Gay rights group erects billboard in Kim Davis' Kentucky town

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
a reply to: Klassified

I get the point but I'm not aware that any daughters were given as brides in exchange for cattle in the United states. Not sure the billboard really applies here.

Then ought the rest of it? Same playbook.

Was that a question?

a reply to: RainyState

Kim Davis, its just a piece of paper, you have to do your job as a clerk.

Just a piece of paper? Cmon now you know better.

a reply to: hellobruce
How did you come to that conclusion? This morning gay people walked into her office and got marriage licenses just like they did last week. That is a good thing. Two people who love each other can now enjoy the benefits of legal matrimony.

I'm going to say this to you one last time. I SUPPORT THE RIGHTS OF EVERYONE---no matter your skin color, your gender, your religion, or any other thing that might be held against a person. I do not believe that anyone's human rights should be arbitrarily taken from them. The Supreme Court's ruling in favor of gays didn't take away Kim Davis' right to reasonable accommodation of her religious beliefs, it simply overturned the laws that defined marriage as between one man and one woman.

Rev. King said it this way:

"We've broken loose from...slavery and we have moved through the wilderness of legal segregation. Now we stand on the border of the promised land of integration." "Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love...Our aim must never be to defeat or humiliate the white man, but to win his friendship and understanding." –1958

Those who call for revenge and violence are wrong. That is my deep moral conviction and I will continue to speak out against it, no matter the source. You are perfectly free to continue to be hateful, spiteful or generally disagreeable but I'm done addressing your drivel. Have a good evening. I'm going to celebrate some friends' engagement party!

a reply to: diggindirt

This morning gay people walked into her office and got marriage licenses just like they did last week.

Yeah because of Kim Davis they had to wait.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: diggindirt

This morning gay people walked into her office and got marriage licenses just like they did last week.

Yeah because of Kim Davis they had to wait.

Many licenses were issued last week I think.

a reply to: xuenchen

Oh I was under the impression that gay couples didn't get their licenses last week. Sorry if I was mistaken. Yeah I was after reading a wiki page on it lol. Too many things on my mind it's hard to pay attention.

But still she shouldn't have caused problems in the first place.

Usually I don't like these infantile squabbles but I thought this one was on point and kind of funny.

Otherwise these few sentences here about sums up my feelings about this subject:

Its much worse than it may appear. These folks are pathological. In reality their dream is to someday see christians on their knees being forced to eat their bible. They wish to force some to violate what they hold dear.

I'm all for equality for homosexuals but a lot of the stuff I see is causing nothing but division. Divide and conquer as usual.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Thank you!


The rhetoric I'm hearing from the fringe on both sides is basic "they want to end society as we know it" chants.

I'm hearing the exact same stuff now as I heard in the 1960s.
"She shouldn't have made a fuss about it."
How about that one? If I had a penny for every time I heard that said about Rosa Parks, I'd be wealthy.
"Resign and find another job." That's what the nutters in Memphis were saying to the black garbage men who wanted to paid equal to the white garbage men.
Or, more recently we heard this type of propaganda about the legalization of cannabis.

Well, guess what, society as we know it didn't end with black people being afforded their civil rights by the legislative process. It didn't end when they won equal pay through the judicial system. And it didn't end when the elective process worked to "free the weed" in Colorado.

If we are ever to have the society our founders had as an ideal, we have to work toward the goals outlined in the founding documents and remember always---"Out of the many we emerge as one."

a reply to: diggindirt

The rhetoric I'm hearing from the fringe on both sides is basic "they want to end society as we know it" chants.

There's only one side - the right side of course. The apocalyptic Christians are the ones who fear it and want to bring it on.

And no wanting equal rights will not end society.

And come to think of it... who is more afraid?

The Christians who fear the end of the world?

Or?

The rest who are afraid of the government?

a reply to: Deaf Alien
And all are exercising their freedom of speech.
I just wish someone would gather up a big basket of dignity and pass it round to the whole crowd.
I don't care what your cause is or what cause you are protesting---screeching isn't going to change any minds.
It's endless discussion and parsing the issues that will unite us as a society, not yelling at one another.
Don't you know that Russia and China have Kim Davis going to jail on every tv set? "Federal Judge sends Christian woman to jail for her religious beliefs." See, the truth won't matter to them any more than it matters to the social media addicted who have a deep need to be part of a group.
Those who are afraid of the government are wise indeed. The founders of the country feared government and included checks on the power of government because of that very rational fear of absolute authority. Indeed, it just that authority against which we struggle today, whether it be the loss of rights under civil law or the loss of all rights under such monsters (Patriot Act and "We can disappear you" Act) as Congress has passed under the guise of "keeping us safe."

So just keep smilin' and spreadin' the good vibes rather than the negative ones. Life will be easier.

originally posted by: Klassified
Gay rights group erects billboard in Kim Davis' Kentucky town

I see what you did there...

originally posted by: diggindirt
"That portion of the statute refers to the marriage certificate. That is the document signed by the person performing the ceremony.
Kim Davis has challenged the license portion of the statute---therefore if her name doesn't have to appear on the license, her name would not have to appear on the certificate, only the seal of the county or the Commonwealth."

OK, I can buy that. Thanks. I assumed that because the marriage certificate required her name (from the license) that her name would have to be on the license. I suppose they'll change all the details in the law when the legislature meets.

The license part of the law also calls for "an authorization statement of the county clerk".

A marriage license which provides for the entering of:
(a)
An authorization statement of the county clerk issuing the license ...

As of now, they don't have that authorization. I get the feeling that they (the governor and attorney general) are just kind of skirting the legal details to find a happy medium that will quell the madness around this case.

