignorant bigotry has nothing to do with the thread topic.

Read the link below to alleviate your ignorance:

The True Story of Sharia in American Courts

The judge must carry out the laws and has a right to refuse all marriages or perform all marriages allowed by law. No sure what part of the Constitution she violates.

 

[Papageorgio]

Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.

Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.

Its gays and Muslims who are being oppressed at the moment. Thank God that decent people are willing to stand up for them.

Gays and Muslims are being oppressed claims the Limey bigot.

WRONG.

You should have posted Muslims oppress gays, woman, minorities, non-Muslims. We in the West do not.

Everything you know is WRONG.

This judge is oppressing gays by refusing to marry them.I would also examine the decisions she has made in the past to see if she has actively discriminated against Gay defendants.

1. The Judge should marry them or refuse to marry anyone...

2. Muslims would kill Homosexuals and to claim Muslims are oppressed in America is total bull ******* shit!

When you write about a country you do not reside in make me wonder what the **** is wrong with you?

I am not going to pretend that America does not have it ******* bigots within her borders and Trump is one of them but for you to sit there and write about how Muslims are oppressed is total nonsense on your part!

Muslims are allowed to worship as they please as long as it does not break any of our Federal, State and local laws and yes this country has laws!

So please stop with the bullshit about how Muslims are oppressed and no they should not be allow to practice or enforce their religious laws if it conflicts with this Country Constitution!

Well said.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Dragonlady]

The government shouldn't be involved in any marriage. That's between you, your families, and your church.

Marriage is a government contract, not a religious one. It is far more important for your finances and your family to have the government recognize your marriage than your church.

 

[squeeze berry]

The face of hate.

the face of hate

 

[Conservative65]

As long as it's consistent and in line with the Constitution. However, people like you and Jillian are pick and choose.

Examples?

Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?

Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?

That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.

Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.

Is someone saying that? You however aren't the arbiter of what laws to follow. The Supreme Court is. And if you understood the issue, you would understand that a state can always give greater rights than the Feds, never fewer.

Yiu might want to read up on that.

A state, in doing that, can't violate federal law. You might wasn't to read up on that.

 

[Conservative65]

According to the writing of the Constitution, they are all state level things. That you support federal level application of them proves what I said about you picking and choosing. Thanks for the proof.

I admit we pick and choose, same way Republicans in Michigan don't like that we voted to legalize pot so Republicans here are using federal law as their reason for fighting the will of the people. Go figure.

The argumentss you lose are because your state laws are deemed unconstitutional, no?

So you are a hypocrite? Just as I thought.

If your States laws are unconstitutional it's up to the feds to get you in line. That's your problem. You want to be unconstitutional in your laws.

When we (the feds) tell you what to do its because you want to be unconstitutional. But then you want to cherry pick out of the constitution the part that says States rights? Do you see how you're wrong?

So a state making a law when the STATE is supposed to be the one making the law is being out of line? My problem is when the Constitution indicates a state has the authority to make laws in areas not specifically delegated to the federal government yet the federal government goes against it's own Constitution.

When the Constitution indicates it is a states' right situation and the federal government chooses to do it anyway, that's wrong.

Unless you can show me where the term abortion, marriage, social welfare, etc. are in the Constitution as a federal authority, it's a state authority. When 5 people incorrectly decide it belongs to the federal government, it's because they WANT it to be not because it has the authority to be.

You can't descriminate against gays in your laws. See, your laws that are unconstitutional are always telling people they can't do something. Gays can't marry, women can't get abortions, blacks can't get welfare only whites can, blacks can't go to white schools, etc.

You right wingers just don't see why you can't use the constitution to be unconstitutional

Yet you can't show the words abortion, marriage, or social welfare in the Constitution.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.

Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.

Its gays and Muslims who are being oppressed at the moment. Thank God that decent people are willing to stand up for them.

Gays and Muslims are being oppressed claims the Limey bigot.

WRONG.

