From same sex marriage to Polygamy

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Clicker wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Apples and oranges.

There is a difference in that one refuses to issue a license and the other refuses to honor a license.  Now, that said, what do you think the reaction would be if the judge were refusing to perform gay marriages only?  

That's not really the case.   We find ourselves, yet again, in a situation where conservatives are trying to manufacture a story where there isn't one in an attempt to play the victim.

As near as I can tell Texas allows judges to perform marriages,  but doesn't require it.  This would make it perfectly fine for any judge to choose to or not to marry anyone or everyone that asks, for whatever reason.

However Mrs. Davis is required by law to give a marriage  license to anyone legally allowed to have one. There's a huge difference there.  She was given a chance to conform on her own free will, but chose not to, so she paid the consequence.  It's really quite simple.

Let me get this straight.

Are you saying that you think she is constitutionally required to uphold the laws of the land?

Legally required.  Yes, of course.

And yet......you have absolutely no problem with Obama and those in his administration not enforcing laws that they don't agree with.

Interesting......

And who are you calling hypocrites?

WTF are you talking about?

Dr. Jones wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Clicker wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Apples and oranges.

There is a difference in that one refuses to issue a license and the other refuses to honor a license.  Now, that said, what do you think the reaction would be if the judge were refusing to perform gay marriages only?  

That's not really the case.   We find ourselves, yet again, in a situation where conservatives are trying to manufacture a story where there isn't one in an attempt to play the victim.

As near as I can tell Texas allows judges to perform marriages,  but doesn't require it.  This would make it perfectly fine for any judge to choose to or not to marry anyone or everyone that asks, for whatever reason.

However Mrs. Davis is required by law to give a marriage  license to anyone legally allowed to have one. There's a huge difference there.  She was given a chance to conform on her own free will, but chose not to, so she paid the consequence.  It's really quite simple.

Let me get this straight.

Are you saying that you think she is constitutionally required to uphold the laws of the land?

Legally required.  Yes, of course.

And yet......you have absolutely no problem with Obama and those in his administration not enforcing laws that they don't agree with.

Interesting......

And who are you calling hypocrites?

WTF are you talking about?

You must not be on the conservative chain email list. Their argument in this case is something stupid similar to "if Obama can break the law then why not Davis". Pretty moronic.

Dr. Jones wrote:

It seems to me that you feel there was some evil conspiracy to put her and keep her in jail.   Am I wrong about that?  Who do you think was pressuring the judge to let her out of jail?  

I'm guessing he found that she was dumber than he thought, and wouldn't do her job even under the threat of jail time.  The only real pressure I see to letting her out is the disruptions caused by the situation.  Huckleberry Hound disrupted classes for the day with his campaign stunt and Teddy 'The Bazooka' was right on his heels.  Cancellation of school over this foolishness is completely unacceptable.

Another case of what you heard isn't what I said. Common with Libs, particularly those who need to change the subject. Putting her in jail is the most common of knee jerk reactions by most judges. It's the only real authority they have over the non-compliant. The extent of a contempt action is usually determined by the non-compliants attitude. Seen it a few times, a penitent defendant will get off more times than not. She was not in the least in that category.

The DNC via it's elected officials was probably on the phone in nanoseconds demanding the judge let her go immediately. The flood of media attention was growing to the point that all the Rep candidates had a new platform to perform on. In the Religious Right groups the Clerk could be the next judge if it's an elected position.
As for reps seizing on the moment, they are simply taking a page out of the Alinsky playbook the Dems have used for years. The difference is that when Conservative "activists" show up there isn't any rioting and looting like what happens when the Dems get their constituents riled up. Cancelling school for a day (if that actually happened) as opposed to shutting down a city and doing multi millions of dollars damage is a rather stark contrast.

Ham Flower? wrote:

You must not be on the conservative chain email list. Their argument in this case is something stupid similar to "if Obama can break the law then why not Davis". Pretty moronic.

I havn't seen this, where did you?

Clicker wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

It seems to me that you feel there was some evil conspiracy to put her and keep her in jail.   Am I wrong about that?  Who do you think was pressuring the judge to let her out of jail?  

I'm guessing he found that she was dumber than he thought, and wouldn't do her job even under the threat of jail time.  The only real pressure I see to letting her out is the disruptions caused by the situation.  Huckleberry Hound disrupted classes for the day with his campaign stunt and Teddy 'The Bazooka' was right on his heels.  Cancellation of school over this foolishness is completely unacceptable.

