Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clerk Who Won't Issue Marriage License to Gay Couples Has Been Married 4 Times

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Star Trek references!

    I’m often irrelevant. It confuses people.

    Comment


    • #47
      Someone loses ALL their nerd cred.

      Let all Oz be agreed;
      I need a better class of flying monkeys.

      Comment


      • #48
        Honoring her religion, does she have an issue granting marriage licenses to applicants who aren't virgins?
        This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

        Stan Reid

        Comment


        • #49
          Is it a rule in Christianity that you have to be a virgin? widows and widowers can remarry.

          Actually, though, if I'm remembering my letters of Paul, isn't the Christian ideal not to marry at all? Maybe she shouldn't be giving anyone licenses.

          Comment


          • #50
            Faulkner

            She's working on her 15 minutes of fame for a religion she barely believes in but she can get on the web & get ATTENTION. I call bs seeker.
            From Voltaire writing in Diderot's Encyclopédie:
            "One demands of modern historians more details, better ascertained facts, precise dates, , more attention to customs, laws, commerce, agriculture, population."

            Comment


            • #51
              I think St Paul held up abstinence as the ideal, but countenanced marriage as a second best.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Robert View Post
                I think St Paul held up abstinence as the ideal, but countenanced marriage as a second best.
                That he did.

                I so wish I'd listened.
                G U T

                There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Spent some time today reading comments from religious conservatives and found out something I never knew. Apparently when the Supreme Court issues an opinion it is simply that, just an opinion. Something along the lines of Tom Cruise was completely miscast in his last movie and as such it carries no weight of law and can be completely ignored if one chooses. Who knew? I bet Al Gore will be pissed when he finds this out.

                  c.d.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by c.d. View Post
                    Spent some time today reading comments from religious conservatives and found out something I never knew. Apparently when the Supreme Court issues an opinion it is simply that, just an opinion. Something along the lines of Tom Cruise was completely miscast in his last movie and as such it carries no weight of law and can be completely ignored if one chooses. Who knew? I bet Al Gore will be pissed when he finds this out.

                    c.d.
                    Actually, it's more like when the Pope is and isn't infallible. The Pope isn't infallible when he talks about whether or not Tom Cruise was completely miscast.

                    This is typical of current conservative thinking-- all opinions are equally valid, whether one has studied a topic for decades, or one is dirt-ignorant on practically everything, and can't even spell GED. It's a weird perversion of all people being equal. The Supreme Court opinions are special because these are supposed to be among the most learned legal experts in the country, and balanced between conservative and liberal leanings, as well as examined by other learned people who represent the populace, for agendas and hidden biases. You can throw a dart at the back of the constitution, and a Supreme Court justice can tell you what is on the other side.

                    Most people in the US can't tell you what the first ten amendments are, let alone what is in the body of the constitution. Heck, most people somehow think the first amendment means that private organizations have to give a forum to anyone who demands it.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      I also love how these "patriots" feel Jesus trumps the Constitution... ANYONE who believes that, or acts in a way that they do ( AkA Rubio or Huckabee... who I can't believe really believe it, but will pretend they do to cater to the far FAR right zealots and crazies... no not all conservatives are crazy... but when you go so extreme... well let's face it.. you are crazy!!), anyway, anyone who acts this way should be forbidden for running for public office, as they just proved that the constitution and the law mean nothing to them.....it's almost like these folks are so excited to read and talk about their 2nd amendment (almost to the point of perversion in some cases... it is really creepy) that they skip right over the 1st amendment....

                      I'm not a Christian so I don't claim to speak for Christians... but if I were.. I would really hope by now my "savior" would have come back just to smack around these loonies and say " who the hell are you to speak for me....I NEVER said the things you claim I said, I don't believe in hatred and intolerance...but you hate and you discriminate in MY NAME...time for my Dad to go all Old Testament on your asses!!!!!"

