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.

 

Full Interview: Kim Davis Talks To Megyn Kelly About Gay Marriage Licenses

page: 9
3
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

Only in interpretation

It will not stand up to time and reinterpretation

neither will marriage in general

you know the whole separation of church and state

marriage by definition is religious

civil union is the correct term that can stand up to interpretation




posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick





A little perspective on marriage
archive.azcentral.com...


Prehistoric - Marriage basically turns strangers into relatives, decreasing tribal tensions.

3,000 B.C. - Marriage first becomes the way the upper classes conclude business deals and peace treaties, cementing socio-political alliances. Ancient societies experiment with polygamy - and in the case of Egyptian royalty, incest among siblings - to forge strong bonds of civilization.

500 B.C. - Short-lived experiment in democracy in ancient Greece actually worsens the status of women. Love is honored - but among men only. In marriage, inheritance is more important than emotional bonds: A woman whose father dies without male heirs can be forced to marry her nearest male relative, even if she has to divorce her husband first.

Circa A.D. 550 - Emperor Justinian tries to enact a requirement for a wedding license, but the unpopular measure is revoked. (He, meanwhile, managed to get a law passed that allowed him to marry a "penitent" former actress, Theodora ).

A.D. 800 - Holy Roman Emperor Charlemagne outlaws polygamy. Germanic warlords, even baptized Christians, still acquire wives for strategic reasons.

900 - The Roman Catholic Church tries to require people to obtain the church's blessing of sexual unions, but is reluctant to thereby create millions of "illegitimate" children whose parents don't obey the edict. The church, however, wins a battle by denying royalty the right to divorce on a whim.

1000 - Catholic clergy are no longer allowed to marry. Upper-class marriages are often arranged before the couple has met. Aristocrats believe love is incompatible with marriage and can flourish only in adultery.

1200 - Common folk in Europe now need a marriage license to wed. Ordinary people can't choose whom to marry, either. The lord of one manor decrees in 1344 that all his unmarried tenants - including the widowed - must marry spouses of his choosing. Elsewhere, peasants wishing to pick a partner must pay a fee.


seems to me it wasn't that religious till the catholic church forced themselves into the mix!!! And well, you do really want to go back and wipe out all the redefining that has been done to marriage over time?



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

Marriage is not Religious...



All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


How do you Interpret that??



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Darth_Prime

marriage by definition is religious



I married a B flat to a C# earlier.

Guess I'm Hindu now.

Of good "conscience", too -- because neither of them were minorities.
edit on 26-9-2015 by DeadFoot because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Annee

she says on the video that she sent letters out to a bunch of people soon after she was elected. I'm taking her own words...
so well, I can't imagine that she didn't know of the possibility of this before she took her oath...



Well she is a believer and knows that anything is possible.

I do not think she should have forseen that the confused 9 would seek to break down the moral fabric of America.

Even annee was surprised.


What confusion? The 14th amendment is clear.

The outcome is what those fighting for equality expected.

My surprise was only that there was no "but", as has happened so many times.

Many SCOTUS decisions are a 5/4 split. I was curious. I looked it up a whike back.


edit on 26-9-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick

marriage by definition is religious



Marriage is a contract.

Only in the last 200 years has love & choice entered the picture.

The only difference is who arranges the contract.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

It is in the definition the term marriage includes religion yet the term civil union is not defined as marriage

one does not have to agree with my words for them to be true

believe what you wish



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

And your opinion is your opinion, but that doesn't make it right, and Marriage by Word is not Religious



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

during the times of slavery in america, it was often forbidden for the slave to get married without the owners permission. that didn't stop them, and well they took on the old african practice of jumping the broom. to them they were married, but to the civil laws of the time they were not, nor were any religion involved in these marriages. so well they don't fit either the your definition of marriage or civil union, although to the actual couple, they were married, in their hearts and in their minds, and most likely in God's eyes. it is God who joins two together, and there is no law, in religion or in civil law can prevent his will from happening when he decides to join two people together.
so I would say, no, religion does not define marriage!
two people are married when they both decide to commit themselves to each other in love.
civil law can be sought to acknowledge that marriage and religion and bless it, but the lack of either does not make it not a marriage!

and historically, you are wrong!



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: dawnstar

It is in the definition the term marriage includes religion yet the term civil union is not defined as marriage

one does not have to agree with my words for them to be true

believe what you wish



And once we wore animal skins and hunted with spears. Some societies still do.

But, societies evolve.

TODAY: Merriam-Webster



(1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law

(2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage (same-sex marriage)


edit on 26-9-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 12:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: dawnstar

It is in the definition the term marriage includes religion yet the term civil union is not defined as marriage

one does not have to agree with my words for them to be true

believe what you wish



When you say something that is actually correct then we might be compelled to believe it....

The word "marriage" means a very close relationship or union.

It doesn't even specifically mean two people getting married. It can be used in many different situations.

So... you're wrong; believe what you wish. You don't have to agree with facts for them to be true, you can say stupid stuff all you want.
edit on 27-9-2015 by DeadFoot because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 12:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: DeadFoot

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: dawnstar

It is in the definition the term marriage includes religion yet the term civil union is not defined as marriage

one does not have to agree with my words for them to be true

believe what you wish



When you say something that is actually correct then we might be compelled to believe it....

The word "marriage" means a very close relationship or union.

It doesn't even specifically mean two people getting married. It can be used in many different situations.


What the hell are you talking about?

Of course marriage has multiple meanings. Duh


But, that is not the subject of discussion on this thread of the word marriage.


edit on 27-9-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 12:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

If Kim got her way shopping would be like this.




posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Love it! THX.

As I've said in previous threads, my mom was disabled. This was long before the Disability Act.

If anyone thinks people treat people who are different (no matter the difference) with Equal Respect and Rights - - - they'd be wrong.

Laws are required so everyone has the same Rights.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   
dp
edit on 27-9-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 02:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
You walk into a Gun store and ask to buy a Gun, and the store owner Refuses because it goes against his "Morality".. what next?


Walk into a DMV and ask to get a drivers license. The clerk refuses to give you a license because it goes against their "morality", even though you have passed all requirements to get a drivers license. What next?

There's a BIG different between a government employee, and a private business. Government employees are hired to do a job for the people, and abide by the laws of the land, not operate a retail store. There's a huge difference and if you can't see that, then i feel sorry for you..



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 02:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Evil_Santa

Private businesses have to abide by the laws of the land too.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 02:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien

They do, but they have the freedom to turn away customers, which is different than a government entity issuing licenses that are required by law.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 02:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Evil_Santa




They do, but they have the freedom to turn away customers,

Not if the laws of the land prohibit them from doing so.
In no state does a business have the right to turn away customers based upon their gender, or race, or religion.
Unfortunately, in many states they still do have the right to do so based on sexual orientation. Fortunately, in many they do not.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 02:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Evil_Santa

Apparently Kim can deny the marriage licenses to gay couples. Sure she can be jailed for contempt of court but she can't be fired and certainly can't be fined and boycotted out of her office.




top topics



 
3
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join