Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is about religious beliefs and the use of force to make people do it. THAT is what the entire issue is about. Doesn't surprise me you missed it though. Guess the words were to "quick" for you.
Because police always enforce that law right?
Waiting for you to describe a law having to do with religious beliefs and the use of force to make people do it. THAT is what the entire issue is about. Doesn't surprise me you missed it though. What did the founders have to say about that?
Do you think all whites wanted Jim Crow and none wanted to serve blacks through the front door?
You see, once again we've got a member of the falsely testifying crowd trying to cloak their own repulsive Jim Crow on others because they want government to run others lives.
I don't care if gays marry. I do care when government uses force to make people accept that belief even when it's against their religious beliefs and no ones rights have been violated. Why yes government is so moral, lets let them use force and coercion even though no ones rights have been violated. Keep trying Jimmy.
Have someone read to you slowly what the founders thought about religious persecution.
1. She got her job before the law changed.
2. Kentucky wasn't going to change that law.
3. Her religious beliefs prohibit it.
You have no thought process and your posts are dishonest. You're lost because you have to lie about what I believe while YOU miss the point.
"There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call the Twilight Zone."
Kim Davis is being forced to marry same sex couples, against her religious beliefs, in order to keep her job. That part isn't voluntary.
Presumably her religious beliefs would also forbid issuing a license to someone who had previously been divorced, as Jesus spoke specifically about that (he didn't say anything about homosexuality), yet I suspect she has never had a problem issuing marriage license to previously-divorced people...in fact, she didn't have a problem getting divorced HERSELF, multiple times.
A private company, of course I do. For any reason. The cab is their property, no one has a right to anothers property.
Taxis almost always operate under the permission of a city or county ordinance. So no, a taxi driver cannot deny service to just anyone they please. There may be limited situations in which they may refuse service, but those are outline in local ordinances.
I can answer that. I lived in Kentucky for over 20 years. The locals are registered democrats but most local politicians are more republican in their ideas. They keep up being democrats for the financial aid they get but if you look at their national voting records they go red, red, red.
Since when does anyone get financial aid just for being a registered Democrat? I don't recall ever seeing "political party" on a financial aid application?
Considering the fact there is over whelming proof of homosexuality and zero proof of a "god", kick the fool to the curb and get a person to do the job that will respect the rights of our citizens as provided by the laws of the land.
The SCOTUS has ruled that marriage is a fundamental right guaranteed to all citizens. I suggest you learn what rights are.
Another way of looking at this is: who here would agree that government employees have a "right" to pick and choose what established laws, rules and regulations they wish to comply with? Who really wants to grant the government such power?
A private company, of course I do. For any reason. The cab is their property, no one has a right to anothers property.
Private companies do not operate in a vacuum. They are chartered under the auspices of the local, state, and federal regulations and as a result are subject to regulations that private citizens do not have to adhere to.
The SCOTUS has ruled that marriage is a fundamental right guaranteed to all citizens. I suggest you learn what rights are.
Another way of looking at this is: who here would agree that government employees have a "right" to pick and choose what established laws, rules and regulations they wish to comply with? Who really wants to grant the government such power?
Yes, see: Loving v. Virginia (1967) … This is not a new thing ...
The remarriages have nothing to do with the issue at hand. I support Kim Davis, and I admire her for doing what the Southern state governors should have done, defied this unconstitutional court edict. What should have happened is mass red state disobedience. Look at all the trouble one woman is causing by defying this court order. We could have stopped the whole thing cold if conservatives lined up, dug in and just said NO! The federal government would have then had two choices, respect the 10th amendment and states rights, or use force upon the southern states. My guess is they would have caved in. Kim Davis should be governor of Kentucky.
No. You and those governors do not have the right to defy the Supreme Court. And if they had, I would hope that they would all be serving time. Hard time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.