It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kim Davis... Gay Marriage... Religious Freedom Restoration Act... Reasonable Accommodations...

page: 16
8
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

Me too


I'm smart enough to know I don't know everything, and to know that I cannot learn if I don't talk and listen to others. Everyone knows some of the same things, but also other things I never even knew was "a thing." Sometimes I hear something or see something that means one thing to me at the time, but months or even years later, something happens and that one thing takes on a whole new significance. I actually love when that happens.

It's funny how the older you get the more you realize that you don't know!




posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: Boadicea

i know but i'm trying to cut off this confrontation before it balloons out of control.


Good on you! I hope it's not already too late.


business documents between people in love, are not "marriage" verifications (in christianity), even if the state has mistakenly called them that. marriage verification happens between the two people in love and god. not between the two people in love and the state.


Why is that so clear to us but not others??? Marriage is not a piece of paper or a ring. When my hubby and I were married, this was part of the ceremony... that we were "married" in our hearts, minds and souls -- and therefore before God -- when we committed to each other. The ceremony was to declare and celebrate our union with our loved ones, but for all intents and purposes, we were already married in deed and in spirit.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Well, hopefully i'm still considered young (23) so i have a lot to learn!



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

You're a spring chicken! Or a fresh rose bud sparkling with morning dew! Whatever you prefer!!! (I prefer the rose bud, but that may just be me)

I just hope you always keep your heart and your mind open and you can always be young. I have far more days behind than before me, but I figure as long as I know there is always "more" out there for me, I cannot be old.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

From various conversations I've had today, I've come to believe that the object is to get out Bunning's courtroom.

I don't blame them at all. As it turns out, this is one of the times we can truthfully say, "It's Bush's fault." I had forgotten about this guy getting appointed. Here's just a snippet from Wiki:

en.wikipedia.org...




Bunning was nominated by President George W. Bush on September 4, 2001, to a seat on the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, which was vacated by William O. Bertelsman. On December 10, 2001, representatives of the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary testified before the United States Senate Committee of the Judiciary for the ABA's majority opinion that Bunning was unqualified for the position of a Federal District Court Judge due to his age of 35, a lack of complex civil case experience as a federal attorney, and his "middle-of-the-class law school" experience at the University of Kentucky.[3] He was confirmed by the United States Senate on February 14, 2002, and received his commission on February 19, 2002.[2]


He is known as "Judge Bumbling" or "Judge Baseball" in the circuit. Daddy got him a good job before leaving office!



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt

And that adds to the conspiracy doesn't it.

We need to see a complete timeline on the Davis "case" starting with what she did or didn't do the day the SCOTUS ruled back in June, as well as what others involved did or didn't do.

We need to see if any published timeline is missing anything.




posted on Sep, 14 2015 @ 02:16 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Good luck with finding one put out by media that makes any sense.
I do know that she began writing to legislators quite some time before this was even close to a decision. I would assume, since she knew the system, she included the governor, attorney general and the librarian in her correspondence.
Several legislators have confirmed that her concern certainly didn't begin on the day the ruling was handed down. People who work in key capitol offices have confirmed that she made her concerns known long before any lawyers showed up. I have no idea when the group representing her contacted her. That would be interesting to know.




top topics



 
8
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join