In other news, Rowan County Kentucky Clerk of the Court, Kim Davis, has been ordered to jail for failure to issue marriage licenses as ordered by the court, and was told she'll remain there until she complies with the ruling. :yes:
She needs to resign if she can't fulfill the duties for her elected duties.
She does need to resign. The governor will not call a special session of the state legislators due to this being a cost to taxpayers. She is no authority on marriage as she has been married (4) times and had twins by her third husband while married to her first husband. She gives the rest of us Kentuckians a bad name. 120 counties in Kentucky and 117 are issuing licenses with no problems.
Quote from: Purplelady1040 on September 03, 2015, 03:09:26 PM
She does need to resign. The governor will not call a special session of the state legislators due to this being a cost to taxpayers. She is no authority on marriage as she has been married (4) times and had twins by her third husband while married to her first husband. She gives the rest of us Kentuckians a bad name. 120 counties in Kentucky and 117 are issuing licenses with no problems.
married (4) times and had twins by her third husband while married to her first husband. ????WOW!
Can she spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e?
Everyone will be in agreement on this until the Hawk shows up. :razz: :biggrin:
Quote from: Locutus on September 03, 2015, 04:14:37 PM
Everyone will be in agreement on this until the Hawk shows up. :razz: :biggrin:
Are you talking about me??? :spooked: Naw, I'm with you guys on this. She signed up for the job. It is the LAW. Nothing here to argue about as far as I am concerned. :no:
Quote from: Bo D on September 03, 2015, 03:45:27 PM
married (4) times and had twins by her third husband while married to her first husband. ????
WOW!
Can she spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e?
That she is. I am sure when she became an authority on marriage after all that. But she is of the adage that the slate is wiped clean all the time when one has sinned. LOL. I guess her idea of a slate being wiped clean and mine are totally different!
My father and I were having a discussion about this, not so long ago. He is 87, health is not great and has always considered him a religious man but he said it wasn't no one's place to decide if a man and a man should marry or a woman and a woman. I was surprised and shocked to hear him say that because I have always had the adage that I didn't care but never said a word to him. If he can feel this way, why can't others?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 03, 2015, 05:02:18 PM
Are you talking about me??? :spooked: Naw, I'm with you guys on this. She signed up for the job. It is the LAW. Nothing here to argue about as far as I am concerned. :no:
;D
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 03, 2015, 05:02:18 PM
Are you talking about me??? :spooked: Naw, I'm with you guys on this. She signed up for the job. It is the LAW. Nothing here to argue about as far as I am concerned. :no:
There is hope! :biggrin:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 03, 2015, 05:02:18 PM
Are you talking about me??? :spooked: Naw, I'm with you guys on this. She signed up for the job. It is the LAW. Nothing here to argue about as far as I am concerned. :no:
LMAO!
NOW you're talking out of the other side of your mouth.
Here's what you were saying previously when it concerned the stupid Indiana legislation:
http://theunknownzone.dailynuisanceproductions.com/index.php?topic=19185.390
Indiana's Religious Freedom Legislation
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 17, 2015, 07:22:11 PM
Wow! We are still on two different wave lengths.....NOBODY CAN DISCRIMINATE!!!!!!!!
But we all have our rights to not participate, even business owners, in anything that goes against their sincere belief. Nobody has yet to turn away someone from their business strictly because they didn't like them......THAT is discrimination......why is this hard to follow?
Just as in the stupid Kim Davis crap, when it comes to public accommodation, your personal beliefs have to be left at home.
The big difference in my opinion....she is elected to do a job. Part of that job is to issue marriage license.
In a private business.......people should have that right to practice their own religious beliefs. If a person doesn't like it, they can go to another business. In this case, there is no other business....Kim Davis IS the elected person to do a particular job.
She needs to resign if she doesn't believe it to be right....THAT is part of her job.
I'm sick of everybody trying to defend her. It black and white. She is wrong.
I do not see this as any attack against Christianity. In the case of the Pizza joint.....it WAS an attack on Christianity.
Two completely different scenarios.
NOPE!
That's your problem, you want to claim apples and oranges when it all apples.
Public is the legal keystone here - public accommodation - everyone has the right to be treated equally when it comes to public accommodation.
