That doesn't explain why Joe Arpaio in Arizona has been elected 6 times.
I said it once and I'll say it again: we need fewer elected officials in this country. There are certain positions that should be immune to public opinion, and county clerk is one of them.
I was referencing this particular situation But I totally agree that certain positions (including county clerk) should not be elected. Just referencing why elected officials occur in Kentucky/the South. ETA: arizona was also claimed as a CSA territory during the War so I wouldn't be surprised if certain elements are similar in historical background to some extent. BUT I know nothing about Arizona history/politics so can't really comment.
I was referencing this particular situation But I totally agree that certain positions (including county clerk) should not be elected. Just referencing why elected officials occur in Kentucky/the South. ETA: arizona was also claimed as a CSA territory during the War so I wouldn't be surprised if certain elements are similar in historical background to some extent. BUT I know nothing about Arizona history/politics so can't really comment.
Her job is to follow the LAW, not her faith. If her faith takes higher precedence in her point of view, she can find a new job. I don't see how this can be debated.
Mark 12:17.
And Romans 13.
"1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."
Her job is to follow the LAW, not her faith. If her faith takes higher precedence in her point of view, she can find a new job. I don't see how this can be debated.
Mark 12:17.
And Romans 13.
"1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."
Yes. I know. I am Christian. But I don't take it to work in ways that strip others of their legal rights. If she want to only have to work within the confines of her religious views, she should work for Christian organization.
"1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."
Yes. I know. I am Christian. But I don't take it to work in ways that strip others of their legal rights. If she want to only have to work within the confines of her religious views, she should work for Christian organization.
Uh. Methinks you misunderstood the verses.
Mark is "Render unto Caesar". And Romans is all about "Submission to Governing Authorities" - Meaning that bitchlady is subject to the laws of the land and the government BECAUSE those things are of God.
In other words, I agree with you. And was using the Bible to point out BitchLady is a hypocrite, like all fundamentalists are.
Yes. I know. I am Christian. But I don't take it to work in ways that strip others of their legal rights. If she want to only have to work within the confines of her religious views, she should work for Christian organization.
Uh. Methinks you misunderstood the verses.
Mark is "Render unto Caesar". And Romans is all about "Submission to Governing Authorities" - Meaning that bitchlady is subject to the laws of the land and the government BECAUSE those things are of God.
In other words, I agree with you. And was using the Bible to point out BitchLady is a hypocrite, like all fundamentalists are.
Sorry. I did misread them. That being said, I am sure Christians could find scripture to justify her behaviour.
Mark is "Render unto Caesar". And Romans is all about "Submission to Governing Authorities" - Meaning that bitchlady is subject to the laws of the land and the government BECAUSE those things are of God.
In other words, I agree with you. And was using the Bible to point out BitchLady is a hypocrite, like all fundamentalists are.
Sorry. I did misread them. That being said, I am sure Christians could find scripture to justify her behaviour.
Yes, she could.
And that's why there's nobody more heretical than a fundamentalist.
I'm Team BITCH GET YOU ANOTHER GOT.DAYUM.JOB. Gone over there and work for the pastor at Hateful Baptist Church of Spiteful Ass People where Rev. Salty presides as head pastor.
As we noted earlier this evening, U.S. District Judge David Bunning has ordered Kim Davis and her attorneys to explain to him why he should not hold her in contempt of court.
Davis, along with all her deputy clerks, Thursday morning at 11:00 will appear before him to face contempt charges requested by the ACLU, who represent the four couples that sued Davis.
Davis, an Apostolic Christian, and her Liberty Counsel attorneys tonight managed to come up with a rather interesting defense for Davis' continued refusal to obey a U.S. District Judge, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court: her "compliance is factually impossible."
Davis' lawyers cite legal precedence. Where "compliance is impossible, neither the moving party nor the court has any reason to proceed with the civil contempt action."
That's their goal, to end the compliance proceeding, and this legal language is what they hope will convince Judge Bunning to let her continue to hold onto her job, stay out of jail, not be fined, and continue to use her religious beliefs to evade the law and discriminate against LGBT people.
"The court’s power to impose coercive civil contempt is limited by an individual’s ability to comply with the court’s coercive order. A party may defend against a contempt by showing that his compliance is factually impossible."
Note that last part: "compliance is factually impossible."
The filing continues. Davis, it states, "is unable to comply with the August 12, 2015 order" — which directs her to issue marriage licenses to all couples — they claim, "because it irreparably and irreversibly violates her conscience by directing her to authorize and issue SSM licenses bearing her name and approval."
They also claim "Davis should not be held in contempt because it will violate her due process rights," because she has brought suit against the Governor of Kentucky.
Why?
She claims his statement to all county clerks — over whom he has no direct authority — telling them they should do their jobs and issue marriage licenses to couples regardless of gender, violated her First Amendment rights.
Why are Davis and her Liberty Counsel attorneys doing all this?
Post by lyssbobiss, Command, B613 on Sept 3, 2015 5:23:51 GMT -5
Man, I wish someone in Rowan County would claim that their religion mandates that they follow around people with Jesus hair and four marriages with like dumpy tuba music.
"This prick is asking for someone here to bring him to task Somebody give me some dirt on this vacuous mass so we can at last unmask him I'll pull the trigger on it, someone load the gun and cock it While we were all watching, he got Washington in his pocket."
Post by jeaniebueller on Sept 3, 2015 10:51:45 GMT -5
Mike Huckabee was on MJ this morning discussing this and Joe pointed out the ridiculousness of him attacking Hillary for not following "the law" and policy relating to her e-mail account, yet being in full support of this clerk who is outright defying a supreme court opinion. LOL
Post by Dumbledork on Sept 3, 2015 11:27:06 GMT -5
I stumbled into an NPR interview with some author that lives in that area. It was half over when I caught it, but he said something that helped restore a little faith in Kentucky.
It was something like "The fact is, she's getting paid to do a job that she's not doin. I think you'll find that most people in Kentucky are hard-workers that feel that if you're getting paid to do a job, you either do it, or you stop getting paid."
Mike Huckabee was on MJ this morning discussing this and Joe pointed out the ridiculousness of him attacking Hillary for not following "the law" and policy relating to her e-mail account, yet being in full support of this clerk who is outright defying a supreme court opinion. LOL
Mike Huckabee was on MJ this morning discussing this and Joe pointed out the ridiculousness of him attacking Hillary for not following "the law" and policy relating to her e-mail account, yet being in full support of this clerk who is outright defying a supreme court opinion. LOL
Did he have a response?
I believe he claimed that the supreme court decision wasn't actually a law so she's not actually breaking a law.
Well, she was going to be a martyr no matter what the judge did (fines vs. jail time), and he couldn't exactly do nothing.
Yeah, I don't give a good goddamn that this woman is considered a martyr by anyone. We can't let our concern for someone else feeling righteous or vindicated stand in the way of dealing with this woman's flagrant violation of, well, just about everything.
So can those couples go right now to the office and get a license? Is the judge that can issue licenses ready to compile or are we going to have to do this whole show over again with a new person?
I just found out a friend of mine is from this area and she is displeased with Kim Davis' behavior. My friend is fairly religious and still cannot believe what Kim Davis is doing.
she believes that she is “a vessel God has chosen for this time and this place.”
She also claims that “this is a heaven or hell issue for me and for every other Christian that believes,”
Chosen. Special. On a mission. My beliefs are more beliefy than your beliefs.
Yup, yup. Sounds about right.
I REALLY dislike her use of the Esther quote (you were made for such a time as this) That book of the bible rocks and has so much to say and her misuse of it is making me even more pissed at her.