(09-03-2015 09:57 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I agree with your views on Obama. He sucks as a president. So, why is the GOP sitting on their dead asses and not drawing up the bill to impeach the president? Why won't the GOP reverse the legislative acts that Obama got passed when the Dems were in charge? And why did Obama get elected to a 2nd term instead of being held accountable for what he did?

Why are you pushing the argument of a child? It sounds like people are saying "Well, if Obama can pick and choose which laws to enforce, then why can't this clerk of courts do the same"? I fail to see why this is a 'gotcha' statement. Just because Obama can get away with it because BOTH PARTIES refuse to hold him to task, it doesn't mean that the clerk of courts should get a free pass to do whatever she wants to do.

Because as it's been said hundreds of times, look who would be taking his place... Biden is just as bad as obama, if not worse.

(09-04-2015 01:05 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 06:49 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 06:35 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course the Supreme Court dramatically changed the law from when she took that oath.

And that matters because?????

Because she didn't swear under oath to issue special privilege marriage licenses.

Yes she did, she swore to uphold the law. You really look foolish arguing this.

I suppose a police officer can just not enforce any changes in the law if, in the time since they've become an officer, those laws have changed? Your position is downright stupid, wholly unrealistic, and it's clear to anyone even interested in reading your drivel that you have nothing backing up your claims except for the fact you agree with her in principle.

(09-04-2015 01:08 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 09:57 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I agree with your views on Obama. He sucks as a president. So, why is the GOP sitting on their dead asses and not drawing up the bill to impeach the president? Why won't the GOP reverse the legislative acts that Obama got passed when the Dems were in charge? And why did Obama get elected to a 2nd term instead of being held accountable for what he did?

Why are you pushing the argument of a child? It sounds like people are saying "Well, if Obama can pick and choose which laws to enforce, then why can't this clerk of courts do the same"? I fail to see why this is a 'gotcha' statement. Just because Obama can get away with it because BOTH PARTIES refuse to hold him to task, it doesn't mean that the clerk of courts should get a free pass to do whatever she wants to do.

Because as it's been said hundreds of times, look who would be taking his place... Biden is just as bad as obama, if not worse.

That's not a valid reason. By doing nothing, the GOP sanctions Obama's refusal to enforce laws. IMHO, they are simply using this as a reference point and will do the same things once they regain the WH. Therein lies your true hypocrisy.

(09-03-2015 10:08 PM)Leargh! Wrote:  

Paul M Wrote:Damn, that's some serious denial.

Damn, that's some serious lack of quoting ability.

But, whatever. Question asked and answered. Now, please get back to the subject of the post and/or start your own on a new subject.

You seem like a smart fellow as far as catching bad quotes, grammar, structure etc. However, you lack all necessary skills of debating if you can't see that obama has done more against the law than this democratic clerk. As have his people. What good does it do to keep bringing up the same thing over and over when it's against obama? It will just get thrown out like every other time.

(09-04-2015 01:08 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 09:57 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I agree with your views on Obama. He sucks as a president. So, why is the GOP sitting on their dead asses and not drawing up the bill to impeach the president? Why won't the GOP reverse the legislative acts that Obama got passed when the Dems were in charge? And why did Obama get elected to a 2nd term instead of being held accountable for what he did?

Why are you pushing the argument of a child? It sounds like people are saying "Well, if Obama can pick and choose which laws to enforce, then why can't this clerk of courts do the same"? I fail to see why this is a 'gotcha' statement. Just because Obama can get away with it because BOTH PARTIES refuse to hold him to task, it doesn't mean that the clerk of courts should get a free pass to do whatever she wants to do.

Because as it's been said hundreds of times, look who would be taking his place... Biden is just as bad as obama, if not worse.

That's not at all the reason, the reason is because it would be political suicide to do so. Even Boehner straight up admitted that.

(09-04-2015 06:37 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 06:35 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 06:17 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 03:08 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 03:04 PM)miko33 Wrote:  And why didn't she simply resign and make a statement about why she resigned to the press?

Why should she have to give up her livelihood

Because she took an oath...

