Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-09-2015, 02:40 PM
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
(25-09-2015 02:16 PM)pablo Wrote:  It's just a marriage license, there isn't a new specific same sex license that she needs to fill out, it's the same as any other.
The only difference is the way she sees it.

Or the way she sees the people she's giving it to...

like you said, the license is the same and the procedure is the same. The difference is that a previously ostracized demographic is now permitted to obtain the license, and she's all butt-hurt about it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like mediocrates's post
25-09-2015, 02:45 PM
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
She was jailed for contempt of court for failing to follow a lawful order. The court has every duty to judge the actions of the other two branches of government.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
25-09-2015, 02:46 PM (This post was last modified: 25-09-2015 02:55 PM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
(25-09-2015 02:40 PM)mediocrates Wrote:  
(25-09-2015 02:16 PM)pablo Wrote:  It's just a marriage license, there isn't a new specific same sex license that she needs to fill out, it's the same as any other.
The only difference is the way she sees it.

Or the way she sees the people she's giving it to...

like you said, the license is the same and the procedure is the same. The difference is that a previously ostracized demographic is now permitted to obtain the license, and she's all butt-hurt about it.

What she fails to understand is that her approval is neither needed nor wanted, what is important is her compliance. Nobody said she had to like her job, but she does have to follow the law; even if it changes in a way she doesn't agree with. If she opposes it on moral grounds, then she is free to quit her job; but her butt-hurt religiosity doesn't giver her the right to unilaterally defy a court, hence why she was jailed under 'contempt of court'.

Plus, she's a right cunt.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like EvolutionKills's post
25-09-2015, 02:55 PM
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
(25-09-2015 02:46 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  What she fails to understand is that her approval is neither needed not wanted, what is important is her compliance. Nobody said she had to like her job, but she does have to follow the law; even if it chances in a way she doesn't agree with. If she opposes it on moral grounds, then she is free to quit her job; but her butt-hurt religiosity doesn't giver her the right to unilaterally defy a court, hence why she was jailed under 'contempt of court'.

Plus, she's a right cunt.

Agreed. The correct course of action, IMO, would have been to resign. Maybe she could have applied for a job issuing hunting licenses or something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes mediocrates's post
25-09-2015, 02:57 PM
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTmBmNAj0jZ1VjUH9QWxBa...0OahHOSSXw]
And then I divorced my second husband because his penis was only this big.

(and I'm such a big cunt)...

signed

Kim Davis

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like onlinebiker's post
25-09-2015, 02:59 PM
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
(25-09-2015 02:55 PM)mediocrates Wrote:  
(25-09-2015 02:46 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  What she fails to understand is that her approval is neither needed not wanted, what is important is her compliance. Nobody said she had to like her job, but she does have to follow the law; even if it chances in a way she doesn't agree with. If she opposes it on moral grounds, then she is free to quit her job; but her butt-hurt religiosity doesn't giver her the right to unilaterally defy a court, hence why she was jailed under 'contempt of court'.

Plus, she's a right cunt.

Agreed. The correct course of action, IMO, would have been to resign. Maybe she could have applied for a job issuing hunting licenses or something.

But then gay people might want to go hunting. She could try working at a store checkout, but ***GAY PEOPLE MIGHT WANT TO BUY STUFF***

She's fucked whichever way you slice it. No longer free to practice her religious bigotry. What a poor, persecuted Christian.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like morondog's post
25-09-2015, 03:02 PM
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
(25-09-2015 02:46 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(25-09-2015 02:40 PM)mediocrates Wrote:  Or the way she sees the people she's giving it to...

like you said, the license is the same and the procedure is the same. The difference is that a previously ostracized demographic is now permitted to obtain the license, and she's all butt-hurt about it.

What she fails to understand is that her approval is neither needed not wanted, what is important is her compliance. Nobody said she had to like her job, but she does have to follow the law; even if it chances in a way she doesn't agree with. If she opposes it on moral grounds, then she is free to quit her job; but her butt-hurt religiosity doesn't giver her the right to unilaterally defy a court, hence why she was jailed under 'contempt of court'.

Plus, she's a right cunt.

What she fails to see is how irrelevant her faith is here. She is nothing but a paper pusher.
She isnt being asked to condone anything, she isn't being asked to perform or participate in any ceremony. Her views simply don't enter into the equation.
Just fill out the papers and file them Kimmy baby, the courts have made the moral decision for you. You're off the hook with god, now move along.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like pablo's post
25-09-2015, 03:05 PM
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
(25-09-2015 02:59 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(25-09-2015 02:55 PM)mediocrates Wrote:  ...could have applied for a job issuing hunting licenses or something.

But then gay people might want to go hunting. She could try working at a store checkout, but ***GAY PEOPLE MIGHT WANT TO BUY STUFF***

She's fucked whichever way you slice it. No longer free to practice her religious bigotry. What a poor, persecuted Christian.

I did say "could have" implying that that is no longer an option after blowing her religious spooge all over the media...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like mediocrates's post
25-09-2015, 03:10 PM
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
(25-09-2015 01:30 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Kim was not elected to issue same sex marriage licenses. She was elected to issue opposite sex marriage licenses. The requirement that county clerks issue same sex marriage licenses is a new one that was imposed after she was elected.

She was elected to do her job. She is not doing her job. The slavery issue was already raised up but would you be whining if it were a man refusing to give ballots to women after universal suffrage was passed? Or how about the civil rights act and a clerk refused to issue a marriage license to a mixed-race couple? You seem incapable of figuring this out.


(25-09-2015 01:30 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Now I have always maintained that the first amendment does not protect one from fulfilling their conditions of employment and still do.

The first amendment does not allow for the violation of the 14th. This has been explained to you several times by several people.

(25-09-2015 01:30 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The question I would like to pose is who is responsible for determining whether or not Mrs Davis is fulfilling her conditions of employment? Is it a judge? The governor, or the electorate?

The Supreme Court you retard. This has already been ruled on by the highest court. If she has a conscious objection to it, she only needed to hand in her letter of resignation. People do it all the time.

(25-09-2015 01:30 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The Judge doesn't have the power to remove her from office so it would stand to reason he/she isn't mandated with the task of determining if Mrs Davis is doing her job or not. That task belongs to the electorate and the state government who can impeach her.

The judge can't impeach her, you are right. It however, is well withing the judge's discretion whether to compel a government employee who is violating the law, to issue a ruling with caselaw as precedent should the case come before him.


PS. Please keep ignoring people. PLEASE. Eventually, you will ignore everyone and then perhaps you will fuck off. I forgive you for being a retard, you just happened to be on the shallow side of the gene pool.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
25-09-2015, 03:35 PM
RE: Kim Davis: It's not MY fault
[Image: kimd2.jpg]

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 12 users Like Commonsensei's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: