Marriage Minded Gays 1. Fundie Christian Court Clerks 0.

[Dos Equis]

I grew up in the bible belt, live in Texas now.. I haven't met ONE Christian other than my brother, who isn't a preacher that has read the bible cover to cover and that's a lot of Christians. True story, was having dinner with my wife's friends a couple months ago and the husband is a religious guy who preaches at prisons.. he was hitting me hard about Christianity and all the god stuff and he wanted to know why I didn't believe the bible. I said there are many many reasons but one is the lack of contemporary historians writing about what should have been remarkable events, but are only found in sometimes one book of the bible. He asked for an example and I told him that in Matthew 27 when Jesus died there was an earthquake and dead saints rose up out of their graves and walked through the city and were seen by many.. I said if something like this actually happened, it would have been mentioned by more than just Matthew. He said that story isn't in the bible. I was a little surprised he would challenge me when I have no dog in the hunt but I said yeah..it's in there. He said he read matthew many times and would remember that. So I bet him dinner it was in there... The good news is, I won dinner, the bad news is, I had to spend another evening with him. On our next outing..where he was buying.. I mentioned that a lot of people don't know who cut Samsons hair.. He immediately said Delilah. I said no.. she didn't. Another dinner bet and now I have to meet him again. On our third dinner he never brought up religion..     

I've met lots who were not preachers.  

I can't say I've read it "cover to cover," but I'm pretty sure I've read most of it.  And I don't preach to anyone about religion.  I rarely talk about it in real life.  There are lots of people like me.

Sorry you have had bad experiences.  

[Dos Equis]

but they were standing on principle...

It was more like self preservation, protecting future business by not ratting out his client, and not throwing a friend under the bus.  Not the same IMO. 

[Dos Equis]

Nobody is preventing Kim Davis from exercising her religion freely. But the free exercise clause doesn't mean she can force her beliefs on others which is what she is actively doing!

The free exercise of religion is exactly what this is about. 

I'm not sure anyone in this thread said she should be able to force her beliefs on others. 

[Agnostic007]

It was more like self preservation, protecting future business by not ratting out his client, and not throwing a friend under the bus.  Not the same IMO. 

either way... and I can't speak for their motives.. but I think the issue here is that you don't believe jail was warranted and it could have been resolved another way. I think jail was appropriate given her refusal to cooperate with the alternatives she was offered and perhaps she will have time to contemplate while there. Hopefully an angel will appear to her and instruct her to stop being a hypocritical bigot, but I won't hold my breath

[Agnostic007]

thanks for the good conversation

[Dos Equis]

either way... and I can't speak for their motives.. but I think the issue here is that you don't believe jail was warranted and it could have been resolved another way. I think jail was appropriate given her refusal to cooperate with the alternatives she was offered and perhaps she will have time to contemplate while there. Hopefully an angel will appear to her and instruct her to stop being a hypocritical bigot, but I won't hold my breath

And if she doesn't comply, then what?  Lock her up until the next election?  

[The Ugly]

Refusing to follow a court order, because she has the same convictions of the founders of the country, shared by close to 90 percent of the country, isn't insanity.  I think she should resign, but I don't think she's crazy.    

What does the fact she is on her third or fourth marriage have to do with anything?  

Your "facts" are suspect. Which founders? Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, the educated ones? Or Washington?

90%? Where'd you get this? I know we're an uneducated people, but the number was 80ish years back, and we've been moving further away since.

And why do her immoral, forbidden divorces matter? Same reason she's making gay matter. She obviously can't live right by God, so she has no business imposing her failed morality on others. She's a fucking hypocrite, who shouldn't be held up as some moral crusader.

Pick better martyrs. Jesus, this Davis movement is starting to embrace a ridiculous BLM-type ignorance.

[Dos Equis]

thanks for the good conversation

Ditto.

[TuHolmes]

The free exercise of religion is exactly what this is about. 

I'm not sure anyone in this thread said she should be able to force her beliefs on others. 

Actually it's not about the free exercise of religion.

It's about her denying the rights of others. She can not like gay marriage, just like she might not like interracial marriage (I don't know if she does or not), but she can not deny those people the right to be married or receive a license for it.

And if she doesn't comply, then what?  Lock her up until the next election? 

Fine by me... It's her choice as much as anyone else's.

[Dos Equis]

Your "facts" are suspect. Which founders? Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, the educated ones? Or Washington?

90%? Where'd you get this? I know we're an uneducated people, but the number was 80ish years back, and we've been moving further away since.

And why do her immoral, forbidden divorces matter? Same reason she's making gay matter. She obviously can't llive right by God, so she has no business imposing her failed morality on others. She's a fucking hypocrite, who shouldn't be held up as some moral crusader.

Pick better martyrs. Jesus, this Davis movement is starting to embrace a ridiculous BLM-type ignorance.