You should have posted Muslims oppress gays, woman, minorities, non-Muslims. We in the West do not.

Everything you know is WRONG.

This judge is oppressing gays by refusing to marry them.I would also examine the decisions she has made in the past to see if she has actively discriminated against Gay defendants.

1. The Judge should marry them or refuse to marry anyone...

2. Muslims would kill Homosexuals and to claim Muslims are oppressed in America is total bull ******* shit!

When you write about a country you do not reside in make me wonder what the **** is wrong with you?

I am not going to pretend that America does not have it ******* bigots within her borders and Trump is one of them but for you to sit there and write about how Muslims are oppressed is total nonsense on your part!

Muslims are allowed to worship as they please as long as it does not break any of our Federal, State and local laws and yes this country has laws!

So please stop with the bullshit about how Muslims are oppressed and no they should not be allow to practice or enforce their religious laws if it conflicts with this Country Constitution!

The stats tend to disprove your assertion.

FBI: Hate Crimes Are Down In the U.S.—But Not Against Muslims

The point here is that a populist gobshite has targeted a minority by telling lies and these are then taken up by the idiots in society. Trumps throw away misogyny has a body count.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I admit we pick and choose, same way Republicans in Michigan don't like that we voted to legalize pot so Republicans here are using federal law as their reason for fighting the will of the people. Go figure.

The argumentss you lose are because your state laws are deemed unconstitutional, no?

So you are a hypocrite? Just as I thought.

If your States laws are unconstitutional it's up to the feds to get you in line. That's your problem. You want to be unconstitutional in your laws.

When we (the feds) tell you what to do its because you want to be unconstitutional. But then you want to cherry pick out of the constitution the part that says States rights? Do you see how you're wrong?

So a state making a law when the STATE is supposed to be the one making the law is being out of line? My problem is when the Constitution indicates a state has the authority to make laws in areas not specifically delegated to the federal government yet the federal government goes against it's own Constitution.

When the Constitution indicates it is a states' right situation and the federal government chooses to do it anyway, that's wrong.

Unless you can show me where the term abortion, marriage, social welfare, etc. are in the Constitution as a federal authority, it's a state authority. When 5 people incorrectly decide it belongs to the federal government, it's because they WANT it to be not because it has the authority to be.

You can't descriminate against gays in your laws. See, your laws that are unconstitutional are always telling people they can't do something. Gays can't marry, women can't get abortions, blacks can't get welfare only whites can, blacks can't go to white schools, etc.

You right wingers just don't see why you can't use the constitution to be unconstitutional

Yet you can't show the words abortion, marriage, or social welfare in the Constitution.

They are in the bit by assault rifle.

 

[Conservative65]

As long as it's consistent and in line with the Constitution. However, people like you and Jillian are pick and choose.

Examples?

Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?

Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?

That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.

Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.

If you dont like the law then you should vote in those who will change it to your satisfaction. There are many laws that are unpopular, the answer is to change the law not sulk like a child.

That's not what he asked, ******.

 

[Conservative65]

Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.

Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.

The top court in this state could sack this judge who keeps refusing to marry gays

Yup, like its time to get another job you backward bigot.

they're going to have to remove him from the bench. some state yahoo can't override federal law. period.

You mean like local yahoos creating sanctuary cities despite federal laws related to illegals?

Why don't you just say "can't override federal laws" unless I as a Liberal agree they can.

******* liar.

What happened to letting States decide?

Bottom line is when law and religion don't agree, law rules

Bottom law is, federal law should rule. Should they be states deciding? Yep, but that is not the way it goes. The judge is wrong, the judge can either abide by the law and marry all or not marry anyone.

Marijuana, abortion, marriage laws are all state issues and should be handled as such. Illegal aliens is a federal issue and the only time the feds get involved is when states like Arizona try to uphold the federal law. So try to be consistent Meathead.

Jillian seems to think states can offer more ability to exercise rights even if doing so violates federal law.