Kim Davis is required to accommodate the public just like anyone in business is required to do. No one forces anyone to become a public entity and open a business to the public - which then requires public accommodation. You can stay private keep all your lil' private hatreds, prejudices, superstitions, and authoritarian personality traits to yourself - which is exactly what you have to do if you open a business or enter elected office etc..
When you attempt to insert your peccadilloes into public accommodation you are deliberately forcing them on others - being an authoritarian.
Can you read?
Quote from: Y on September 10, 2015, 05:01:40 PM
NOPE!
That's your problem, you want to claim apples and oranges when it all apples.
:yes:
Henry Hawk, is he justified in not doing his job?
Quote from: AbbyTC on September 13, 2015, 04:43:08 PM
Henry Hawk, is he justified in not doing his job?
If a person is a Christian Scientist he would not become a pharmacist so that particular situation would not happen.
Quote from: AbbyTC on September 13, 2015, 04:43:08 PM
Henry Hawk, is he justified in not doing his job?
First of all, I'm not sure if that cartoon is true or not.........but, I'm not sure ANY pharmacist will be in business very long if they don't fill prescriptions.....so, I really don't see a problem here....
Kind of a stupid point you are making if you ask me.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 14, 2015, 08:08:24 AM
First of all, I'm not sure if that cartoon is true or not.........but, I'm not sure ANY pharmacist will be in business very long if they don't fill prescriptions.....so, I really don't see a problem here....
Kind of a stupid point you are making if you ask me.
Does not matter if it is a true situation or not; for if it isn't it soon will be.
Secondly, most pharmacists these days are not working for their own business, but rather for a corporate conglomerate that owns the chain of stores they work for. Just like everyone else. These entities long won the war against the independent pharmacists within most, if not all major cities in this nation. The lone hold-outs, if any, exist within rural small town America. And even their days are numbered as the health insurance industry continues to mandate the purchase of all maintenance prescriptions via a mail order pharmacy. I doubt many privately owned pharmacies are surviving on antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory and other types of infection(s) and pain killers. And if they are they are just one pill-head induced robbery from ruination.
So the point is indeed a very valid one. You are Joe/Jane pharmacist working for Dopers Are Us Corporation, presented with this scenario. What is the answer?
Forget the Christian Scientist. You are hard line Christian and have been presented with a legal prescription for an at home abortion inducing compound. What is the answer?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 14, 2015, 08:08:24 AM
First of all, I'm not sure if that cartoon is true or not.........but, I'm not sure ANY pharmacist will be in business very long if they don't fill prescriptions.....so, I really don't see a problem here....
Kind of a stupid point you are making if you ask me.
Not really. It just shows the stupidity of people who work in the public sector (whether a government employee, a business owner, or an employee) and want to discriminate against others because of their religious beliefs. Why is it ok to discriminate if it's a business that you own or work for, but not ok if you're a government employee?
All she had to do was allow someone else in the office to issue the licenses who didn't have a problem with it rather than quit issuing them altogether. They need to start going after the sanctuary city mayors next.
Quote from: me on September 15, 2015, 01:19:33 AM
All she had to do was allow someone else in the office to issue the licenses who didn't have a problem with it rather than quit issuing them altogether. They need to start going after the sanctuary city mayors next.
They can't go after her mayor. He or she has nothing to do with laws that are state or federal.
Quote from: me on September 15, 2015, 01:19:33 AM
All she had to do was allow someone else in the office to issue the licenses who didn't have a problem with it rather than quit issuing them altogether.
That isn't entirely true. She has claimed that any license issued without her name on it is invalid.
"Their license had Davis' name removed and the words "pursuant to federal court order" added to it. She questioned the validity of licenses issued without her authority, but the governor and the county attorney have said that licenses issued to gay couples by the deputies will be valid."
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-says-she-wont-stop-deputies-marriage-n426836 (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-says-she-wont-stop-deputies-marriage-n426836)
Only something like this stupid action, it could only happen in Kentucky. :music1: :guitarist: :music1: :boohoo: :music1: A little drum roll. :drummer: :groan:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 11, 2015, 07:59:55 AM
Can you read?
Your problem is the same as the rest of the uneducated hicks in this country - you don't have clue, and won't acknowledge, this country's government is based upon Rights and the Rule of Law and NOT on religion or any other of your insipid RW stupidity of the masses.