They all believed in God.  

I haven't looked at the statistics lately.  Last time I did it was close to 90 percent.  Even it's 80 percent, we're still talking about  the overwhelming majority of the country.  Which begs the question:  who is more likely to be crazy, the 80 to 90 percent believe, or the 10 to 20 who don't?  

How do you know her divorces are immoral?  

And let's assume she is a hypocrite.  She doesn't forfeit her right to ask for an accommodation of her religious beliefs, even if she is a hypocrite.  

[avxo]

The free exercise of religion is exactly what this is about.

No. The State isn't intefering with Kim Davis' ability to go to Church, pray, fast, or do whatever else she feels like doing in her personal life. Kim Davis, the County Clerk, doesn't get to decide to issue or not issue marriage licenses based on the religious beliefs of Kim Davis, the person. Kim Davis the County Clerk is an elected official acting in her official capacity and is an instrument of the State. If Kim Davis the person doesn't think she can do the job of Kim Davis the County Clerk, then Kim Davis the person ought to simply resign.

I'm not sure anyone in this thread said she should be able to force her beliefs on others.  

She is refusing to issue marriage licenses in her capacity as an State employee because of her personal religious beliefs. As a result, couples otherwise entitled to receive a marriage license and get married don't receive one and can't get married. How is that not forcing her beliefs on others?!?

They all believed in God.  

I haven't looked at the statistics lately.  Last time I did it was close to 90 percent.  Even it's 80 percent, we're still talking about  the overwhelming majority of the country.  Which begs the question:  who is more likely to be crazy, the 80 to 90 percent believe, or the 10 to 20 who don't?  

Right, because if 80 or 90% of people believe something, then it must be true...  See argumentum ad populum.

[The Ugly]

Of course not.  She is violating a court order.  There has to be consequences.  I'm saying locking her up indefinitely shouldn't be one of them. 

Don't see how that matters. I think assisted suicide facilities shouldn't be illegal. Oh, well. What's "shouldn't" got to do with anything?

[The Ugly]

Seriously?  I don't read about things that I know are BS.  That makes no sense.  

Makes no sense? What are you even talking about, guy?

You think my teenage brain knew it was BS by intuition? I obviously read it AND DISCOVERED it was BS, just like all the rest. You read it, I assume, and came to another conclusion. I guess that happens, too.

[Dos Equis]

No. The State isn't intefering with Kim Davis' ability to go to Church, pray, fast, or do whatever else she feels like doing in her personal life. Kim Davis, the County Clerk, doesn't get to decide to issue or not issue marriage licenses based on the religious beliefs of Kim Davis, the person. Kim Davis the County Clerk is an elected official acting in her official capacity and is an instrument of the State. If Kim Davis the person doesn't think she can do the job of Kim Davis the County Clerk, then Kim Davis the person ought to simply resign.


She is refusing to issue marriage licenses in her capacity as an State employee because of her personal religious beliefs. As a result, couples otherwise entitled to receive a marriage license and get married don't receive one and can't get married. How is that not forcing her beliefs on others?!?


Right, because if 80 or 90% of people believe something, then it must be true...  See argumentum ad populum.

Yes, her claim involves the right to avoid doing something that conflicts with a sincerely held religious belief.  That falls under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment (or as my friend corrected me, under Religious Freedom Restoration Act).  So yes, this is a religious freedom/free exercise matter.  Whether she has a valid claim is another story. 

I said I didn't see anyone in this thread saying she should be able to force her beliefs on others.  I haven't said it.  Did someone else?  Maybe I missed it.

I was joking about the percentages, but you kinda have to not be uptight to see that.   

[Dos Equis]

Don't see how that matters. I think assisted suicide facilities shouldn't be illegal. Oh, well. What's "shouldn't" got to do with anything?

C'mon man.  You are telling me that even the smallest part of you is not bothered by locking up an American citizen indefinitely, without a trial, without having committed a crime like a common criminal?  Seriously? 

[Dos Equis]

Makes no sense? What are you even talking about, guy?

You think my teenage brain knew it was BS by intuition? I obviously read it AND DISCOVERED it was BS, just like all the rest. You read it, I assume, and came to another conclusion. I guess that happens, too.

I'm not talking about you growing up and reading things to educate yourself, which is great.  I'm talking about being an atheist and reading the Bible, solely to try and argue with Christians.  That's what makes no sense to me. 

[TuHolmes]

C'mon man.  You are telling me that even the smallest part of you is not bothered by locking up an American citizen indefinitely, without a trial, without having committed a crime like a common criminal?  Seriously? 

How much of you were bothered when the Patriot act let you do the same thing?

Seriously?

And contempt of court doesn't require a trial... it NEVER HAS.

[Dos Equis]

How much of you were bothered when the Patriot act let you do the same thing?

