1
16

[–] Moonbat 1 points 16 points (+17|-1) ago 

The government doesn't, and shouldn't, decide who is married, and neither should Kim Davis.

But if it absolutely must give us permission to be married, then we shouldn't be subject to Kim's religious convictions, any more than we should be subject to those of any other religious fanatic.

4
1

[–] RedditDead2005-2015 [S] 4 points 1 points (+5|-4) ago 

Marriages recognized by the federal government and states are legal and not religious marriages. Atheists, Hindus, Muslims can be married. This bitch seems to only recognize Christian marriages. She could just have easily denied atheists a marriage license based on her religious convictions. Do you see why she needs to only go by the law? BTW, I personally feel it's stupid to have gays marry in a church as they don't play by the rules, but legal marriage is necessary for health insurance coverage of spouses, legal power attorney (e.g., decisions on spouse in coma), and IRS reasons (declaring married status for income taxes).

0
3

[–] Moonbat 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Mostly agree, but

legal marriage is necessary for health insurance coverage of spouses, legal power attorney (e.g., decisions on spouse in coma), and IRS reasons (declaring married status for income taxes).

Yeah. Legal legal legal. "Legal" marriage is a legal thing only, that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with real marriage. It shouldn't exist, imo.

edit: And she doesn't apparently understand that.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

1
10

[–] RedditDead2005-2015 [S] 1 points 10 points (+11|-1) ago  (edited ago)

So I see Christians crying victimization just like blacks too. The bitch has been married 4 times. And she's a Biblical law-abiding Christian. LOL.

12
-11

0
5

[–] Thatdrumdude 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Yeah, man it's totally a crime to be a christian. It might as well be a gang at this point. With how much the government punishes christianity by making all of their churches tax free and letting the religion influence law. Totally how we treat criminals.

1
5

[–] Asinus 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

I see where he is coming from, but I must disagree. Since the government has a total monopoly on marriage licenses, the couple in this instance can't go find another supplier. I do believe there should be some form of conscientious objector protection which would cover her, but she is outright refusing for anyone to do it.

The better example would be the bakery that refused to bake a cake for a gay wedding. The gay couple could have gone to any number of bakeries that were in their community who would have happily made the cake. Instead they decided to sue for everything under the sun and drive them out of business.

0
4

[–] Devildetails 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Her form of protest here is one choice quit, otherwise quit breaking the law asshole.

0
2

[–] Asinus 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Way to keep it above the table. I did not belittle or disrespect anyone, but you went straight to the insults. If you read my post, I said she should do the marriage license as the government has a total monopoly in this instance.

The part about the conscientious objector status is a well known legal standing. This is why you don't see the Amish in the military, even though all men over 18 are required to register for selective service. Only when you get into abortion and gay politics do the absolutists come into play.

The gay rights movement has moved away from "All we want is equality" to "You will be made to care and approve of our choice! If you don't we will destroy you!"

0
3

[–] ninjajunkie 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

You can't volunteer to be a conscientious objector. She holds public office, no one made her do that, unlike the draft or something where CO usually comes up.

0
2

[–] Asinus 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I agree, but when she took office this possibility wasn't around. The closest thing would be a doctor who refuses to do abortions.

0
0

[–] thatsmrdickface 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Totally agree!!!1!

I plan to open a bakery of my own. However, my religion is such that we believe that blacks are inferior to whites. It goes against my religion to serve blacks.

The government shouldn't have any say in whether or not I deny services to blacks.

After all, the blacks can just go to another bakery and get another cake!

0
0

[–] Asinus 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I am a Libertarian and we think that is perfectly fine if you want to do that. You would need to accept the consequences of that action (bad press, fewer customers) and you would most likely go out of business. The government shouldn't have any say in the matter.

0
4

[–] CaptainPoison 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Huckabee is a massive fraud https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoY-4uE-fAU

0
1

[–] RedditDead2005-2015 [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I died laughing when he said "Do you know what the cure is? <long pause> Cinnamon." :)

2
1

[–] isitfridayyet 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

And all the dumbfuck bible thumpers will agree with him.

1
1

[–] RedditDead2005-2015 [S] 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

"I let her know how proud I am of her for not abandoning her religious convictions and standing strong for religious liberty," Huckabee said in a statement.

0
4

[–] tpdplsio 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

So if a Muslim was a county clerk and did the same thing, he'd totally be cool with it?

1
4

[–] RedditDead2005-2015 [S] 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

That's the hypocrisy with Christians. Freedom of religion means freedom of Christian religion which may or may not include Catholics and Mormons depending on which state you're in.

0
0

[–] kickassdanny 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Separation of church and state. She is a representative of the state. She is breaking the law.