IF you remember, you're one who is ALWAYS leaning on the logical fallacy of Appeal to Popularity and thinking just because lots of idiots like you agree on some piece of ignorance and stupidity that's the way it should be - regardless if it violates anyone else's rights or the rule of law.
The founders of this country did their damnedest to form a government that avoided a pure democracy and the rule of the mob because - in their foresight - they knew there would be lots of idiots like you who would just as soon have tyranny of the masses as as opposed to a government respecting human rights and the rule of law.
That you have no use for what the founders managed to do has been obvious from you for years. You and your ilk are as anti-american as the day is long, as evidenced by your continuous support of ideology, propaganda, and maniacs bent on violating the basic tenets this country was founded on. You can't be content simply having your freedom, you want to control everyone else's.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it! :razz:
:biggrin:
I think Alzheimers may be setting in on you my friend.... :razz:
You pretty much just make up things you assume I stand for, then lash out with all sorts of name calling crap.... :no:
You have NO clue to what I stand for or what I believe.....you just stereotype you thoughts about people and go at it.
I will give you a sample in your style,
You say "You can't be content simply having your freedom, you want to control everyone else's." .... but YOU are in favor of Gun Control, the "fairness doctrine", tons and tons of regulations, taxes upon taxes to control the masses.....
Seems to me YOU want to control everyone and not simply enjoy our freedoms... ;)
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 15, 2015, 05:01:42 PM
.... but YOU are in favor of Gun Control...
"HAH!" (TM)
I admit I'm in favor of gun control. It's a public safety issue, ergo a public health issue.
First off, let's start with the Constitution, because that's always the jumping off point for gun nuts.
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
That phrase of the Second Amendment can be interpreted as the right of the States to organize well REGULATED militia's and the right of those people in those militias to bear arms shall not be infringed.
Another interpretation can also be what constitute 'arms'. Arms could be limited to spears, swords, and knives without infringing on the spirit of the Second Amendment.
Now my idea of gun control is to eliminate any sort of automatic/semi-automatic weapon. That in itself would tend to eliminate most 'mass' killings - yeah, I know you can carry multiple revolvers but it's not as easy as using semi-autos. Doing that still won't reduce anyone's ability for self-protection or hunting.
It's as I've pointed out before, you either accept that there are Second Amendment limitations or there aren't. IF you accept there aren't, then you accept the idea that your neighbor et al can have WMD's and nuke your sorry arse. :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on September 15, 2015, 04:13:12 PM
Only something like this stupid action, it could only happen in Kentucky. :music1: :guitarist: :music1: :boohoo: :music1: A little drum roll. :drummer: :groan:
Not all from Kentucky support this clerk as a matter of fact most don't. She by no means speaks for most people of Kentucky who feel she needs to go. She was given a job to do and if she refuses than she should go! She just wants her 15 minutes of fame and is using her religion to make a point. Problem is that anyone who has been married (4) times and had kids by her 3rd. husband while still married to her first is no authority on marriage. Religion wrapped in bigotry is still bigotry and that is all she is, plain and simple!
I wonder if the voters of Rowan County will oust her ass next time. She's not up for another 3+ years. That's plenty of time for them to develop amnesia as to what's happened, and vote her back in. After all, that office has been in her family for decades now.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 15, 2015, 05:01:42 PM
.... but YOU are in favor of..the "fairness doctrine"...
I don't know why you RW morons ever had a problem with the Fairness Doctrine because it insured your ridiculous stupidity was given air time. Really, I do know...it's because you're authoritarians and can't stand hearing anything that shows and refutes your insanity. :biggrin:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine
The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced.
Quote from: Locutus on September 15, 2015, 05:57:49 PM
I wonder if the voters of Rowan County will oust her ass next time. She's not up for another 3+ years. That's plenty of time for them to develop amnesia as to what's happened, and vote her back in. After all, that office has been in her family for decades now.
They could but I think the Governor may have the legislators when they convene in January decide to remove her. He didn't want to call a "special" session as it would cost the taxpayers extra. Time will tell!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 15, 2015, 05:01:42 PM
.... but YOU are in favor of...tons and tons of regulations...
Capitalism must be highly regulated else it benefits the few to the detriment of the many.
You RW idjits refuse to face the fact that Capitalism is simply one economic system and can be corrupt and destructive without proper regulation for the benefit of the ENTIRE society.
