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.
Sylvia Driskell, 66, describes herself as an ambassador of “God, And His, Son Jesus Christ [sic]” and will serve as her own lawyer in Driskell v. Homosexuals, NBC News reports. In her seven-page petition, written entirely in cursive, Driskell doesn’t reference any case laws for U.S. District Judge John M. Gerrard to consider, but she does quote the Bible and Webster’s Dictionary.
“I never thought that I would see a day in which our great nation or our own great state of Nebraska would become so compliant to the complicity of some people[’s] lewd behavior,” writes Driskell, who says “that homosexuality is a sin and that they the homosexuals know it is a sin to live a life of homosexuality. Why else would they have been hiding in the closet.”
Of course this won't go anywhere. But it seems like a pretty good representation of the "thinking" of many fundamentalists on the subject. If they COULD bring a suit like this, they would.
Of course this won't go anywhere. But it seems like a pretty good representation of the "thinking" of many fundamentalists on the subject. If they COULD bring a suit like this, they would.
I would like to point out that although we are in the same state, I've never met this woman. Were she in my church I would counsel her to be more loving, drop the case, and perhaps seek psychiatric help.
Of course this won't go anywhere. But it seems like a pretty good representation of the "thinking" of many fundamentalists on the subject. If they COULD bring a suit like this, they would.
ahahahaha Perhaps she can get Mike Huckabee to finance the suit.
Of course this won't go anywhere. But it seems like a pretty good representation of the "thinking" of many fundamentalists on the subject. If they COULD bring a suit like this, they would.
Oh, I know how this one is going to play out: the judge will issue a 'show cause' order, she'll trot out some biblical passages, the judge will say 'that's not cause for a lawsuit' and throw the case out, she'll get her 15 minutes of fame in the papers...
And she should be required to pay a fine and costs for a frivolous suit.
What I would like to know, is just who she thinks she is going to serve with papers for this suit. Every single [person that she thinks is a] homosexual in the country? That could add up, as the plaintiff would be responsible for the cost of service.
Of course this won't go anywhere. But it seems like a pretty good representation of the "thinking" of many fundamentalists on the subject. If they COULD bring a suit like this, they would.
Is she appealing for donations to her Fighting Fund?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zymer
And she should be required to pay a fine and costs for a frivolous suit...
That'd be good. If only fo the squeals about "persecution".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
I would like to point out that although we are in the same state, I've never met this woman. Were she in my church I would counsel her to be more loving, drop the case, and perhaps seek psychiatric help.
Well said, Vizza, This will be likely to make a few religious people think about just what religious -based claims they would support.
The mentality it represents to state "Murica", "Merka", etc...is subordinate to those that speak with that accent/slang.
I see it a lot. It always lowers the stock value of those that do. Funny though...I've never seen the Religious use that mocking, insulting, biased term (and variants) on this board. Telling.
Some people take exception to homosexuals. Some take exception to the Religious.
Tell ya what. How about we set the same rules for sexual orientation that we do for theological orientation? Ya know, given that they are both traits of "protected classes" that are able to be (and commonly are) switched-up. Traits that in no way compare to traits that can never change, like the race of ones parents, or where you were born.
How about we limit or allow the trait of homosexuality to exactly the same degree we do with Religion. And, of course, where these traits can be openly represented or even spoken of.
To be "fair and equal", you see.
It is telling that some think it is great when legal action is taken to limit Religious Proclivities...but get all bent when it is used against Sexual Proclivities.
Neither bother me. Hey...whatever ur into...go for it. Leave em both alone.
It's a pity Ms. Driskell never found the right woman and settled down.
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.
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.