Of course the Supreme Court dramatically changed the law from when she took that oath.

That is their right...don't like it? Take it up with our founding fathers

Suddenly you care about a person's right. Lol, you're funny.

LOL the guy in this thread who just labelled the majority of all gay people as hateful and intolerant beings is calling other people bigots. Mind blowing the lack of self awareness in that.

No, it's bigotry when unfairly people characterize groups he identifies with, it's just the truth when people unfairly characterize groups he doesn't like.

(09-04-2015 08:29 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 04:50 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  **** YOU *******. I AM NOT A DEGENERATE.

People like you, and Davis, are the scum of the earth. You and your type of no place in the United States. The USA is NOT a ******* Theocracy.

If you are so high and mighty about being a Christian, then ban divorce and a multitude of other things that Jesus actually preached about.

If not, STFU about calling AMERICANS and Humans degenerates.

You should put some soothing salve on that ass.

(09-04-2015 08:32 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  Oh the hypocrisy

Quote:In 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom unleashed a national political and legal tempest when he issued about 4,000 marriage licenses to same-sex couples. At a time when gay marriage was expressly prohibited by California law

Good find... Bet nobody said a word about ol Gayvin in San Fran.

(09-04-2015 11:41 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 10:33 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 10:20 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Submission to Civil Authorities (1 Peter 2:13-17)
13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.
15 For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men.
16 [Act] as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but [use it] as bondslaves of God. 17 Honor all men; love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king.

So civil disobedience by a Christian is never allowed?

Oh so now we get to cherry pick which scriptures we follow? Typical. Convenient.

You picked and chose.

(09-04-2015 01:27 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 08:32 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  Oh the hypocrisy

Quote:In 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom unleashed a national political and legal tempest when he issued about 4,000 marriage licenses to same-sex couples. At a time when gay marriage was expressly prohibited by California law

Good find... Bet nobody said a word about ol Gayvin in San Fran.

If a judge ordered him to stop, and he defied the order, then he should have suffered the same consequences. That being said, the comparison isn't exactly valid as he wasn't negatively affecting american citizens handing out marriage licenses like this woman is by refusing to do so.

(09-04-2015 01:05 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 06:49 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 06:35 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course the Supreme Court dramatically changed the law from when she took that oath.

And that matters because?????

Because she didn't swear under oath to issue special privilege marriage licenses.

Thanks for answering. On a couple of conservative boards I read they were saying this in the comments & it was not logical.

1 It is a "marriage license" not a "special privilege marriage licenses".

2 They need to follow current law which may be different than what the laws were when they were sworn in. Laws change all the time & people are not re sworn in every time there is a change.

(09-04-2015 12:20 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 12:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 11:59 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 11:24 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 06:16 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Why doesn't matter...she violated a court order...that's all it takes to go to jail.

Yes...She violated her oath of office. She is also a white trash hypocrite. Her personal life reads like something from redneck joke book. She is the LAST person to get on a religious high horse. Fck her.

She's not on a religious high horse. She just doesn't want her name on their certificate because she thinks its wrong.

This argument is completely off the rails. I'm a Christian. There is no way in the world that God would hold an ounce of disdain for me if I opposed gay marriage but still had my name on a piece of paper that allowed a gay couple to be considered married by a government.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

More importantly, he would certainly not look kindly on her breaking her oath she took.

Either she does the job, as the oath states or she resigns, those are the only options she has to prevent her from breaking a commandment. She wasn't interested in that though and willingly broke that commandment, because she isn't really concerned with her religious beliefs, she simply wants attention.

That oath she took didn't involve something that goes directly against God, genius.

(09-04-2015 01:11 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 01:08 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 09:57 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I agree with your views on Obama. He sucks as a president. So, why is the GOP sitting on their dead asses and not drawing up the bill to impeach the president? Why won't the GOP reverse the legislative acts that Obama got passed when the Dems were in charge? And why did Obama get elected to a 2nd term instead of being held accountable for what he did?