Quote from: Purplelady1040 on September 15, 2015, 06:03:36 PM
They could but I think the Governor may have the legislators when they convene in January decide to remove her. He didn't want to call a "special" session as it would cost the taxpayers extra. Time will tell!
Do the legislators have that authority under KY law?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 15, 2015, 05:01:42 PM
...taxes upon taxes to control the masses.....
First, taxes are the dues we pay to have a society.
The problem with taxes is the problem with the lack of regulation of Capitalism. Those with the money and power write the code and the laws either directly or through corrupt influence.
Just remember, you support that through your stupid support of the 'We Corporations Are Really People' decision - based on your ridiculous religious fol-del-rol. :razz:
:biggrin:
Quote from: Locutus on September 15, 2015, 06:08:56 PM
Do the legislators have that authority under KY law?
According to what I've read they do. The Governor doesn't, but the Legislature does have the authority to impeach her.
Quote from: Y on September 15, 2015, 06:12:27 PM
According to what I've read they do. The Governor doesn't, but the Legislature does have the authority to impeach her.
Unfortunately, I would bet that a large number of those selfsame legislators agree with her position. That would make impeachment unlikely.
Quote from: Locutus on September 15, 2015, 06:14:51 PM
Unfortunately, I would bet that a large number of those selfsame legislators agree with her position. That would make impeachment unlikely.
I hope not. These religious nutcases need to be shown this country is NOT governed by ANY of their religious insanity.
Quote from: Locutus on September 15, 2015, 06:08:56 PM
Do the legislators have that authority under KY law?
Yes, the legislators do have that authority and the Governor will have to accept what decision they come up!
Quote from: Locutus on September 15, 2015, 06:14:51 PM
Unfortunately, I would bet that a large number of those selfsame legislators agree with her position. That would make impeachment unlikely.
I can't say but some of the legislators feel she is wrong and should abide by the law! A couple of the legislators were asking public opinion on their Facebook accounts and many were speaking out against the clerk!
Quote from: Y on September 15, 2015, 06:17:24 PM
I hope not. These religious nutcases need to be shown this country is NOT governed by ANY of their religious insanity.
I couldn't agree more.
I posted this on another thread about "religious freedom" and it's just as apropos here as it was there. Just substitute "issuing a marriage license" for "selling a wedding cake."
Quote from: Locutus on April 03, 2015, 11:11:25 AM
It is just as wrong, from a civic and legal perspective, to deny selling a wedding cake to a gay couple as it was to deny people of color the right to sit at the same breakfast counter. Religious beliefs, if they are bigoted and oppressive, cannot be "legalized" in a country which values human dignity and in which universal human rights are the cornerstone of the whole system of justice.
Exclusion of LGBT persons, on the basis of one's religious belief, is another example of religion being used for bigotry and exclusion in a country which promotes equality and inclusion. Our laws should not permit that. Inside the church walls, or inside the walls of your own home, you can say whatever you want to about your beliefs about another person's lifestyle, orientation and/or sinfulness and damnation. But you cannot force them, in the legal community and in society, to drink from a different water fountain, or to go to a different bakery.
It really is just that simple if you think about it.
Quote from: Locutus on September 15, 2015, 06:22:55 PM
I couldn't agree more.
I posted this on another thread about "religious freedom" and it's just as apropos here as it was there. Just substitute "issuing a marriage license" for "selling a wedding cake."
Excellent!
Quote from: Y on September 15, 2015, 06:17:24 PM
I hope not. These religious nutcases need to be shown this country is NOT governed by ANY of their religious insanity.
:yes:
Quote from: Y on September 15, 2015, 05:48:11 PM
"HAH!" (TM)
I admit I'm in favor of gun control. It's a public safety issue, ergo a public health issue.
First off, let's start with the Constitution, because that's always the jumping off point for gun nuts.
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
That phrase of the Second Amendment can be interpreted as the right of the States to organize well REGULATED militia's and the right of those people in those militias to bear arms shall not be infringed.
Another interpretation can also be what constitute 'arms'. Arms could be limited to spears, swords, and knives without infringing on the spirit of the Second Amendment.
Now my idea of gun control is to eliminate any sort of automatic/semi-automatic weapon. That in itself would tend to eliminate most 'mass' killings - yeah, I know you can carry multiple revolvers but it's not as easy as using semi-autos. Doing that still won't reduce anyone's ability for self-protection or hunting.
