Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 73 (8962 total)
114 online now:
Coragyps, dwise1, jar, Phat (AdminPhat), ringo, vimesey (6 members, 108 visitors)
Newest Member: Samuel567
Post Volume: Total: 871,047 Year: 2,795/23,288 Month: 986/1,809 Week: 105/313 Day: 22/39 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Case against Kim Davis dismissed
Faith
Member
Posts: 34709
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 46 of 103 (790488)
08-30-2016 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by ThinAirDesigns
08-30-2016 7:51 PM


The checks and balancers are intended to control the GOVERNING INSTITUTIONS that tend to usurp power over each other and over the people, not the people themselves. The Supreme Court has been usurping power over both the other branches of government and over the people for at least a century now.

It's not that there was no intent to keep majority rule within bounds too, but not to the extent we are seeing today and that you are apparently ap0proving.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 08-30-2016 7:51 PM ThinAirDesigns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-30-2016 8:10 PM Faith has responded
 Message 54 by Tanypteryx, posted 08-30-2016 9:02 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 57 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 08-31-2016 2:57 AM Faith has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 47 of 103 (790489)
08-30-2016 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Faith
08-30-2016 8:00 PM


The checks and balancers are intended to control the GOVERNING INSTITUTIONS that tend to usurp power over each other and over the people, not the people themselves.

And yet when the Supreme Court made gay people a little more free, some people complained! Can you imagine?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:00 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by jar, posted 08-30-2016 8:16 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:20 PM Dr Adequate has responded
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:33 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 32167
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 48 of 103 (790490)
08-30-2016 8:16 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Dr Adequate
08-30-2016 8:10 PM


And the New York Supreme Court just carried things a step further and redefined parenthood as well.

quote:
More broadly, the court noted that “Alison D.’s foundational premise of heterosexual parenting and nonrecognition of same-sex couples is unsustainable,” particularly in light of New York’s law allowing gay marriage, which was passed in 2011, and the United States Supreme Court’s landmark ruling last year granting same-sex couples the right to marry.

Thank God!


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-30-2016 8:10 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 34709
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 49 of 103 (790491)
08-30-2016 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Dr Adequate
08-30-2016 8:10 PM


When they make an extreme minority "a little more free" against the will of the majority they are indeed usurping power over the people.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-30-2016 8:10 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by jar, posted 08-30-2016 8:28 PM Faith has responded
 Message 55 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-30-2016 9:44 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 32167
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 50 of 103 (790492)
08-30-2016 8:28 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
08-30-2016 8:20 PM


Faith writes:

When they make an extreme minority "a little more free" against the will of the majority they are indeed usurping power over the people.

Two issues with what you post Faith.

First, that is not usurping but rather the duty of the SCOTUS and second, the majority has consistently supported gay marriage.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:20 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:31 PM jar has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 34709
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 51 of 103 (790493)
08-30-2016 8:31 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by jar
08-30-2016 8:28 PM


The majority of the people have NOT supported gay marriage at all. The court has been bullying them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by jar, posted 08-30-2016 8:28 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by jar, posted 08-30-2016 8:48 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 61 by Theodoric, posted 08-31-2016 9:53 AM Faith has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 34709
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 52 of 103 (790494)
08-30-2016 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Dr Adequate
08-30-2016 8:10 PM


"...a little more free" is a gross misrepresentation of extending marriage to couples who have no qualifications for marriage whatever.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-30-2016 8:10 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-30-2016 9:46 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 32167
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 53 of 103 (790496)
08-30-2016 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Faith
08-30-2016 8:31 PM


We know that is your claim
Faith writes:

The majority of the people have NOT supported gay marriage at all. The court has been bullying them.

We know you like to make that claim and very likely even believe it is true but just like Young Earth or the Biblical floods or Special Creation it is simply your fantasy.

quote:
Well, it’s about time.”

That, says Rev. Richard Gantenbein, is how the majority of his 300-member congregation has responded since Sunday morning, Aug. 14. That’s when Gantenbein – head pastor at St. Andrew Presbyterian Church since 1982 – took the pulpit to affirm, publically, his personal support for marriage equality. He took the moment to proclaim St. Andrew as a safe haven for LGBTQ Christians, and for those believers struggling as their family members come out as gay or transgender.

“It’s what I’ve believed for a while now, after years of careful study of the scripture and a lot of serious reflection,” says Gantenbein. “I’ve just been waiting for the right opportunity to say it clearly and openly.”

Gantenbein’s view on same-sex marriage is now shared by a majority of American Presbyterian congregations, which voted in March of 2015 to amend the church constitution to define marriage as a covenant “between two people.” The decision freed Presbyterian ministers to conduct same-sex weddings, previously prohibited, regardless of the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2015 ruling legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states. In spite of the church-wide vote, the issue continues to generate vigorous debate among many Presbyterians, including opponents suggesting the denomination has caved in to cultural pressures, abandoning centuries of church tradition.


from this source

The Presbyterian Church USA votes recognize Same Sex marriages

The Episcopal and Lutheran churches now recognize same sex marriages and even openly gay pastors, priests, deacons and bishops.

