Pointing out the double standard

a reply to: kellyjay

I did actually,

Actually, you didn't.
You did, however, show that the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples in San Francisco was done unlawfully.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: kellyjay
The order to cease and desist was issued in March. The licenses were not voided until August.


Interesting though, the cease and desist decision was based on the forms being used. They were "altered" from the approved forms.

That this Court maintain administrative uniformity and certainty by immediately issuing an order directing respondents to cease and desist from issuing or registering License and Certificate of Marriage forms, other than those approved by the State of California, while this original writ proceeding is pending.

www.courts.ca.gov...

other than those approved by the State of California, while this original writ proceeding is pending.

yes, the approved ones being man and woman liscences, not same sex, same sex liscences were not approved, thus why he was told to stop issuing them....thus he was breaking the law by doing so.

as for them nullifying them in august...so it took them a few months to get around to it....

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay
now im off to bed...good evening

That's actually a good idea. Maybe a reasonable idea may come to you. THIS just isn't coming to fruition. It's inane.

so inane you have been here what?...2 hrs now? lol

So what? I'm here everyday. That's all you've got? You can't deny the facts so you attempt a personal attack? Bwahahahaha.....

i dont need to "attack" anyone...i made my point

What point? You certainly haven't shown any kind of double standard.

I did actually, you just dont want to accept it....

No, no you didn't. Not in your wildest imagination!

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: kellyjay

I did actually,

Actually, you didn't.
You did, however, show that the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples in San Francisco was done unlawfully.

unlawful
ʌnˈlɔːfʊl,-f(ə)l/Submit
adjective
not conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules.
"the use of unlawful violence"
synonyms: illegal, illicit, lawbreaking, illegitimate, against the law; More

www.oxforddictionaries.com...

so i proved my initial point

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay
now im off to bed...good evening

That's actually a good idea. Maybe a reasonable idea may come to you. THIS just isn't coming to fruition. It's inane.

so inane you have been here what?...2 hrs now? lol

So what? I'm here everyday. That's all you've got? You can't deny the facts so you attempt a personal attack? Bwahahahaha.....

i dont need to "attack" anyone...i made my point

What point? You certainly haven't shown any kind of double standard.

I did actually, you just dont want to accept it....

No, no you didn't. Not in your wildest imagination!

your cognitive dissonance is showing

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: kellyjay

I did actually,

Actually, you didn't.
You did, however, show that the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples in San Francisco was done unlawfully.

unlawful
ʌnˈlɔːfʊl,-f(ə)l/Submit
adjective
not conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules.
"the use of unlawful violence"
synonyms: illegal, illicit, lawbreaking, illegitimate, against the law; More

www.oxforddictionaries.com...

so i proved my initial point

What was your intitial point? Because you haven't proven any kind of double standard, which is title of your thread; Pointing out the double standard.

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay
now im off to bed...good evening

That's actually a good idea. Maybe a reasonable idea may come to you. THIS just isn't coming to fruition. It's inane.

so inane you have been here what?...2 hrs now? lol

So what? I'm here everyday. That's all you've got? You can't deny the facts so you attempt a personal attack? Bwahahahaha.....

i dont need to "attack" anyone...i made my point

What point? You certainly haven't shown any kind of double standard.

I did actually, you just dont want to accept it....

No, no you didn't. Not in your wildest imagination!

your cognitive dissonance is showing

Did you get that from the Net? Do you even know what it means? Seriously man, I'd quit while I'm WAY behind. You proved that you had a semi-bogus issue that got blown out of the water. And yes, just because one tells themselves, "You're amazing Bob" turns out that Bob is wrong as hell.

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay
now im off to bed...good evening

That's actually a good idea. Maybe a reasonable idea may come to you. THIS just isn't coming to fruition. It's inane.

so inane you have been here what?...2 hrs now? lol

So what? I'm here everyday. That's all you've got? You can't deny the facts so you attempt a personal attack? Bwahahahaha.....

i dont need to "attack" anyone...i made my point

What point? You certainly haven't shown any kind of double standard.

I did actually, you just dont want to accept it....

No, no you didn't. Not in your wildest imagination!

your cognitive dissonance is showing

You intellectual dishonesty has been exposed for all to see.

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: kellyjay

I did actually,

Actually, you didn't.
You did, however, show that the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples in San Francisco was done unlawfully.

unlawful
ʌnˈlɔːfʊl,-f(ə)l/Submit
adjective
not conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules.
"the use of unlawful violence"
synonyms: illegal, illicit, lawbreaking, illegitimate, against the law; More

www.oxforddictionaries.com...

so i proved my initial point

What was your intitial point? Because you haven't proven any kind of double standard, which is title of your thread; Pointing out the double standard.

try reading my post...but ill give you the cliff notes, gary newmore decided to break the law based on his opinion of what he felt was right and wrong, kim done the same....one is hailed a hero by the left for breaking the law, kim is villified by the left for doing the same thing....

a reply to: kellyjay

so i proved my initial point

Your intial point was a double standard. You did not demonstrate that.

