(07-08-2015 09:44 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 08:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I ask again, OK for cities to refuse issuing gay licensees? San Fran doesn't want to recognize illegals, other cities don't recognize their wedded.

Curious Paul, why are you seemingly always the first to introduce "the gay" into a thread?

Curious Tom, why are you seemingly always the first to imply that someone is either gay or a homophobe in a thread?

Cite one please. Thanks.

(07-08-2015 09:42 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't agree with this approach, and I think it will run afoul of the courts if it ever got that far.

What I do agree with is saying, if you want to be a sanctuary city, fine, but if you let someone go and he subsequently commits a crime, you are civilly liable to the victims. And I would extend that liability to include any person who voted in favor of sanctuary status in any proceeding where that was approved.

I think the voter liability issue is a non starter but I can see a path forward in states enacting statutes allowing municipalities to be subject to liability in these instances.

(07-08-2015 10:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:44 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 08:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I ask again, OK for cities to refuse issuing gay licensees? San Fran doesn't want to recognize illegals, other cities don't recognize their wedded.

Curious Paul, why are you seemingly always the first to introduce "the gay" into a thread?

Curious Tom, why are you seemingly always the first to imply that someone is either gay or a homophobe in a thread?

Cite one please. Thanks.

You mean IN ADDITION to this thread? There are plenty, I'm sure. I used the word "seemingly" just like you did, which I assume means you did no research into your claim.. it just SEEMS like you did..

Typical lib. This is just like the deflecting and asking for Romney's tax returns.

(07-08-2015 10:37 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 10:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:44 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 08:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I ask again, OK for cities to refuse issuing gay licensees? San Fran doesn't want to recognize illegals, other cities don't recognize their wedded.

Curious Paul, why are you seemingly always the first to introduce "the gay" into a thread?

Curious Tom, why are you seemingly always the first to imply that someone is either gay or a homophobe in a thread?

Cite one please. Thanks.

You mean IN ADDITION to this thread? There are plenty, I'm sure. I used the word "seemingly" just like you did, which I assume means you did no research into your claim.. it just SEEMS like you did..

Typical lib. This is just like the deflecting and asking for Romney's tax returns.

Typical ignoramus. I did not label or otherwise imply that Paul was a homophobe or gay with my comment. Either prove otherwise or just shut up. Thanks.

(07-08-2015 10:43 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 10:37 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 10:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:44 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious Paul, why are you seemingly always the first to introduce "the gay" into a thread?

Curious Tom, why are you seemingly always the first to imply that someone is either gay or a homophobe in a thread?

Cite one please. Thanks.

You mean IN ADDITION to this thread? There are plenty, I'm sure. I used the word "seemingly" just like you did, which I assume means you did no research into your claim.. it just SEEMS like you did..

Typical lib. This is just like the deflecting and asking for Romney's tax returns.

Typical ignoramus. I did not label or otherwise imply that Paul was a homophobe or gay with my comment. Either prove otherwise or just shut up. Thanks.

I love how selective interpretation that goes completely against what's on paper is a defense mechanism for libs. PS - everyone sees right through it.

Your pseudo-intellectualism and nuance falls flat once again.

Everyone knows what you meant with your little cute comment, and I think you ought to apologize for it.

(07-08-2015 09:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 08:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I ask again, OK for cities to refuse issuing gay licensees? San Fran doesn't want to recognize illegals, other cities don't recognize their wedded.

Curious Paul, why are you seemingly always the first to introduce "the gay" into a thread?

It's San Francisco. The gay was implied from the get go.

(07-08-2015 09:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 08:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I ask again, OK for cities to refuse issuing gay licensees? San Fran doesn't want to recognize illegals, other cities don't recognize their wedded.

Curious Paul, why are you seemingly always the first to introduce "the gay" into a thread?

He is pointing out the hypocrisy of the situation. Evidently he struck a nerve.

Sanctuary City has another name.....nullification.

I've never believed in nullification on the conservative side so I'm not going to start on the liberal side.

Issue gay marriage licenses or resign....enforce the immigration laws or resign. Drawing a salary and refusing to do the job is cowardly.

If you won't do your duty, and won't follow your oath, and will not resign in order to keep getting paid...you should go to jail.

(07-08-2015 10:11 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  I guess I agree with the approach. I don't know how they can be a "sanctuary" in the first place but at minimum we should dis-incentivize them from doing so. I'd rather do that than try to "get them back" if it results in a murder - as that would be a bit too late for the murder victim.

One of the big reasons they were set up is because the illegals would not come forward to report crime because if they did they would be deported.

(07-09-2015 02:57 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 10:11 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  I guess I agree with the approach. I don't know how they can be a "sanctuary" in the first place but at minimum we should dis-incentivize them from doing so. I'd rather do that than try to "get them back" if it results in a murder - as that would be a bit too late for the murder victim.

One of the big reasons they were set up is because the illegals would not come forward to report crime because if they did they would be deported.

Well...That experiment has failed. Time to move on.

What if the Illegals started killing the Gay population in San Francisco ? I bet there would be an immediate Ban on Illegals like Yesterday !

(07-09-2015 05:44 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  What if the Illegals started killing the Gay population in San Francisco ? I bet there would be an immediate Ban on Illegals like Yesterday !

It might only take one.