Another case of what you heard isn't what I said.  Common with Libs, particularly those who need to change the subject.  Putting her in jail is the most common of knee jerk reactions by most judges.  It's the only real authority they have over the non-compliant.  The extent of a contempt action is usually determined by the non-compliants attitude. Seen it a few times, a penitent defendant will get off more times than not.  She was not in the least in that category.  

The DNC via it's elected officials was probably on the phone in nanoseconds demanding the judge let her go immediately.   The flood of media attention was growing to the point that all the Rep candidates had a new platform to perform on.  In the Religious Right groups the Clerk could be the next judge if it's an elected position.
As for reps seizing on the moment, they are simply taking a page out of the Alinsky playbook the Dems have used for years.  The difference is that when Conservative "activists" show up there isn't any rioting and looting like what happens when the Dems get their constituents riled up.  Cancelling school for a day (if that actually happened) as opposed to shutting down a city and doing multi millions of dollars damage is a rather stark contrast.  

I don't see where any amount of repentance would make any difference one way or another in this case. It was simply a question of whether or not she agreed to fulfill the obligations of her elected position.

Why would the DNC care if this homophobic hypocrite sat and rotted in a jail cell for not doing her job?

Dr. Jones wrote:

I don't see where any amount of repentance would make any difference one way or another in this case.  It was simply a question of whether or not she agreed to fulfill the obligations of her elected position.

Why would the DNC care if this homophobic hypocrite sat and rotted in a jail cell for not doing her job?

You really are dense aren't you.

Obviously the dems would rather see her in jail but the media storm it created and the new platform for the Reps to get free face time on TV caused them to gag on their kneejerk impulse to jail her and throw away the key in order to keep them out of the free media exposure. The hypocrisy is so strong even a Dem can't hold their nose tight enough to avoid the stench.

Clicker wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

I don't see where any amount of repentance would make any difference one way or another in this case.  It was simply a question of whether or not she agreed to fulfill the obligations of her elected position.

Why would the DNC care if this homophobic hypocrite sat and rotted in a jail cell for not doing her job?

You really are dense aren't you.

Obviously the dems would rather see her in jail but the media storm it created and the new platform for the Reps to get free face time on TV caused them to gag on their kneejerk impulse to jail her and throw away the key in order to keep them out of the free media exposure.  The hypocrisy is so strong even a Dem can't hold their nose tight enough to avoid the stench.

Ahhh, now your conspiracy theory comes to life.  Democrats put her in jail?  How did they go about doing that, do you suppose? You think Republicans are getting good media exposure for standing behind a hypocrite that refuses to do her job?

If it's of any consolation to you guys, just because the government says it's marriage doesn't make it true. A marriage license is merely a legal contract. Marriage is something entirely different.

Dr. Jones wrote:

Clicker wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

It seems to me that you feel there was some evil conspiracy to put her and keep her in jail.   Am I wrong about that?  Who do you think was pressuring the judge to let her out of jail?  

I'm guessing he found that she was dumber than he thought, and wouldn't do her job even under the threat of jail time.  The only real pressure I see to letting her out is the disruptions caused by the situation.  Huckleberry Hound disrupted classes for the day with his campaign stunt and Teddy 'The Bazooka' was right on his heels.  Cancellation of school over this foolishness is completely unacceptable.

Another case of what you heard isn't what I said.  Common with Libs, particularly those who need to change the subject.  Putting her in jail is the most common of knee jerk reactions by most judges.  It's the only real authority they have over the non-compliant.  The extent of a contempt action is usually determined by the non-compliants attitude. Seen it a few times, a penitent defendant will get off more times than not.  She was not in the least in that category.  

The DNC via it's elected officials was probably on the phone in nanoseconds demanding the judge let her go immediately.   The flood of media attention was growing to the point that all the Rep candidates had a new platform to perform on.  In the Religious Right groups the Clerk could be the next judge if it's an elected position.
As for reps seizing on the moment, they are simply taking a page out of the Alinsky playbook the Dems have used for years.  The difference is that when Conservative "activists" show up there isn't any rioting and looting like what happens when the Dems get their constituents riled up.  Cancelling school for a day (if that actually happened) as opposed to shutting down a city and doing multi millions of dollars damage is a rather stark contrast.  

I don't see where any amount of repentance would make any difference one way or another in this case.  It was simply a question of whether or not she agreed to fulfill the obligations of her elected position.

Why would the DNC care if this homophobic hypocrite sat and rotted in a jail cell for not doing her job?

