Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
08 21, 19, 08:13:33:AM

Login with username and password

The reason the Left is pushing this 'White Supremacist'
mantra is against the Right is because they are sooo
damned afraid of losing the Black Vote, that they have to Lie..

Search:     Advanced search
2189281 Posts in 247521 Topics by 302 Members
Latest Member: test
* Website Home Help Login Register
 |  All Boards  |  Moved Hot Topics  |  Topic: Kim Davis IN Custody for Contempt of Court 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 Print
Author Topic: Kim Davis IN Custody for Contempt of Court  (Read 5375 times)
Dan
Contributor
Sr. Member

Posts: 86701

Tolerance is a 2-way street


« Reply #264 on: 09 10, 15, 04:56:28:PM » Reply

Quote
see hawk, dan compares his personal discrimination to the legal laws about discrimination

See Hawk?  I was informing Wvit that not all discrimination is illegal.  Do you think he got it?

How about the other lesson I taught him, about the difference in discriminating against behavior and discriminating against people?  Do you think he understood that lesson?
1965hawks
Sr. Member

Posts: 26544


« Reply #265 on: 09 10, 15, 05:43:27:PM » Reply

Dan: She didn't discriminate. She treated everyone equally, Hawk.

Indeed she did, Dan. She treated everyone "equally" to avoid  issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples; her "equal" treatment--refusing to issue marriage licenses to all couples--made possible her discriminatory intent to deny issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

And, by the way, explain why Kim Davis didn't violate her oath by willfully taking the law into her own hands and making the personal choice not to issue marriage licenses to all persons who are legally entitled to receive a marriage license? And, in addition to that, explain how Davis can claim her religious belief justifies her violation of constitutionally guaranteed rights and prevents her from being held in contempt for refusing to obey a lawful court order to perform the duties for which she was hired to do?   
caserio1
Sr. Member

Posts: 89405


« Reply #266 on: 09 10, 15, 05:48:57:PM » Reply

youm doan know?

God tole her
1965hawks
Sr. Member

Posts: 26544


« Reply #267 on: 09 10, 15, 05:56:08:PM » Reply

Dan: See Hawk?  I was informing Wvit that not all discrimination is illegal.  Do you think he got it? How about the other lesson I taught him, about the difference in discriminating against behavior and discriminating against people?  Do you think he understood that lesson?

Let's see if you understand this, Dan? Now that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that same-sex marriages are legal in every state in this country, it's illegal for Kim Davis or any other governmental official to deny issuing a marriage license to eligible, same-sex couples under any circumstances. And if Davis chooses to follow the same course and interfere with the issuance of marriage licenses, as she did before, then there will be legal grounds on which to hold her in contempt again, and she will most likely be thrown in gaol again.
   
Jw2
Sr. Member

Posts: 38767


« Reply #268 on: 09 10, 15, 05:58:53:PM » Reply

anchoragedan doesn't let facts get in the way of his delusions.
1965hawks
Sr. Member

Posts: 26544


« Reply #269 on: 09 10, 15, 06:05:15:PM » Reply

Dan: Is that all you have are disgusting pathetic personal attacks, johniel?

Blame those personal attacks on your obstinate stupidity an ignorance, Dan, not on your opponents in this debate.
Dan
Contributor
Sr. Member

Posts: 86701

Tolerance is a 2-way street


« Reply #270 on: 09 10, 15, 06:06:47:PM » Reply

Quote
Indeed she did, Dan. She treated everyone "equally" to avoid  issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples; her "equal" treatment--refusing to issue marriage licenses to all couples--made possible her discriminatory intent to deny issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Wrong.  She issued marriage licenses to everyone who was getting married to an opposite sex partner, regardless of who they were.  That's why it's not discrimination.

Quote
explain why Kim Davis didn't violate her oath by willfully taking the law into her own hands

She didn't take the law into her own hands.  She didn't violate her oath.  She upheld the law she swore to uphold.

Quote
and making the personal choice not to issue marriage licenses to all persons who are legally entitled to receive a marriage license?

She issued licenses to all people who qualified under the law she swore to uphold.  She did not discriminate.