Kim and her attorneys are insisting that the licenses aren't valid. I see their point. Strictly speaking, the licenses being issued don't adhere to the law as it stands. But Kim and her lawyers don't have the legal power that their opponents do, and it's possible that the legislature can put a band-aid on the licenses to pronounce them legal or something... So we'll see what happens down the road.

My imagination took me to one of these couples deciding to get divorced after ten years in a nasty battle and one taking the case that their marriage was never legal in the first place. Hubby and I had an interesting discussion about the possible outcomes of that scenario last night.

Thanks for your input.

I need some help understanding Kim Davis's point of view.

Does her religion, or any religion, ONLYdictate that homosexuality is wrong?

Or along with it being wrong, you have to take action against homosexuality?

For example, if her religion simply states "homosexuality's wrong" then is she going above and beyond what her religion dictates?

OR

Does her religion command her to take a stand against it?

Is it all in its interpretation?

I'm seriously asking for help with understanding this. I'm not trying to mock anybody's beliefs or cause another debate. Please take that into consideration.

originally posted by: RainyState
I need some help understanding Kim Davis's point of view.

Does her religion, or any religion, ONLYdictate that homosexuality is wrong?

Or along with it being wrong, you have to take action against homosexuality?

For example, if her religion simply states "homosexuality's wrong" then is she going above and beyond what her religion dictates?

OR

Does her religion command her to take a stand against it?

Is it all in its interpretation?

I'm seriously asking for help with understanding this. I'm not trying to mock anybody's beliefs or cause another debate. Please take that into consideration.

As far as I know, most major organized religions believe homosexuality is an abomination against God

But, there was a time many thought seizures were being possessed by the Devil.

Today we know through science sexual orientation is inherent. Sexual orientation develops early in utero.

Individuals within religion are quicker to accept homosexuals as normal, as they are made that way. The "church" itself still drags in ancient belief.

Some fundamental Christians truly belief God warned them that it was prophesized a time would come when homosexuals would be accepted in society as normal. That its wrong, a sign of the end times, and they must do everything they can to stop it.

originally posted by: RainyState
Does her religion, or any religion, ONLYdictate that homosexuality is wrong?

No, but the "ick factor" makes people feel, do and say things they otherwise wouldn't. The religious right and anti-gay groups have convinced people that homosexuality is worse than other sins. They don't want homosexuality to be a reality, so they fight to keep "it in the closet". That way, they can pretend it doesn't exist.

Or along with it being wrong, you have to take action against homosexuality?

People convince themselves that they must act against it... Like they're working for God. If they show how much they disapprove, then their God will bless them for it.

For example, if her religion simply states "homosexuality's wrong" then is she going above and beyond what her religion dictates?

OR

Does her religion command her to take a stand against it?

Different Christians will handle it in different ways. But religion has become SO political, there's barely a line between them anymore. Political "causes" have become religious "causes". That's why we see so much animosity from "people of God". They're on a mission from God. Their church and fellow Christians convince them they are.

My mother, who was what I call a "real" Christian would have loved anyone, regardless of their sin and said that God will sort it all out. She took the non-judgment edict seriously, which I rarely see anymore. Most Christians these days live their lives in judgment. There are very few Christians like my mom anymore. Most of the "squeaky wheels" are fearful, hateful, control freaks.

Jesus spent LOTS of time with "sinners". He loved them. For people to claim they're Christians and then act SO very un-Christ-like, is an abomination, IMO.

originally posted by: intrepid
Childish. Why do people just HAVE to get a dig? Very undignified.

Confusing post..

Childish is what this woman did by telling strangers they didn't deserve to marry and using her authority to deny them the same?

Childish is desperately seeking attention from the media for her intolerant, illegal and ignorant actions..

Undignified is every right wing GOP wannabe POTUS that rushed to celebrate her illegal and unconstitutional actions.

A billboard highlighting the silliness of those ideologues? Just what was needed IMO.

originally posted by: RainyState
I need some help understanding Kim Davis's point of view.

Does her religion, or any religion, ONLYdictate that homosexuality is wrong?

Or along with it being wrong, you have to take action against homosexuality?

For example, if her religion simply states "homosexuality's wrong" then is she going above and beyond what her religion dictates?

OR

Does her religion command her to take a stand against it?

Is it all in its interpretation?

I'm seriously asking for help with understanding this. I'm not trying to mock anybody's beliefs or cause another debate. Please take that into consideration.

My understanding is that since it is against her religious beliefs, that she is not supposed/allowed to take any action that supports it. Thus...she can't issue a license, etc.

She already had the consequences of her unfair behavior towards others. She's already stressing. Why be mean to her and make her stress worse when she already faced the consequences (and hopefully learned something from the situation)?

If she doesn't like her job, I hope she finds a new one which will not cause her to stress between her job and religion.

This is what unconditional love is:

"Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;" - Matthew 5:44

"For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?" - Matthew 5:46

Love, Forgiveness, and Equality

For those who choose to be against equality, they will see the consequences of their negative actions (sow thorns and reap thorns, sow grapes and reap grapes) and hopefully realize that love, forgiveness, and equality, leads to peace for others and themselves.

Wishing the best for all.

a reply to: arpgme

If she doesn't like her job, I hope she finds a new one which will not cause her to stress between her job and religion.

Imagine if she finds out that her co-workers are gay and married.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

My understanding is that since it is against her religious beliefs, that she is not supposed/allowed to take any action that supports it. Thus...she can't issue a license, etc.

Her job is to verify the clerical information. That's all.

Her name on the license only means the clerical information has been signed off as correct. It has nothing to do with the marriage itself.

Nothing in her job description changed because the Constitution says everyone has the same right.