|
Post by chevypower on Sept 7, 2015 2:13:36 GMT -6
Better known as the three ring circus......the States Attorney, Judge, and Lawyer
|
|
|
Post by angelsamongus on Sept 7, 2015 4:17:56 GMT -6
LAWS are LAWS,
Because there are INCREASES in Numbers of those who have come OUT of the Closet; DOES NOT make the LAWS change ( . ) PERIOD / Paragraph !
Because we DO NOT have a "Godly President;" Does it change the way The Constitution WAS Written? NO ( ! )
This NATTION Was built on the Cornerstone of SWORN IN Words written TEXT From The Bible; Where IS it written that this has CHANGED ( ? )
When I am lying at DEATHS Doorstep; which WILL come one day soon. Do I want the Bible as Written in NIV Version by my side; the words my family has been raised on ? OR, do I want..... Whatever; "Hussein Obama " believes / worships; at my bedside while my family members take the Holy Sacraments during my Last Rights?
ANYTHING, Other than; " The Holy Bible " is babble, babble, babble; etc..... OUR USA President WORSHIPS; Grade School Curriculum teaching Techniques in BEJHEADING Christians. HAND to HAND COMBAT FOR MALES AND FEMALES AS PART OF THE GRADE SCHOOL CURICULUM ?
HHMMMmmmm..... ARE You WILLING to PAY an INCREAE IN Teacher Salaries to teach our; Grades; K - 10 Hand to Hand Combat Training, Beheading of Rebels, (those who are unwilling to BEHEAD Christians ??
In The Name of Jesus Christ my Lord and Savior; I'M NOT ! ! !
|
|
|
Post by dumdave on Sept 7, 2015 9:32:14 GMT -6
Separation of church and state. What exactly does that mean, from a Constitutional perspective? Can you delineate the wall of separation? For instance, did Monica violate federal law when she said "Oh God" during her time with Bill? How about when we listen to Obama tell us how Islam has made America great? Or, perhaps, and just perhaps, when the words "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" were written, they meant keep your nose out of each individuals right to worship as they chose, be it a nutcase Evangelical or a Rastafarian.......... Sniper, I know you are smarter.
|
|
|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Sept 7, 2015 10:48:10 GMT -6
Refusing to enforce or unable to enforce to your liking? I know you think you somehow suckered me into your argument but you really are rather transparent. You and your fellow teabaggers think that anything less than deporting every illegal immigrant in this country is ignoring the law. The reality of the current problem is that there is neither the money or manpower to accomplish this no matter what the current GOP front runner has led the simple minded to believe. What our president has proposed is to enhance border security with more border agents (not some unrealistic magic wall) and then focus the remaining resources on deportation of the illegals who are criminals. Is this ignoring the law? Technically I guess you could say yes or you could say that it is looking at a problem and approaching it in a common sense realistic fashion. As you like to say, there just no more money to spend in government. Isn't using what money you have to focus on border security and criminals a sensible approach? On a much smaller scale but similar grounds, would you say that a cop who doesn't write a ticket for every minor offense he witnesses is ignoring the law and in line for dismissal or could he possibly be focusing his time and departments resources on more pressing issues. On a side note, how does the number of deportations by our president stack up against previous administrations? All your barking does not answer the question. Does the President of the United States take an obligation to faithfully execute his duties under the Constitution of the US or not? You make all kinds of excuses for officer discretion, does Federal Law allow for officer Discretion? Is it still discretion when you write ORDERS to ignore the law? No, you make all kinds of disparaging remarks about your fellow legal citizens who are paying their way, yet suck up to those who can do nothing but take............. I guess Dad was right, you lay with dogs.........
|
|
|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Sept 7, 2015 10:58:45 GMT -6
What exactly does that mean, from a Constitutional perspective? Can you delineate the wall of separation? For instance, did Monica violate federal law when she said "Oh God" during her time with Bill? How about when we listen to Obama tell us how Islam has made America great? Or, perhaps, and just perhaps, when the words "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" were written, they meant keep your nose out of each individuals right to worship as they chose, be it a nutcase Evangelical or a Rastafarian.......... Sniper, I know you are smarter. Really? How about you show where I am wrong? Now, did I take a little trip down memory ( Mammary? ) lane for laughs? Yea, I did, you gotta admit, Bill made it easy. Perhaps I did not correctly divine your intent of your post? How about you 'splain it to me?
|
|
|
Post by cityslicker on Sept 7, 2015 11:29:25 GMT -6
What's wrong, certain clergy have been corn holing for years. The flock just ignores it and keeps donating money. Who voted for these politicians?
|
|
|
Post by rocket on Sept 7, 2015 11:43:51 GMT -6
Mike hukabee just said on the news that he stands behind her 100% Support fighting against gay marriage . Got feeling that this issue may be discussed at the nations Capitol With hukabee calling for repealing of gay marriage or push for new laws Making it illegal. Something hit a nerve to get a politician Involved in this.
