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.

 

Kentucky: Oath Keepers Say They Will Protect Kim Davis From The Law

page: 18
69
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

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?


Or a catholic who wont give a marriage liscence to a previously divorced couple.a


Questions like this have been asked over and over across multiple threads, and the KD supporters refuse to answer them, because then it would expose their own bigotry. Bigotry is fine until someone calls you out on it, and you have no answer other than an imaginary friend in the sky that many don't believe in, or believe in a different one.




posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:05 PM
link   
It`s very simple really, if all public servants are allowed to violate the laws and disregard portions of their job duties based on their individual religious beliefs we will have chaos. Imagine if a muslim police officer only enforced the laws that fit with his religious beliefs,or a soldier, or a politician or a judge etc who only obeyed the laws that fit with their particular interpretation of their religious beliefs.
There is a reason the founding fathers created laws and courts,to avoid this exact thing from happening.without laws that everyone has to abide by we would have anarchy.
protecting people who violate the laws is grounds for aiding and abetting criminal misconduct.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:10 PM
link   
I don't get it. This story implies you still has her job? How can she not be fired?

I'm probably one of the most anti-Christian members of ATS but I don't agree she should have been imprisoned. She should have been fired. In any job if you don't do it properly you get fired. I don't understand why this didn't happen. A roadsweeper doesn't go to prison if they refuse to sweep a certain road. Makes no sense to me.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Variable

I'm pretty sure she's not a conservative and is a declared democrat...unless you mean in just the sense of religion and not political party

Graffik



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Logman
I don't get it. This story implies you still has her job? How can she not be fired?

I'm probably one of the most anti-Christian members of ATS but I don't agree she should have been imprisoned. She should have been fired. In any job if you don't do it properly you get fired. I don't understand why this didn't happen. A roadsweeper doesn't go to prison if they refuse to sweep a certain road. Makes no sense to me.


She is an elected official and can only be impeached by the Kentucky legislature which is not in session again until January. I think they are only in session 30 - 60 days a year.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Logman

If the president doesn't do his job what happens? He is impeached etc... He's not simply fired right? Same applies to this clerk because she was elected. Hope that clears this up.

Graffik



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe

Beat me to it!!!
Darn this second line



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Logman
I don't get it. This story implies you still has her job? How can she not be fired?

I'm probably one of the most anti-Christian members of ATS but I don't agree she should have been imprisoned. She should have been fired. In any job if you don't do it properly you get fired. I don't understand why this didn't happen. A roadsweeper doesn't go to prison if they refuse to sweep a certain road. Makes no sense to me.


She is an elected official and can only be impeached by the Kentucky legislature which is not in session again until January. I think they are only in session 30 - 60 days a year.


They are going to have to call an emergency session which again will cost the very poor state even more money.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   
I think the state shouldn't have this much control over marriage in the first place



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Logman
I don't get it. This story implies you still has her job? How can she not be fired?

I'm probably one of the most anti-Christian members of ATS but I don't agree she should have been imprisoned. She should have been fired. In any job if you don't do it properly you get fired. I don't understand why this didn't happen. A roadsweeper doesn't go to prison if they refuse to sweep a certain road. Makes no sense to me.


She is an elected official and can only be impeached by the Kentucky legislature which is not in session again until January. I think they are only in session 30 - 60 days a year.


They are going to have to call an emergency session which again will cost the very poor state even more money.


Not to mention none of the members of the legislature want to speak against her, might make them very hard to be re-elected in what is a very conservative state. I am thinking the governor has no desire to be re-elected, and thus is not forcing the special session to expose the legislature to the public condemnation.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe
the sheriff that would refuse to allow his deputies to arrest abusive husbands because well, it's their right, no, it's their duty to physically discipline their rebellious wives and keep them in line.

the amish dmv worker who refuses to issue driver's licenses

the teacher who refuses to teach the girls because he believes they don't need a quality education like the boys do, she should be home learning to cook, clean, sew, ect.

the islamic dog catcher who refuses to handle dogs....

the new agey superintendent of the department of public works who refuses to allow his workers to mow the parks because well, it causes those poor blades of grass pain and therefore it shouldn't be done!

we can't bend over backwards every time someone has a belief, and we can't decide which ones are worthy and which ones are not.
we have to accept the validity of all of them.
all we can do is do our best to try to accommodate them within reason.
this I believe was done with the court clerk, but to say that the only acceptable option is that no licenses will be given out in the county is not within reason. if you accept that then aren't you kind of discriminating a whole danged county by denying them a service that every other county has simply because they live in a county who's county clerk has a "belief".











edit on 11-9-2015 by dawnstar because: don't know why I am confusing county and coutry as much as I am...