                      Steadmund Brand
                      "The truth is what is, and what should be is a fantasy. A terrible, terrible lie that someone gave to the people long ago."- Lenny Bruce

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Steadmund Brand View Post
                        time for my Dad to go all Old Testament on your asses!!!!!"
                        Just so you know, that's a really offensive thing to say to Jews.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          No offence was meant by any means (especially being born Half Jewish) but then again... it doesn't apply to Jews as it is him talking to "Christians" using his name.....everyone else would be left alone....

                          reminds me of an Old Comedy album called " You Don't Have to be Jewish " from the 1960's....there is a skit where a Jewish man goes to heaven and get's to speak to God, and he asks, " are we the chosen people?" God tells him yes, they are the chosen ones... to which he replies " well then would you mind chosing someone else for once???" ...great album.. I believe Lou Jacobi was the man in that skit.

                          Steadmund Brand
                          "The truth is what is, and what should be is a fantasy. A terrible, terrible lie that someone gave to the people long ago."- Lenny Bruce

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Steadmund Brand View Post
                            No offence was meant by any means (especially being born Half Jewish) but then again... it doesn't apply to Jews as it is him talking to "Christians" using his name.....everyone else would be left alone....

                            reminds me of an Old Comedy album called " You Don't Have to be Jewish " from the 1960's....there is a skit where a Jewish man goes to heaven and get's to speak to God, and he asks, " are we the chosen people?" God tells him yes, they are the chosen ones... to which he replies " well then would you mind chosing someone else for once???" ...great album.. I believe Lou Jacobi was the man in that skit.

                            Steadmund Brand
                            I remember that album. Jack Gilford was also in it.

                            That view about the limits of Supreme Court opinions is as old as 1832. That year the Court upheld the claims of the Cherokee Indians to huge tracts of lands in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee, that had been illegally seized and sold by state governments (especially in Georgia). Andrew Jackson, supposedly a huge nationalist, should have approved of this triumph over state powers, but he hated Indians. He is reputed to have said, "John Marshall has given his opinion. Now let him enforce it!" The decision was never enforced, and soon the Cherokees and other tribes on the eastern side of the Mississippi River were forced to move to the western side (with thousands of dead as a result) along what became known as "the trail of tears".

                            Jeff

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Errata View Post
                              Well that's all just breathtakingly off topic. I apologize.
                              No, that was great! You have fascinating stories, Errata! Patch Adams would have approved of your hospital's take on humor, certainly.

                              Re the clerk Kim Davis, the judge released her with orders not to disobey the law about issuing marriage licenses, nor to interfere in them being issued by others in her office (previously she'd told her deputies not to give out licenses to same sex couples, as well). At least one deputy has promised to continue issuing them even if she says otherwise (which is a honorable move on his part, if you ask me), so it remains to be seen what will happen now.
                              Pat D. https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...rt/reading.gif
                              ---------------
                              Von Konigswald: Jack the Ripper plays shuffleboard. -- Happy Birthday, Wanda June by Kurt Vonnegut, c.1970.
                              ---------------

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Pcdunn View Post
                                No, that was great! You have fascinating stories, Errata! Patch Adams would have approved of your hospital's take on humor, certainly.

                                Re the clerk Kim Davis, the judge released her with orders not to disobey the law about issuing marriage licenses, nor to interfere in them being issued by others in her office (previously she'd told her deputies not to give out licenses to same sex couples, as well). At least one deputy has promised to continue issuing them even if she says otherwise (which is a honorable move on his part, if you ask me), so it remains to be seen what will happen now.
                                I bet she resumes being obstinate and disobeys the orders again. She has the mantle of martyrdom for her faith on her, and the adulation and support of these yahoos who believe earth is the real center of the universe, man was not descended from apes, and God actually wrote the Bible (Old Testament) through such instruments as Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc. She can afford to return to the prison again.

                                Besides, if she does follow the judge's order she can be labelled a hypocrite by those same yahoos. I don't think she wants to be.

                                Jeff

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X