It's as I've pointed out before, you either accept that there are Second Amendment limitations or there aren't. IF you accept there aren't, then you accept the idea that your neighbor et al can have WMD's and nuke your sorry arse. :biggrin:
You can regulate 'til the cows come home and it won't keep the guns out of the criminal's hands. They don't go through the proper channels to obtain a gun.
Y,
First of all, my mistake. I pretended for a moment that I gave a hoot what you think..........I screwed up and broke one of my own rules, that being not to engage with you on political or religious issues. It is pointless.
Secondly, I have not taken any time to read your responses, so you wasted MORE of your time. I don't care what your thoughts are me or my ideology. It means nothing.
I know I am right about my thoughts and beliefs or I wouldn't believe this way. I KNOW for a fact your thoughts are wrong. It is that simple and really nothing to discuss.
If you want to talk about non-political stuff, lets do it. :yes:
Quote from: Locutus on September 15, 2015, 06:14:51 PM
Unfortunately, I would bet that a large number of those selfsame legislators agree with her position. That would make impeachment unlikely.
I disagree. There are not many that are supporting her. This in my opinion is not even worth arguing about....she is 100% wrong. I think she should be fired (if that means impeachment then do it.) She SHOULD step down if she if she had any integrity. I can respect someone who is willing to give up a great salary for their beliefs. Even if I don't agree with them...it takes integrity to do such a thing.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2015, 07:56:59 AM
I disagree. There are not many that are supporting her. This in my opinion is not even worth arguing about....she is 100% wrong. I think she should be fired (if that means impeachment then do it.) She SHOULD step down if she if she had any integrity. I can respect someone who is willing to give up a great salary for their beliefs. Even if I don't agree with them...it takes integrity to do such a thing.
They can't fire her as she is an elected official. They can only remove her from her position when the legislatures meet in January.
Quote from: me on September 15, 2015, 11:14:03 PM
You can regulate 'til the cows come home and it won't keep the guns out of the criminal's hands. They don't go through the proper channels to obtain a gun.
Did you even notice I said 'eliminate'? You do know what that means, don't you? :razz:
:biggrin:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2015, 07:52:25 AM
Y,
First of all, my mistake. I pretended for a moment that I gave a hoot what you think..........I screwed up and broke one of my own rules, that being not to engage with you on political or religious issues. It is pointless.
Secondly, I have not taken any time to read your responses, so you wasted MORE of your time. I don't care what your thoughts are me or my ideology. It means nothing.
I know I am right about my thoughts and beliefs or I wouldn't believe this way. I KNOW for a fact your thoughts are wrong. It is that simple and really nothing to discuss.
If you want to talk about non-political stuff, lets do it. :yes:
Your response here simply proves what I've been saying about you for a decade or more.
You are an ideologue and don't care a whit that you're shown to be wrong over and over again throughout the years. Facts, evidence, truth, and logic mean absolutely nothing to you.
"I know I am right about my thoughts and beliefs or I wouldn't believe this way" is the most ridiculous comment I think I've ever seen. That comment should show you just how totally messed up your 'thought processes' (and I use that term very lightly) are.
"It has to be true 'cause I done thunk it!" That's truly the thought of the year! :rotfl:
Quote from: Y on September 21, 2015, 04:13:22 PM
You are an ideologue and don't care a whit that you're shown to be wrong over and over again throughout the years. Facts, evidence, truth, and logic mean absolutely nothing to you.
"I know I am right about my thoughts and beliefs or I wouldn't believe this way" is the most ridiculous comment I think I've ever seen. That comment should show you just how totally messed up your 'thought processes' (and I use that term very lightly) are.
You have to wonder if people who say things like this know how stupid they sound? "I already know everything (well, everything except how to correctly conjugate the most basic verbs in the English language) so there is nothing more to learn."
Holy Shit! Kim Davis is up for Time's Person of the Year. :eek:
Quote from: AbbyTC on December 03, 2015, 11:28:28 PM
Holy Shit! Kim Davis is up for Time's Person of the Year. :eek:
I wish she would go away. She is an embarrassment to Kentucky.
Quote from: AbbyTC on December 03, 2015, 11:28:28 PM
Holy Shit! Kim Davis is up for Time's Person of the Year. :eek:
You can see why I don't take TIME any more. :yes: :haha: