BruceVC

Shame ..I hear what you saying but imagine how she sees this, she truly believes her mortal soul is in danger....but jail is probably worse

Volo there is a valid reason for jailing her from the judges perspective....I may not agree with it but it is valid. From this CNN link http://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/03/politics/kentucky-clerk-same-sex-marriage-kim-davis/index.html " During the hearing, one witness told the court that Davis had denied her a marriage license three times, and when Davis took the stand, the clerk explained that she could not issue the licenses because of her religious beliefs. American Civil liberties Union attorneys argued in a motion filed Monday that Davis "continues to collect compensation from the Commonwealth for duties she fails to perform." They said they didn't want her to be jailed as punishment, but rather, the attorneys asked the court to "impose financial penalties sufficiently serious and increasingly onerous" to make her comply with the high court's order. U.S. District Judge David Bunning, however, apparently felt she deserved jail time, but he also told Davis she could end her incarceration by complying with the Supreme Court order and telling her deputy clerks to do the same "

Also I read she has to stay in jail until she issues the licenses Now what will she do.....will she really be prepared to stay in jail indefinitely over her religious views....its seems a bit unfair ?

This is interesting but I feel jailing her is a bit harsh. She should have been fined or something similar This may sound inconsistent coming from a huge supporter of gay rights like me but I see her as someone who just doesn't have the mental reasoning to make the right decision. I suppose this does send a clear message

Those photos have made me even more hungry...what salami are those ?

Shady I always forget where you from originally...where is it again? I know you eat food that many people would consider " adventurous " but I find delicious

Yeah I prefer Pork but sometimes I go for Beef, we also get lamb ribs but they are too fatty for me

Beef ribs are very tasty, very little fat and very meaty Aren't they common where you live ?

Yeah...you see thats how I often get misunderstood. I would never denigrate your career...it would have been only about your company

Its weird but in the past I would have considered that a normal comment ...but I am right most people would see that as condescending?

http://rocomamas.com/menu/ Guys take a look at this menu and tell me what you would order ?

I really think my posting etiquette is getting better....I think I'm far less condescending , you know what I was going to ask you? " Malc from the stories you have told me about your work its not the place I would want to work " But I see how that might be seen as rude and dismissive

Would you say you work in a company that has a good sense of ethos and decorum that resonates with the staff?

Dentists are just going to charge you money, you dont need to go A good piece of string tied to a door handle is the best way to remove problematic teeth

Er...to be fair, if God exists (and prohibits something) then surely His authority would actually be more important and relevant than any state or federal authority? Whats your personal view on this matter? Do you think she has a right to defy Federal law due to religious convictions ? Sure, I am well aware she doesn't represent the majority of Christians as it has been well established that the majority of Americans are supportive of same sex marriage and all the legal rights this gives couples

Good grief. Do you feel guilty Baro...this is what happens when you guys promote transgenderphobia

I wonder how many other rules that are in the bible she strictly follows. Scant few probably. Indeed, for example the old Testament says anyone who works on the Sabbath needs to be put to death...does she advocate the death penalty for people who work on a Sunday? Probably not I guess " Therefore you are to observe the sabbath, for it is holy to you. Everyone who profanes it shall surely be put to death; for whoever does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from among his people. For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, holy to the LORD; whoever does any work on the sabbath day shall surely be put to death. "

Hm. I used to be that annoying guy that would challenge christians on their beliefs all the time (a side effect of being one of the few atheists in a christian high school I suppose) and there was this one guy who I'm still friends with to this day because of a mutual respect in belief - he was always able to provide a satisfactory answer to everything I grilled him with and he grilled me right back (he introduced me to the convergent evolution conundrum). He's the only Christian I know that really knows his bible and really follows the doctrine of forgiveness rather than judgement, so I once asked him how it affects christians that gay marriage is legal. He pointed me towards Matthew 18:18 - "Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (This specific quotation is from the New English Standard) The way he explained this verse (and several similar verses in Matthew) to me was that Jesus gave his disciples reign to make decisions about law, and if the disciples feel that law should be changed on earth then it will change also in heaven. Now, obviously he only had few specific disciples then but the common interpretation is that any christian is a disciple of Jesus, so the law has changed based on what christian society has accepted. It's why christians are now allowed to wear clothing made of two different fabrics, or eat pork, or don't have to stone their entire city to death if it has a single non-believer. If good people accept homosexuality (the law being a symbol of that acceptance) and homosexuals live good, full lives they will be accepted into heaven just like anyone else who doesn't follow archaic old testament rules. Now the jury is out on whether or not believers have accepted homosexuality, but considering the amount of christian homosexuals I'd say the silent majority has. To be fair, Matthew is also the book in which Jesus himself has a temper tantrum and kills a tree because it didn't happen to have any fruit for him that day. The entire book is nonsensical to me. Anyway, just thought it was an interesting perspective from the only Christian I have ever respected (not to say I don't respect Christians as people, but the only one I have respected in their belief). Personally, I think all those old school bible belt Christians who deny homosexuals rights should also follow all the other rules in their little book. Considering how many rules the good book has and how little of it gets followed, I'd say that 99% of them will be stoned to death within a week. I mean, if they find the rules of Leviticus to be so important, they better never have shaved because that book condemns that about as much as it does a man lying with a man as he does with a woman. I hope they've never eaten lobster or calamari. And if they ever, even once disobeyed their daddies? Stoned to death! The problem would solve itself. But I'm cynical. EDIT: It would be fun to get a tattoo of the specific sentence in Leviticus forbidding tattoos. Good post Something else I feel relevant to this discussion is that Christianity has generally always seen a separation between the church and state, at least in the last 500 years. So Jesus for example said " "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's". The common interpretation to this is "people should obey the laws of the land...in this case it was the paying of taxes which some people at the time of Jesus questioned as why should Jews pay a tax to a foreign country " Muslim countries typically don't believe in a separation of religious and governmental laws, there religious doctrine is normally inextricably linked to how there governments function...which IMO is one of the huge issues why many countries in the Middle East are so conservative and have laws that many of us consider anathema

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/01/will-clerk-issue-gay-marriage-licenses-after-court-ruling/ Here are some more details around the clerks view, what is particularly interesting is the text below “I never imagined a day like this would come, where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage,” Davis said in the statement. “To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven or Hell decision. For me it is a decision of obedience.” So for her she clearly feels she faces eternal damnation if she issues these gay marriage licenses...mmmm...

That's a reasonable and informative post, I get what you are saying So in this example she clearly feels she is being judged by a higher power do you agree she should then step down?

Interesting response, I never realized she can't be fired. What would happen to her if she was guilty of lets say theft or sexual misconduct? I understand that gay couples could just get married in another state, would you feel that is an appropriate solution if an African American couple were receiving really bad treatment at a certain restaurant and this was clearly due to the racial element. Would you feel the solution is also for them to just go eat at another restaurant ? I am not trying to catch you out, I am just interested in how a person differentiates between racism and homophobia. And I know you have liberal views so this isn't a personal attack on you

http://www.lex18.com/story/29929988/rowan-county-clerk-defies-judge-refuses-to-issue-marriage-license This story interests me, despite the US supreme court ruling that all states cannot refuse to provide marriage licenses to gay couples there are still some people in the US who refuse to abide by the law There primary argument is that it is against there religious belief, for example this lady in this example says she is refusing to issue the license under " the authority of god " ...she obviously feels this is more important or relevant than federal authority? So what do you think should happen to her and others who simply refuse to provide marriage licenses to gay couples, I say just keep it simple, you just fire people who refuse to do there jobs

Uh, you can a bit of decorum without being a tyrant. ...which isn't my point either. Being "offended" is a smokescreen for controlling speech no matter how you spin it. No its not that people don't understand, its your premise that is questionable You basically making excuses or trying to justify offensive\rude\crude\derogatory comments

Interesting, so you don't think his comment about...lets say the Mexican community are offensive? http://www.latinpost.com/articles/66043/20150714/rupert-murdoch-slams-donald-trumps-remarks-about-mexican-immigrants.htm http://www.latinospost.com/articles/65207/20150626/latin-celebrities-responds-to-donald-trumps-hateful-comments-about-mexican-immigrants.htm