Before the SCOTUS issued their ruling 38 US States had legalized same sex marriages and nationwide polls in the US showed that over 60% of the population supported the concept of same-sex marriages.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:31 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2332
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006


(7)
Message 54 of 103 (790497)
08-30-2016 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Faith
08-30-2016 8:00 PM


Faith writes:

The checks and balancers are intended to control the GOVERNING INSTITUTIONS that tend to usurp power over the people, not the people themselves.

Yes, exactly correct. The Bill of Rights and some of the Amendments to the Constitution say some very specific things about what the government can and cannot do to citizens.

For example, it is unconstitutional for me and a bunch of people I convince to vote to take away religious people’s bibles and to stop all sales of bibles. If we won the election, we could not force the police or any other governmental agency to enforce the new law. It would be unconstitutional.

I cannot enforce a law that takes away the rights of law abiding citizens, just because I don't like them, or that bestows “special rights” on myself or my favorite bunch of people. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter in the United States of which laws enforceable under the constitution. They have many laws to consider each session and there are often large contentious groups supporters arguing for various positions regarding the law.

The framers and amenders of the U. S. Constitution have not always got things right and over the course of our history the court has been politicized.

When the court renders a decision, people being employed by “GOVERNING INSTITUTIONS”, in other words “PUBLIC EMPLOYEES” are required to perform the function of their position. “PUBLIC EMPLOYEES” are paid from taxes collected from everyone so they have no right to discriminate against law abiding citizens requesting service from “PUBLIC EMPLOYEES”.

You’re also wrong about this being ”treating other people decently and not being an asshole run amok”


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:00 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 55 of 103 (790501)
08-30-2016 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
08-30-2016 8:20 PM


When they make an extreme minority "a little more free" against the will of the majority they are indeed usurping power over the people.

In the first place, the opponents of gay marriage are not in the majority.

Which apparently means that the rest of us are entitled to do what the fuck we like to you. You think it's unfair that gay people are happy, see how you like being thrown to the lions. Apparently in Faithworld that's constitutional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:20 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 56 of 103 (790502)
08-30-2016 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
08-30-2016 8:33 PM


"...a little more free" is a gross misrepresentation of extending marriage to couples who have no qualifications for marriage whatever.

That's one of the things they are now free to decide for themselves.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:33 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 564
Joined: 02-12-2015


Message 57 of 103 (790514)
08-31-2016 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Faith
08-30-2016 8:00 PM


quote:
It's not that there was no intent to keep majority rule within bounds too ...

Oh, now I see you're conceding that the what you wrote below about the Constitution is wrong.

quote:
Read the Constitution. Majority rules.

Thanks
JB


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 08-30-2016 8:00 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Faith, posted 08-31-2016 4:31 AM ThinAirDesigns has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 34709
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 58 of 103 (790516)
08-31-2016 4:31 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by ThinAirDesigns
08-31-2016 2:57 AM


Funny, I have no problem affirming both: majority rules but not utterly without restraint. Kind of obvious wouldn't you think?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 08-31-2016 2:57 AM ThinAirDesigns has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-31-2016 5:18 AM Faith has responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3801
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.6


(8)
Message 59 of 103 (790518)
08-31-2016 5:18 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by Faith
08-31-2016 4:31 AM


It was her job, then it wasn't
As I understand it, it was her job to sign-off on marriage licenses for those who were legally entitled to such.

Gay were legally entitled to such.

She refused to sign-off on marriage licenses for gays.

She was not doing her job, and got sued as a result.

The law changed such that it was no longer her job to sign-off on said licenses.

She was no longer not doing her job, and the lawsuits got thrown out.

Moral of the story - If doing your job conflicts with your personal beliefs, either get your job description changed or get a different job.

I believe it's as simple as that.

Moose


Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.

"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith

"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien

"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Faith, posted 08-31-2016 4:31 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Faith, posted 08-31-2016 5:30 AM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 34709
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 60 of 103 (790519)
08-31-2016 5:30 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Minnemooseus
08-31-2016 5:18 AM


Re: It was her job, then it wasn't
She got the job when she was not required to sign off on gay marriage licenses. I think it was even an elected position, wasn't it? She was well suited to its requirements and did a lot to improve the office according to her election promises. She had been a Christian for a few years when the gay marriage law came along, until which point there was no problem with her practicing her religion and holding that job, as in America there never should be. Seems rather nasty for the law to change things in a way that jeopardized her position in the middle of her holding it.

So changing the law that required her to sign off on gay marriage licenses seems like a fair enough compromise under the circumstances, but of course in a conflict between Christian faith and sin elevated to a right I'd much rather it was her faith that was protected as it always used to be. But we're headed for the Grand Finale so let it all hang out, hey?

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-31-2016 5:18 AM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-31-2016 10:16 AM Faith has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020