Seriously?

And contempt of court doesn't require a trial... it NEVER HAS.

I am always bothered by the prospect of an American citizen being locked up indefinitely without charges (or being convicted).  What does the Patriot Act have to do with the price of tea in China? 

[TuHolmes]

I am always bothered by the prospect of an American citizen being locked up indefinitely without charges (or being convicted).  What does the Patriot Act have to do with the price of tea in China? 

When were we talking about Tea in China?

I thought we were talking about American Citizens being locked up indefinitely without charges. (or being convicted)... which is exactly what the Patriot Act allows for.

Don't get high and mighty about it now because you want to use religion... This has been happening for different reasons for almost 15 years now.

[Dos Equis]

When were we talking about Tea in China?

I thought we were talking about American Citizens being locked up indefinitely without charges. (or being convicted)... which is exactly what the Patriot Act allows for.

Don't get high and mighty about it now because you want to use religion... This has been happening for different reasons for almost 15 years now.

We are talking about a woman in Kentucky being locked up indefinitely after violating a court order due to her sincerely held religious beliefs.  We're not talking about the Patriot Act, which has absolutely nothing to do with this woman. 

What has been happening for almost 15 years now? 

[TuHolmes]

We are talking about a woman in Kentucky being locked up indefinitely after violating a court order due to her sincerely held religious beliefs.  We're not talking about the Patriot Act, which has absolutely nothing to do with this woman. 

What has been happening for almost 15 years now? 

American citizens being locked up without trials.

We are talking about core beliefs of the American judicial system.

If you believe that the core of americans being locked up indefinitely without trials is wrong, then why did you not protest about the patriot act allowing for it.

You are picking and choosing which citizens can be locked up and which can not.

That is a problem.

[The Ugly]

I grew up in the bible belt, live in Texas now.. I haven't met ONE Christian other than my brother, who isn't a preacher that has read the bible cover to cover and that's a lot of Christians. True story, was having dinner with my wife's friends a couple months ago and the husband is a religious guy who preaches at prisons.. he was hitting me hard about Christianity and all the god stuff and he wanted to know why I didn't believe the bible. I said there are many many reasons but one is the lack of contemporary historians writing about what should have been remarkable events, but are only found in sometimes one book of the bible. He asked for an example and I told him that in Matthew 27 when Jesus died there was an earthquake and dead saints rose up out of their graves and walked through the city and were seen by many.. I said if something like this actually happened, it would have been mentioned by more than just Matthew. He said that story isn't in the bible. I was a little surprised he would challenge me when I have no dog in the hunt but I said yeah..it's in there. He said he read matthew many times and would remember that. So I bet him dinner it was in there... The good news is, I won dinner, the bad news is, I had to spend another evening with him. On our next outing..where he was buying.. I mentioned that a lot of people don't know who cut Samsons hair.. He immediately said Delilah. I said no.. she didn't. Another dinner bet and now I have to meet him again. On our third dinner he never brought up religion..     

This is so not uncommon. Most Christians haven't read the fucking thing, they're clueless. Only theologians and apologists in my experience. Not even most preachers, they just cherrypick is all. So it's pretty amusing when they bitch about atheists citing troublesome verses. Like WE'RE the cherrypickers? Lot more bad than good if they'd bother to open the thing.

I swear, to a person they have NO IDEA about the genocide, or stonings, or torture, or slavery, or racism, or rape, or sexism, or slaughter, slaughter, slaughter - no clue how many seemingly innocuous activities result in a fatal smiting: fabrics, crops, Sabbath, shellfish - they just call me a liar and move on. Scared to death of what they'll learn, that's how strong the delusion. I'd bet my nonsoul it represents upwards of 70% of American believers.



 

[Dos Equis]

American citizens being locked up without trials.

We are talking about core beliefs of the American judicial system.

If you believe that the core of americans being locked up indefinitely without trials is wrong, then why did you not protest about the patriot act allowing for it.

You are picking and choosing which citizens can be locked up and which can not.

That is a problem.

Which American citizens have been locked up indefinitely without charges or convictions for the past 15 years?   

This has zero to do with Kentucky woman. 

[TuHolmes]

Which American citizens have been locked up indefinitely without charges or convictions for the past 15 years?   

This has zero to do with Kentucky woman. 

Who cares which have or haven't?

The fact is that they can... The NDAA made sure of that as well.


Actually, as you are discussing the core of citizens being able to be detained without charge indefinitely, they are very related.

You obviously can see this, you just don't want to admit it.

[Dos Equis]

Who cares which have or haven't?

The fact is that they can... The NDAA made sure of that as well.


Actually, as you are discussing the core of citizens being able to be detained without charge indefinitely, they are very related.

You obviously can see this, you just don't want to admit it.

Not saying I don't believe you.  Actually, yes I am.