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: 19
69
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
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???





There are laws against all of the things that you have mentioned, and I would support those laws through my own moral beliefs. I should have made clear my thoughts were between consenting adults. The gov't has made marriage a legal contract with all kinds of financial and legal benefits and therefore should be available to all consenting adults.




posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

Let's hope they do try and prevent her from being arrested so that the trigger happy police force can put these "Oathkeepers" 6 feet deep.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe
oh as far as all the bribes that they have to encourage people to marry, ya, I don't feel that they are appropriate either. quite frankly I think that married people in alot of ways are put in a disadvantage now.
and well when it comes to hospital visitations, why is it that the hospitals feel the need to deprive us of our rights to chose who should be visiting us anyways. I mean, what if I would rather have a non-family member with me instead, or making my healthcare decisions if I for some reason can't.

so well, isn't it more like they have deprived us of some rights and then decided to give them back, kind of, if we only get married?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ObjectZero

That's the problem. County clerk is an elected position that requires impeachment to remove her from office. So unless they grow a pair and impeach her she will remain in office.


Yep, that is the thread killer!

Unfortunately... I don't see any pairs in office.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
so, here's a question for yas....

what if a police officer, or heck the chief of police has the same belief that pat robertson has:

www.youtube.com...

and well feels that he has no place interfering with a man's authority over his wife, or his responsibility to physically discipline her when he feels the need. should the whole town just tolerate it, since the chief is only acting on his religous belief, he feels that it would be wrong to keep the husband from hitting his wife. it's his right, no it is his responsibility!!! did the legislators when they wrote laws making spousal abuse illegal defy the separation of church and state and thereby infringe on the cheif's right to act according to his conscious? should he be fired for not arresting the guy, or well shall we mess around trying to accommodate him while wives across the city are beaten?


Excellent analogy. It comes down to the same principle of a person hired to do a job yet refusing to do it because of their "sincerely held religious beliefs".



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:40 PM
link   
*i am not a Christian*
When Kim Davis took this job, she was a religious nut then too, but then not only did she not have to put her name on a document that married to homosexuals, it was probably illegal to do so. So things changed? So I'd life...but she is standing strong with her religious beliefs. She was voted into office by the people of the city, let them vote her out if that is the majority opinion in the state.
If I was that big of a Christian, I wouldn't do what is against my God...however her rights are not as "right" as the folks needing the marriage license. Religion, politics and sexual orientation. What better to have a safe conversation over.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: BubbaJoe
oh as far as all the bribes that they have to encourage people to marry, ya, I don't feel that they are appropriate either. quite frankly I think that married people in alot of ways are put in a disadvantage now.
and well when it comes to hospital visitations, why is it that the hospitals feel the need to deprive us of our rights to chose who should be visiting us anyways. I mean, what if I would rather have a non-family member with me instead, or making my healthcare decisions if I for some reason can't.

so well, isn't it more like they have deprived us of some rights and then decided to give them back, kind of, if we only get married?



Well most people dont write and notorize these things before they happen. So if you cant speak and you have a hospital stay the default goes in effect. Its complicated legally and the marriage lets the non genetic family member have rights. Same with estates. You dont write a will and you die in a car accident well the estate wont transfer. Uncle scam sucks it up.
The accumulation of property and end of life are big issues that can be helped by making contracts before hand. The liscense from the state should be that. If they just called it some legal contract word everyone would be okay. Since Christians can be very superstitious the word marriage is the problem for them. They dont care about other religions religous freedom at all.

The funny part is Atheists are using this law to put up statues of "satan" to say F U...churches are getting to smoke pot etc. The christians who support things like this are too small thinking to see that is what happens when you legislate this crap. It means I can say I worship satan get the church recognized by having good lawyers and start pushing my beliefs in public and at work.

I feel ripped off being agnostic. I wish I could impose my beliefs on the public...but they arent radical enough to make anyone mad. In fact i defend both rational sides all the time.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:00 PM
link   

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


religiously speaking, the state doesn't. all the state is doing is providing a legal document between consenting adults. mrs./ms. davis is giving it more power than it actually has. it's a secular event, not a divine event. the state can't perform a divine event.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: undo



mrs./ms. davis is giving it more power than it actually has. it's a secular event, not a divine event. the state can't perform a divine event.