Quote
explain how Davis can claim her religious belief justifies her violation of constitutionally guaranteed rights

She violated nobody's constitutional rights.  The courts, however, violated HERS.

Quote
to perform the duties for which she was hired to do?

She did perform her duties to which she was hired to do.  Your problem is you want to hold her responsible for performing NEW duties to which she never agreed to do. If you want her to perform those new duties, offer a new contract.  If she declines, you have to pay the balance of her existing contract.
Dan
Contributor
Sr. Member

Posts: 86701

Tolerance is a 2-way street


« Reply #271 on: 09 10, 15, 06:07:41:PM » Reply

Johniel is delusional and filled with hate.
Dan
Contributor
Sr. Member

Posts: 86701

Tolerance is a 2-way street


« Reply #272 on: 09 10, 15, 06:09:47:PM » Reply

Quote
Blame those personal attacks on your obstinate stupidity an ignorance

I can't be held responsible for your stupidity and ignorance, Hawk.  That's on you.  Don't attack me because of your shortcomings.
1965hawks
Sr. Member

Posts: 26544


« Reply #273 on: 09 10, 15, 06:24:24:PM » Reply

Jw2: anchoragedan doesn't let facts get in the way of his delusions.

Jw2,

Haven't you noticed? Dan's delusional drivel is always based on his flawed logic, unsound reasoning, and (of course!) his playing fast and loose with the facts--to make them suit his fallacious arguments. Don't let the name change fool you. He's still anchoragedunce.
1965hawks
Sr. Member

Posts: 26544


« Reply #274 on: 09 10, 15, 06:34:46:PM » Reply

Dan: I can't be held responsible for your stupidity and ignorance, Hawk.  That's on you.

Every critical reader in this forum holds your stupid and ignorant ass responsible for the asinine bullshit you're wont to post here, Dan. That's on your delusional ass.


Don't attack me because of your shortcomings.

You're confused again, Dan. I've never attacked you on the pretense my shortcomings. No; I've always pointed out the stupidity and ignorance of your fallacious arguments and then proceeded to debunk them--much to my delight and to the delight of all the other rational discussants in this forum.

LOL
sine-qua-non
Sr. Member

Posts: 69761

This Little Piggi Gets Wee Wee'd Up All The Way Hm


« Reply #275 on: 09 10, 15, 06:49:24:PM » Reply

The only good news about the SCOTUS marriage decision !!!



By now, everyone on the planet knows that the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has rendered a decision to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide. In a landmark 5-4 decision, Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan ruled that states may not prohibit homosexual couples from getting "married." The reasoning of their decision was based on the 14th Amendment's "Due Process" clause.


Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy said, "Under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, no State shall 'deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.' The fundamental liberties protected by this Clause include most of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights."

Obviously, there is nothing in the Bill of Rights specifically about the right of homosexuals to "marry." But there is something in the Bill of Rights specifically about the right to keep and bear arms. Using the reasoning and conclusion of the Court's homosexual "marriage" ruling, states have absolutely no authority to deny recognition of concealed carry permits that have been issued in other states. In other words, if the 14th Amendment protects an unspecified right (same-sex "marriage"), it certainly protects a specified right (the right to keep and bear arms). And since some states recognize the right of citizens to openly carry firearms, this right should also be determined to be protected by the 14th Amendment.


If states must recognize driver's licenses (and now same-sex "marriage" licenses) issued in other states, it is now clear that they must also be required to recognize concealed weapon licenses issued in other states. 
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 Print 
 |  All Boards  |  Moved Hot Topics  |  Topic: Kim Davis IN Custody for Contempt of Court
Jump to:  

AesopsRetreat Links


AesopsRetreat
YouTube Channel


Build The Wall
Go FundMe Link



Rules For Radicals.



2nd Amendment Source



5 minute Education




Join Me at KIVA
My Kiva Stats


Truth About
Slaves and Indians




r/K Theory




White Privilege




Conservatives:
What Do We Believe


Part 1:
Small Govt & Free Enterprise

Part 2:

The Problem with Elitism

Part 3:
Wealth Creation

Part 4:
Natural Law



Global Warming Scam



Lend a hand


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP © AesopsRetreat
Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.067 seconds with 37 queries.