|
|
|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Sept 7, 2015 12:16:50 GMT -6
Huckabee is a tool.
|
|
|
Post by capncrunch on Sept 7, 2015 13:07:25 GMT -6
To start off, I don't think that when you are getting paid to do a job, that your opinion about this or that should interfere with your job. This lady should loose her job because she let her opinion is not fact. Plus she has no right to tell others what they should do and not do to make themselves happy. If two people, the same sex or not want to get married and that makes them happy, than that is those people's right. And it is not effecting me one way or another. Is this lady going to tell people of mixed races that they can not get married due to different nationality? Or what about having sex outside of being married? I wonder how this lady thinks about having children outside of wedlock?
|
|
|
Post by cityslicker on Sept 7, 2015 15:30:48 GMT -6
She has been married 4 times and has seen the light. No makeup, no slutty fesses, and no proliferation of the species. A true bible thumper.
|
|
|
Post by cityslicker on Sept 7, 2015 15:32:46 GMT -6
That was "slutty dresses,"
|
|
|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Sept 7, 2015 15:57:29 GMT -6
To start off, I don't think that when you are getting paid to do a job, that your opinion about this or that should interfere with your job. This lady should loose her job because she let her opinion is not fact. Plus she has no right to tell others what they should do and not do to make themselves happy. If two people, the same sex or not want to get married and that makes them happy, than that is those people's right. And it is not effecting me one way or another. Is this lady going to tell people of mixed races that they can not get married due to different nationality? Or what about having sex outside of being married? I wonder how this lady thinks about having children outside of wedlock? No, this woman should RESIGN her position rather than do something she believes is against her religion. That's the bottom line, the same as with ANY OFFICIAL who will not enforce the laws as they are on the books. There really is no need to talk about anything else, what she did before seeing the light is irrelevant to this situation and is being used by people of little minds to make their case. Bottom line, in her mind, she was saved and nothing that transpired before that salvation really matters. The key here is just how much she really believes, if she does, then resign that 80,000 a year job and be one with God, if not she has the obligation to issue the licenses. BTW, there is no such thing as same sex marriage, only same sex cohabitation. The Bible defines marriage, not the court. I can show you more than one Catholic who is not married in the eyes of the church, but are in the eyes of the state.
|
|
|
Post by antamaleen on Sept 7, 2015 16:14:05 GMT -6
To start off, I don't think that when you are getting paid to do a job, that your opinion about this or that should interfere with your job. This lady should loose her job because she let her opinion is not fact. Plus she has no right to tell others what they should do and not do to make themselves happy. If two people, the same sex or not want to get married and that makes them happy, than that is those people's right. And it is not effecting me one way or another. Is this lady going to tell people of mixed races that they can not get married due to different nationality? Or what about having sex outside of being married? I wonder how this lady thinks about having children outside of wedlock? No, this woman should RESIGN her position rather than do something she believes is against her religion. That's the bottom line, the same as with ANY OFFICIAL who will not enforce the laws as they are on the books. There really is no need to talk about anything else, what she did before seeing the light is irrelevant to this situation and is being used by people of little minds to make their case. Bottom line, in her mind, she was saved and nothing that transpired before that salvation really matters. The key here is just how much she really believes, if she does, then resign that 80,000 a year job and be one with God, if not she has the obligation to issue the licenses. BTW, there is no such thing as same sex marriage, only same sex cohabitation. The Bible defines marriage, not the court. I can show you more than one Catholic who is not married in the eyes of the church, but are in the eyes of the state. I agree with the majority of what you said. However, it's that last little bit that I don't. The court doesn't define marriage? Marriage is a union between two people, whether the church agrees with it or not.
|
|
|
Post by super on Sept 7, 2015 18:14:03 GMT -6
I think everyone should stay out of it. Should be a Church sanctioned deal. WTH did we do before licensing became the rule?
|
|
|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Sept 7, 2015 18:34:41 GMT -6
I agree with the majority of what you said. However, it's that last little bit that I don't. The court doesn't define marriage? Marriage is a union between two people, whether the church agrees with it or not. No, the court does not have the power to determine the meaning of a word. This is what pisses me off so bad about this issue, both sides are SPOILING for a fight, and NEITHER will take an objective look at what the role of religion and the state is in regards to interpersonal relationships. For purposes of the state, the ONLY thing that it has purvey over is the legal rights and responsibilities of a relationship. For purposes of the state, it makes no difference if it is man/woman, man/man, woman/woman, for that matter 7 women and a man. There are SPECIFIC civil rights and legal obligations inherent in the relationship. Notice nothing about marriage, just the legalities of the union. The Bible very clearly defines a Marriage as the union of a man and a woman, but past that, what legal rights does it convey? Exactly, NONE, NADA,ZIP. Therefore, the only logical thing to do to protect not only every single citizens civil rights, but to protect our various religious institutions, and quite frankly, the notion of good old common sense, would be to issue civil cohabitation licenses for each and every one who applies to the state.
|
|