BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Califbill

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 9/4/15 2:01 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 9/4/15 1:36 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 9/4/15 11:22 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 09:29:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/3/15 10:59 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 21:34:04 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/3/15 8:42 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 19:53:00 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

I noticed that the news did not show any pictures of the straight
couples who could not get a license there. I suppose they just drove
15 miles down the road to the next county seat.

Because the clerk in their county refused to do her job, and keep her
damned religion out of it.

So you admit this was just a political protest, not an actual
hardship.
I still say that as long as she did not issue any marriage licenses at
all, she may have a case, for whatever the motive might be.

I'm not admitting anything of the sort. What is the matter with your
processing?

Maybe if your answers were more responsive, it would make more sense.
This was clearly a political protest because there were no straight
couples protesting and they were locked out too.
They arranged cameras to be there when a gay couple came up to the
counter in a clearly staged event.
If this is what you are referring to my statement is clearly relevant.

BTW I would not be shocked if this couple never got married. It is
like the handicapped, would be, stripper who forced the case of a
wheelchair accessible titty bar stage. Once they put it in, she never
came back Not one time,.
There are just some professional protesters. I guess it is a living

I have no knowledge of whether it was "clearly a political protest" and
neither do you. Davis was elected to do the job of the clerk, which
includes issuing marriage licenses. If she has some moronic religious
reason preventing her from doing that, she should resign. This is not a
country in which the christian taliban rule, and while she is entitled
to believe whatever she wants, she cannot use those beliefs to determine
whether she will issue marriage licenses. She was found in contempt of
court.

Bull****
Who arranged to have the TV station there?

It is very possible that there may not be any marriage licenses at all
in Kentucky since the law that defines the way they are issued has
been ruled unconstitutional. There is no federal law that defines the
marriage process either.

I think I'll defer to the jurisdiction of the federal judge in this
matter, even though you think you know more about the issues and laws than he does.

Federal judges have overstepped their jurisdiction before.

So you think a civil official ought to be able to use his or her
superstitious religious beliefs to make office policy, eh?

Nope, but I also think it is a state offense and problem, not Federal. I
still support States Rights, like the founding fathers did.

You might want to read the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment,
among other documents.

The only humor I find in this is the clerk's marriage and pregnancy
history. It's quite colorful and demonstrates her hypocrisy about her
alleged religious beliefs.

Conflicting laws. Where in the 14th does it fit?