You mean like Obama who swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States?

I wish they would jail that traitor or put him in front of a firing squad.

Darth Cheney wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Clicker wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

It seems to me that you feel there was some evil conspiracy to put her and keep her in jail.   Am I wrong about that?  Who do you think was pressuring the judge to let her out of jail?  

I'm guessing he found that she was dumber than he thought, and wouldn't do her job even under the threat of jail time.  The only real pressure I see to letting her out is the disruptions caused by the situation.  Huckleberry Hound disrupted classes for the day with his campaign stunt and Teddy 'The Bazooka' was right on his heels.  Cancellation of school over this foolishness is completely unacceptable.

Another case of what you heard isn't what I said.  Common with Libs, particularly those who need to change the subject.  Putting her in jail is the most common of knee jerk reactions by most judges.  It's the only real authority they have over the non-compliant.  The extent of a contempt action is usually determined by the non-compliants attitude. Seen it a few times, a penitent defendant will get off more times than not.  She was not in the least in that category.  

The DNC via it's elected officials was probably on the phone in nanoseconds demanding the judge let her go immediately.   The flood of media attention was growing to the point that all the Rep candidates had a new platform to perform on.  In the Religious Right groups the Clerk could be the next judge if it's an elected position.
As for reps seizing on the moment, they are simply taking a page out of the Alinsky playbook the Dems have used for years.  The difference is that when Conservative "activists" show up there isn't any rioting and looting like what happens when the Dems get their constituents riled up.  Cancelling school for a day (if that actually happened) as opposed to shutting down a city and doing multi millions of dollars damage is a rather stark contrast.  

I don't see where any amount of repentance would make any difference one way or another in this case.  It was simply a question of whether or not she agreed to fulfill the obligations of her elected position.

Why would the DNC care if this homophobic hypocrite sat and rotted in a jail cell for not doing her job?

You mean like Obama who swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States?

I wish they would jail that traitor or put him in front of a firing squad.

What part didn't he uphold?

Apparently "Eye of the tiger" wasn't written with homophobes in mind...

Band unhappy with Kim Davis song choice
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/09/entertainment/eye-of-the-tiger-kim-davis-survivor-feat/index.html

Dr. Jones wrote:Apparently "Eye of the tiger" wasn't written with homophobes in mind...

Band unhappy with Kim Davis song choice
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/09/entertainment/eye-of-the-tiger-kim-davis-survivor-feat/index.html

Nice picture of your wife Fcukstik.

Survivor and Jim Peterik sucked donkey balls. Peterik should be grateful that his crappy song is getting airplay again. Save me from '80s hair bands.

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:Apparently "Eye of the tiger" wasn't written with homophobes in mind...

Band unhappy with Kim Davis song choice
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/09/entertainment/eye-of-the-tiger-kim-davis-survivor-feat/index.html

Nice picture of your wife Fcukstik.

Survivor and Jim Peterik sucked donkey balls. Peterik should be grateful that his crappy song is getting airplay again. Save me from '80s hair bands.

Couldn't be her. She's hairless from the eyebrows down.

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:Apparently "Eye of the tiger" wasn't written with homophobes in mind...

Band unhappy with Kim Davis song choice
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/09/entertainment/eye-of-the-tiger-kim-davis-survivor-feat/index.html

Nice picture of your wife Fcukstik.

Survivor and Jim Peterik sucked donkey balls. Peterik should be grateful that his crappy song is getting airplay again. Save me from '80s hair bands.

Couldn't be her.  She's hairless from the eyebrows down.  

It's called an inflatable sheep.

Darth Cheney wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:Apparently "Eye of the tiger" wasn't written with homophobes in mind...

Band unhappy with Kim Davis song choice
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/09/entertainment/eye-of-the-tiger-kim-davis-survivor-feat/index.html

Nice picture of your wife Fcukstik.

Survivor and Jim Peterik sucked donkey balls. Peterik should be grateful that his crappy song is getting airplay again. Save me from '80s hair bands.

Couldn't be her.  She's hairless from the eyebrows down.  

It's called an inflatable sheep.

An inflatable sheep with real eyebrows? That's a whole different fantasy. Is it a unibrow? That may be hawt...

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Clicker wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

It seems to me that you feel there was some evil conspiracy to put her and keep her in jail.   Am I wrong about that?  Who do you think was pressuring the judge to let her out of jail?  