Why are you pushing the argument of a child? It sounds like people are saying "Well, if Obama can pick and choose which laws to enforce, then why can't this clerk of courts do the same"? I fail to see why this is a 'gotcha' statement. Just because Obama can get away with it because BOTH PARTIES refuse to hold him to task, it doesn't mean that the clerk of courts should get a free pass to do whatever she wants to do.

Because as it's been said hundreds of times, look who would be taking his place... Biden is just as bad as obama, if not worse.

That's not a valid reason. By doing nothing, the GOP sanctions Obama's refusal to enforce laws. IMHO, they are simply using this as a reference point and will do the same things once they regain the WH. Therein lies your true hypocrisy.

I think the primary reason is because there are no grounds for impeachment other than the BS axel that the republicans wrap them selves around.

(09-04-2015 01:30 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 11:41 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 10:33 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 10:20 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Submission to Civil Authorities (1 Peter 2:13-17)
13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.
15 For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men.
16 [Act] as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but [use it] as bondslaves of God. 17 Honor all men; love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king.

So civil disobedience by a Christian is never allowed?

Oh so now we get to cherry pick which scriptures we follow? Typical. Convenient.

You picked and chose.

I choose to follow none of them. Call me a purist.

(09-04-2015 01:32 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 12:20 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 12:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 11:59 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 11:24 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Yes...She violated her oath of office. She is also a white trash hypocrite. Her personal life reads like something from redneck joke book. She is the LAST person to get on a religious high horse. Fck her.

She's not on a religious high horse. She just doesn't want her name on their certificate because she thinks its wrong.

This argument is completely off the rails. I'm a Christian. There is no way in the world that God would hold an ounce of disdain for me if I opposed gay marriage but still had my name on a piece of paper that allowed a gay couple to be considered married by a government.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

More importantly, he would certainly not look kindly on her breaking her oath she took.

Either she does the job, as the oath states or she resigns, those are the only options she has to prevent her from breaking a commandment. She wasn't interested in that though and willingly broke that commandment, because she isn't really concerned with her religious beliefs, she simply wants attention.

That oath she took didn't involve something that goes directly against God, genius.

The oath was not to uphold her religious beliefs. And her god may be different than someone else's god. She is not even a real Christian. The Pope has said that Catholic Church is the one true church. Any non Catholic who claims to be a Christian is worshiping a false god.

(09-04-2015 11:41 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 10:33 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 10:20 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 05:05 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 04:59 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  Why is this even a debate? The bible doesn't support her action. The law doesn't support her action. Liberals shouldn't. Conservatives shouldn't.


She sucks in every which way.

Explain...

Submission to Civil Authorities (1 Peter 2:13-17)
13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.
15 For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men.
16 [Act] as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but [use it] as bondslaves of God. 17 Honor all men; love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king.

So civil disobedience by a Christian is never allowed?

Oh so now we get to cherry pick which scriptures we follow? Typical. Convenient.

Those are scriptures that *YOU* picked. I am asking if your understanding of scripture (since you brought it up) means that no civil disobedience of a christian could be scriptural.

(09-04-2015 12:42 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  Oh really now. Did you actually just post this? The majority of gays are hateful and intolerant...? And you claim to not be a bigot how?

Don't be weird on me. I'm one of the few posters that has stated several times that we're all bigots, including myself.

Anyways, go and tell a gay no and see what kind of response you get as opposed to the response you get for telling a normal guy no. One will call the media and all his pals to come protest, one will walk away and go elsewhere. Yes, most gays are intolerant and hateful. If not, then they're melodramatic drama queens.

Won't issue me a license? Ok, I'll go get the news media.



21 miles west is another clerk of court that can issue a special privilege marriage license. Some came all the way from Ohio to cry about this, surely they could have gone 21 miles west. Too much to ask though I guess. That's a long haul.

(09-04-2015 12:47 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(09-04-2015 07:51 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Just another Major reason to make sure No Leftwing Liberal gets elected for another 4 years of this Gay driven Agenda that smacks in the face of the majority of Americans that are Straight.

No, we need to make sure no Theocratic Conservative gets elected and advances their un-American bigoted Agenda.

Here's to getting Trump or Carson elected...