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.
originally posted by: JohnFisher
TThat's how it was played off anyway. Everybody had the same right to marry. It just wasn't who they wanted to marry. People want to marry robots and children and animals and objects too. That's why marriage had to be defined. They redefined marriage on their own accord. Now everybody still has the same right to marry, same as before, and it still isn't to whomever they want. That's legislation.
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
originally posted by: JohnFisher
Their true colors are red, white, and blue. While I may personally disagree with the oathkeepers doing this, their sentiment is a defiance to a legislative SCOTUS.
Then they're in defiance of something that didn't happen. SCOTUS didn't legislate anything. The Constitution did. Kenutcky, among other states, violated the 14th amendment, and the SCOTUS ruled that they can't do that...
originally posted by: luthier
originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
Sounds like if they get the first order dismissed, she won't have to follow it, so she can go back to acting JUST as she was before, NOT issuing licenses and NOT allowing her deputies to do so, because the judge had no jurisdiction to expand on the original order.
You explained it better than I could have, but that was my basic understanding as well. So like I said. Legal wrangling. Lets hope the courts don't fall for it.
Its not a case of if they fall for it or not. If there was a procedural error they have to concede and refile. The motion does not appear sound in any way from reading that side of it.
originally posted by: Klassified
originally posted by: luthier
originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
Sounds like if they get the first order dismissed, she won't have to follow it, so she can go back to acting JUST as she was before, NOT issuing licenses and NOT allowing her deputies to do so, because the judge had no jurisdiction to expand on the original order.
You explained it better than I could have, but that was my basic understanding as well. So like I said. Legal wrangling. Lets hope the courts don't fall for it.
Its not a case of if they fall for it or not. If there was a procedural error they have to concede and refile. The motion does not appear sound in any way from reading that side of it.
Sounds reasonable, but I'm never surprised at what happens with these kinds of cases.
originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: 727Sky
Then she needs to seek new employment if she will not do her job. Like i'm going to decide I'm not doing something at work and expect to remain employed..this is utterly ridiculous as this hypocrite is elected, being elected and not doing your job..nice work if you can find it. I guess her 80k a year has nothing to do with her convictions..if she really had any she would leave rather than defy the SCOTUS and the constitution..she is just a bigot..plain and simple.
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: 727Sky
But no, this particular judge threw her in jail as a show of force without warrant and without due process.
Funny how you left out the fact she went to court - and lost! Also the reason she was jailed is she defied a court order.
The Right Wing militant group called The Oathkeepers, with many members who are active duty or former military and law enforcement personnel, are coming to protect and defend Kim Davis from the law itself.
originally posted by: Patriotsrevenge
Our nation was founded under GOD and his laws.
This Once great nation will fall hard and be devastated for turning away from God.
Our nation was founded under GOD and his laws.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
originally posted by: Patriotsrevenge
a reply to: Hefficide
The Right Wing militant group called The Oathkeepers, with many members who are active duty or former military and law enforcement personnel, are coming to protect and defend Kim Davis from the law itself.
A law passed by Socialist judges who do not deserve to breath the same air as us. They do not follow the Constitution, they follow what Obama wants.
Our nation was founded under GOD and his laws. The only reason the religious freedom was put in the framing was all the people who founded the country had been persecuted tyrants who were protected by the Vatican.
Catholicism and England was what they wanted freedom from not GOD or Christianity as they all were Christians fed up with the Pope.
This Once great nation will fall hard and be devastated for turning away from God. If you cant see it happening before your eyes then you need to remove the blinders.
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: Patriotsrevenge
Our nation was founded under GOD and his laws.
Her laws actually, and exactly which "god"?
This Once great nation will fall hard and be devastated for turning away from God.
Again, exactly which "god"?
Our nation was founded under GOD and his laws.
The only reason the religious freedom was put in the framing was all the people who founded the country had been persecuted tyrants who were protected by the Vatican.
This Once great nation will fall hard and be devastated for turning away from God. If you cant see it happening before your eyes then you need to remove the blinders.
originally posted by: BubbaJoe
To all of those supporting her religious freedom.
If a militant catholic started firebombing evangelical protestant churches because they had broken from the one true faith, y'all would be ok with that?
This Once great nation will fall hard and be devastated for turning away from God. If you cant see it happening before your eyes then you need to remove the blinders.