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Basically people that dont' understand anything LOL



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: BubbaJoe
the sheriff that would refuse to allow his deputies to arrest abusive husbands because well, it's their right, no, it's their duty to physically discipline their rebellious wives and keep them in line.

the amish dmv worker who refuses to issue driver's licenses

the teacher who refuses to teach the girls because he believes they don't need a quality education like the boys do, she should be home learning to cook, clean, sew, ect.

the islamic dog catcher who refuses to handle dogs....

the new agey superintendent of the department of public works who refuses to allow his workers to mow the parks because well, it causes those poor blades of grass pain and therefore it shouldn't be done!

we can't bend over backwards every time someone has a belief, and we can't decide which ones are worthy and which ones are not.
we have to accept the validity of all of them.
all we can do is do our best to try to accommodate them within reason.
this I believe was done with the court clerk, but to say that the only acceptable option is that no licenses will be given out in the county is not within reason. if you accept that then aren't you kind of discriminating a whole danged county by denying them a service that every other county has simply because they live in a county who's county clerk has a "belief".


Exactly, and these are the questions the KD supporters refuse to answer.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure
I think the state shouldn't have this much control over marriage in the first place


Agreed. It should be a a civil union or some legal term for estates and such for everyone. The marriage part should be personal. Go to a church or a field or 20 leagues under the sea after you get your tax paperwork. Who cares what the state calls it as long as everyone gets the same deal.

Marriage isnt owned by the abrahamic faiths. Most of the founders were deist and pantheist by their own writing. They were heavy on philosophy of locke, spinoza, and roseau.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Logman
I don't get it. This story implies you still has her job? How can she not be fired?

I'm probably one of the most anti-Christian members of ATS but I don't agree she should have been imprisoned. She should have been fired. In any job if you don't do it properly you get fired. I don't understand why this didn't happen. A roadsweeper doesn't go to prison if they refuse to sweep a certain road. Makes no sense to me.


She is an elected official and can only be impeached by the Kentucky legislature which is not in session again until January. I think they are only in session 30 - 60 days a year.


They are going to have to call an emergency session which again will cost the very poor state even more money.


Not to mention none of the members of the legislature want to speak against her, might make them very hard to be re-elected in what is a very conservative state. I am thinking the governor has no desire to be re-elected, and thus is not forcing the special session to expose the legislature to the public condemnation.


Yeah he has rejected a motion or two of hers...



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure
I think the state shouldn't have this much control over marriage in the first place


I will agree with this and add, there are a lot of things that I think the government should have no control over, because they affect no one except the parties involved. There are other things that affect the general public, that I am all in favor of. The feds don't scare me, local government, city or county scares the living hell out of me.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Logman
I don't get it. This story implies you still has her job? How can she not be fired?

I'm probably one of the most anti-Christian members of ATS but I don't agree she should have been imprisoned. She should have been fired. In any job if you don't do it properly you get fired. I don't understand why this didn't happen. A roadsweeper doesn't go to prison if they refuse to sweep a certain road. Makes no sense to me.


A roadsweeper is not elected. They are hired by the city, county, town, state to do a job. She was elected. There is a process that must be taken to "fire" an elected individual.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe

so, you don't mind if I trade my 13 year old daughter for a nice sum of money and a nice vacation home on the beach to be this rich old guy's fourth wife?
or is cousin joe and cousin jane get married and have a few little ones?
or if one of my sons decides he wants a couple wives?

the gov't does have legitimate reasons to get involved in marriages and try to regulate them. and weather or not a religion was involved in the marriage doesn't matter, a marriage is a marriage.

evern hear of a covenant marriage.

en.wikipedia.org...

I don't think they had that much success with them, but well, I find myself wondering, would they obtain the same goal that they were striving for with the covenant marriages by claiming marriage as being in religion's domain and the state shouldn't be involved in it???



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:01 PM
link   
I didn't realise she was an elected official. Thanks for clearing that up as I was a bit puzzled.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Wait wait wait.. so sh e denied two STRAIGHT COUPLES too? SO how is this DISCRIMINATION?



new topics

top topics



 
69
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join