One of your secondary points was that the issuance of licenses in San Francisco was illegal. You did demonstrate that.

a reply to: windword

I do not know the motivation of the person that started the thread. Your opinion on that matter may or may not be true. Since I have no personal knowledge of this person's motivation, I will remain neutral on that issue. Now, on the actual subject matter of double standards, do you have an opinion? Are my examples valid or not? Would you be interested in providing other examples that you may find to be double standards? Personally, I think both sides use double standards and it is wrong to do so, by either side.

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: kellyjay

I did actually,

Actually, you didn't.
You did, however, show that the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples in San Francisco was done unlawfully.

unlawful
ʌnˈlɔːfʊl,-f(ə)l/Submit
adjective
not conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules.
"the use of unlawful violence"
synonyms: illegal, illicit, lawbreaking, illegitimate, against the law; More

www.oxforddictionaries.com...

so i proved my initial point

What was your intitial point? Because you haven't proven any kind of double standard, which is title of your thread; Pointing out the double standard.

try reading my post...but ill give you the cliff notes, gary newmore decided to break the law based on his opinion of what he felt was right and wrong, kim done the same....one is hailed a hero by the left for breaking the law, kim is villified by the left for doing the same thing....

Newmore accepted the law. Kim did not. What does that say?

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay
now im off to bed...good evening

That's actually a good idea. Maybe a reasonable idea may come to you. THIS just isn't coming to fruition. It's inane.

so inane you have been here what?...2 hrs now? lol

So what? I'm here everyday. That's all you've got? You can't deny the facts so you attempt a personal attack? Bwahahahaha.....

i dont need to "attack" anyone...i made my point

What point? You certainly haven't shown any kind of double standard.

I did actually, you just dont want to accept it....

No, no you didn't. Not in your wildest imagination!

your cognitive dissonance is showing

Did you get that from the Net? Do you even know what it means? Seriously man, I'd quit while I'm WAY behind. You proved that you had a semi-bogus issue that got blown out of the water. And yes, just because one tells themselves, "You're amazing Bob" turns out that Bob is wrong as hell.

you maintained throughout the post he broke no law, thus there was no double standard, i proved he did indeed break the law, thus my double standard claim stands, of course i know what cognitive dissonance means, are you attacking my intellect now? yet you claim i attacked you for pointing out the length of time you have been here after calling my thread "inane"....and you are a moderator? nice example you are setting

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: kellyjay

I did actually,

Actually, you didn't.
You did, however, show that the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples in San Francisco was done unlawfully.

unlawful
ʌnˈlɔːfʊl,-f(ə)l/Submit
adjective
not conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules.
"the use of unlawful violence"
synonyms: illegal, illicit, lawbreaking, illegitimate, against the law; More

www.oxforddictionaries.com...

so i proved my initial point

What was your intitial point? Because you haven't proven any kind of double standard, which is title of your thread; Pointing out the double standard.

try reading my post...but ill give you the cliff notes, gary newmore decided to break the law based on his opinion of what he felt was right and wrong, kim done the same....one is hailed a hero by the left for breaking the law, kim is villified by the left for doing the same thing....

Newmore accepted the law. Kim did not. What does that say?

kim being in jail plays no role whatsoever in my comparisson....so is a moot point

a reply to: Khaleesi

I'll provide an answer.

A double standard entails two identical situations resulting in different outcomes. For example, a man an a woman of equal expertise, in the same job, receiving different incomes.

It does not apply in this case.

In the manner that there is any similarity in the cases, the outcomes were the same. A court order was issued to cease. The similarity ends there. In one, the order was complied with. In the other it was not.

The other argument is that public opinion is displaying a double standard. It isn't, in both cases there were vocal contingents in favor and against the positions taken.

No double standard.

originally posted by: kellyjay
....and you are a moderator?

The death knell of a destroyed argument. That's all you have.....again? My points stand. Do you have anything else?

a reply to: kellyjay

kim being in jail plays no role whatsoever in my comparisson

So what does?
Public response?
In both cases, both were both villified and lauded for their actions.

originally posted by: Khaleesi
a reply to: windword

I do not know the motivation of the person that started the thread. Your opinion on that matter may or may not be true. Since I have no personal knowledge of this person's motivation, I will remain neutral on that issue. Now, on the actual subject matter of double standards, do you have an opinion? Are my examples valid or not? Would you be interested in providing other examples that you may find to be double standards? Personally, I think both sides use double standards and it is wrong to do so, by either side.

i have already claimed in the post that both sides use double standards, i also gave other examples of double standards in the initial post, the point of this post is the current double stardard regarding kim using religion as her reason for not issuing marraige liscences.

My opinion is that your opinion doesnt trump the law, and that she should have issued them, or stepped down from her post, but that it should apply to ALL and not just some depending on public opinion

a reply to: kellyjay

I think a huge double standard comes from Cruz and Huckabee and others who have sided with the woman in Kentucky.

All of them are ignoring the rights of the individual to marry (self-determine) and are working with the assumption that it is the role of government to determine if a couple should wed.


But to the OP, all politicians are hypocrites.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: kellyjay

kim being in jail plays no role whatsoever in my comparisson

So what does?
Public response?
In both cases, both were both villified and lauded for their actions.

Ive been through this already with you, if you need it reiterated to you, feel free to peruse my response from earlier when we covered this.