I'm guessing he found that she was dumber than he thought, and wouldn't do her job even under the threat of jail time.  The only real pressure I see to letting her out is the disruptions caused by the situation.  Huckleberry Hound disrupted classes for the day with his campaign stunt and Teddy 'The Bazooka' was right on his heels.  Cancellation of school over this foolishness is completely unacceptable.

Another case of what you heard isn't what I said.  Common with Libs, particularly those who need to change the subject.  Putting her in jail is the most common of knee jerk reactions by most judges.  It's the only real authority they have over the non-compliant.  The extent of a contempt action is usually determined by the non-compliants attitude. Seen it a few times, a penitent defendant will get off more times than not.  She was not in the least in that category.  

The DNC via it's elected officials was probably on the phone in nanoseconds demanding the judge let her go immediately.   The flood of media attention was growing to the point that all the Rep candidates had a new platform to perform on.  In the Religious Right groups the Clerk could be the next judge if it's an elected position.
As for reps seizing on the moment, they are simply taking a page out of the Alinsky playbook the Dems have used for years.  The difference is that when Conservative "activists" show up there isn't any rioting and looting like what happens when the Dems get their constituents riled up.  Cancelling school for a day (if that actually happened) as opposed to shutting down a city and doing multi millions of dollars damage is a rather stark contrast.  

I don't see where any amount of repentance would make any difference one way or another in this case.  It was simply a question of whether or not she agreed to fulfill the obligations of her elected position.

Why would the DNC care if this homophobic hypocrite sat and rotted in a jail cell for not doing her job?

You mean like Obama who swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States?

I wish they would jail that traitor or put him in front of a firing squad.

What part didn't he uphold?

Are you really that daft?

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Clicker wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

It seems to me that you feel there was some evil conspiracy to put her and keep her in jail.   Am I wrong about that?  Who do you think was pressuring the judge to let her out of jail?  

I'm guessing he found that she was dumber than he thought, and wouldn't do her job even under the threat of jail time.  The only real pressure I see to letting her out is the disruptions caused by the situation.  Huckleberry Hound disrupted classes for the day with his campaign stunt and Teddy 'The Bazooka' was right on his heels.  Cancellation of school over this foolishness is completely unacceptable.

Another case of what you heard isn't what I said.  Common with Libs, particularly those who need to change the subject.  Putting her in jail is the most common of knee jerk reactions by most judges.  It's the only real authority they have over the non-compliant.  The extent of a contempt action is usually determined by the non-compliants attitude. Seen it a few times, a penitent defendant will get off more times than not.  She was not in the least in that category.  

The DNC via it's elected officials was probably on the phone in nanoseconds demanding the judge let her go immediately.   The flood of media attention was growing to the point that all the Rep candidates had a new platform to perform on.  In the Religious Right groups the Clerk could be the next judge if it's an elected position.
As for reps seizing on the moment, they are simply taking a page out of the Alinsky playbook the Dems have used for years.  The difference is that when Conservative "activists" show up there isn't any rioting and looting like what happens when the Dems get their constituents riled up.  Cancelling school for a day (if that actually happened) as opposed to shutting down a city and doing multi millions of dollars damage is a rather stark contrast.  

I don't see where any amount of repentance would make any difference one way or another in this case.  It was simply a question of whether or not she agreed to fulfill the obligations of her elected position.

Why would the DNC care if this homophobic hypocrite sat and rotted in a jail cell for not doing her job?

You mean like Obama who swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States?

I wish they would jail that traitor or put him in front of a firing squad.

What part didn't he uphold?

Are you really that daft?

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:
You mean like Obama who swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States?

I wish they would jail that traitor or put him in front of a firing squad.

What part didn't he uphold?

Oh my, where does one begin??

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:
You mean like Obama who swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States?

I wish they would jail that traitor or put him in front of a firing squad.

What part didn't he uphold?

Oh my, where does one begin??

Great question.

He swore to uphold the laws of the land, not just those he chooses to uphold.

BladeRunner wrote:He swore to uphold the laws of the land, not just those he chooses to uphold.

Ummmm....OK?

Give them a chance to look through their chain emails and wacko websites and I'm sure they'll get back to you.

Defense of Marriage Act

Gomezz Adddams wrote:Defense of Marriage Act

What about it?

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:Defense of Marriage Act

What about it?

You wanted an example of laws not enforced by Obama. DOMA was just one. There is also voter intimidation by the Black Panthers, selective enforcement of immigration laws, twenty plus changes made to Obamacare e.g. the delay of the employer mandate.