That is a very very good answer. Hopefully Kim Davis' supporters will read this and start to understand.

Star for you.




posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hr2burn
*i am not a Christian*
When Kim Davis took this job, she was a religious nut then too, but then not only did she not have to put her name on a document that married to homosexuals, it was probably illegal to do so. So things changed? So I'd life...but she is standing strong with her religious beliefs. She was voted into office by the people of the city, let them vote her out if that is the majority opinion in the state.
If I was that big of a Christian, I wouldn't do what is against my God...however her rights are not as "right" as the folks needing the marriage license. Religion, politics and sexual orientation. What better to have a safe conversation over.


She can't deny other peoples rights by forcing her belief on them.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:23 PM
link   
Apparently, this just happened.




The Rowan County clerk’s legal team, from the right-wing organization Liberty Counsel, filed an emergency appeal Friday seeking to delay the requirement that her office issue the licenses, the Associated Press reports. The filing, with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, argues that since the same-sex couples who sued Davis over her decision to cease issuing marriage licenses to any couples, gay or straight, received their licenses from Davis’s deputies in her absence, her office should not be required to grant any more once she returns to work — which she is expected to do Monday. www.advocate.com...



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien

yeah, and if she's a christian, then she would also know that pastors, priests, clerics, are not performing the actual divine event either, they are just performing a ceremony for public consumption and providing the legal documentation for the state. the divine event takes place in the hearts and minds of the two individuals, which jesus explains when he refers to the issue of divorce and adultery.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Great more cost to the public, whats our tax payers bill at currently and can we send it to her?



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

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: Annee

Great more cost to the public, whats our tax payers bill at currently and can we send it to her?


I would like the Federal Government to "throw the book at her" - - use her as an example - - and set a precedence.

Because she is not the only one.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

HAHAHA...

Let's see if the appeals court grants that request. I have a feeling that Liberty Counsel is going to be SOL.



The court has already ordered that she cannot interfere with her deputies filing for others.

Which order will stand? I am betting on the judge's order.
edit on 11-9-2015 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi

Which order will stand? I am betting on the judge's order.


Actually, I'm betting on the money.

I think she'll cave to keep her job.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

What I was saying is that I bet the judge's order will stand and the appeal will be dismissed.


As far as her caving to keep her job I am not so sure because she seems to be fairly unintelligent. I think she will do whatever her lawyers tell her and the firm that represents her are self interested and known for creating martyrs then abandoning their clients.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Annee

What I was saying is that I bet the judge's order will stand and the appeal will be dismissed.



Yes, yes.

I think I'm just getting tired of this and want it over.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide
Well, I still have an outstanding traffic ticket that have been fighting for the last two years. Where are the OathKeepers when I need them?

Where are you in my time of need?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Hefficide

Here's the thing Heff, let me ask a couple of hard questions - because I think perception is very important in this instance.



I'll try?




Q: How many American citizens are of the same mind-set as Ms Davis and the oath keepers - throw a figure at me?


Well 39% opposed, 55% in favor of.. www.pewforum.org...




Q: How many NON-Americans are of the same mind-set as Ms Davis and the oath keepers - throw a figure at me?


Not sure but do know they behead folks in Iran for the same and ISIS has been proud to publish youtube vids of them tossing purported gays off the tops of buildings?


Q: In your opinion, is the Bible the word of God?

No..It's a doc written and edited by the Roman Catholic Church to wield power.


Q: In your opinion, did Jesus exist?

Yes.



Q: In your opinion, other than government recognition, how important is the issuing of a marriage licence to 2 people who genuinely love each other?


Extremely..as long as they excluded from the same rights and recognitions offered everyone else...it means everything. Put another way, lets say the US gov decides you are less of citizen and due less rights than everyone else..Is that some irrelevant slight?


Evidently, all questions are totally related.


Frankly I don't see the relevance in most of your questions..just being honest.





edit on 11-9-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
69
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join