NATION

PASSWORD

Kentucky County Clerk Denies Gay Marriage Licenses

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 40542
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:26 pm

Dyakovo wrote:
Vaikneland wrote: marriage= religion. You're an idiot.

Marriage I the US is a secular institution. No church involvement is required for a marriage to be valid.


For that matter if a church would perform a marriage ceremony without the government papers and all that, then as far as the government is concerned no marriage has taken place.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
Geilinor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41328
Founded: Feb 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Geilinor » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:26 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Neu California wrote:
Or a government official in the right capacity. I don't know why you think you need a priest to get married, because, legally, you don't

Well you clearly need to get through Christianity somehow. Also, I noticed you're a communist, and I can see why your vision is so clouded ;)

You don't need Christianity to get married. Do you think non-Christians don't have marriage?
Member of the Free Democratic Party. Not left. Not right. Forward.
Economic Left/Right: -1.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.41

User avatar
Mondoncon
Envoy
 
Posts: 240
Founded: Feb 23, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Mondoncon » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:26 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Neu California wrote:
Or a government official in the right capacity. I don't know why you think you need a priest to get married, because, legally, you don't

Well you clearly need to get through Christianity somehow. Also, I noticed you're a communist, and I can see why your vision is so clouded ;)

Christianity neither invented nor owns marriage.
Que?

User avatar
Vaikneland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 570
Founded: Feb 01, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Vaikneland » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:26 pm

Neutraligon wrote:
Vaikneland wrote:Kim Davis is the connection if the Christian church. Forcing her to marry someone does not follow the constitution. And yet people complain about how we have no freedom anymore.


Kim Davis has nothing to do with the Christian church while she is in the office. She might have a connection outside office, but while she is in the office she is solely a county clerk.

Wow her whole identity changes when she walks through the doors at the cout house! Please tell me how she does that, I wish I could do the same. :o
Pro: Conservative, Capitalism, Right-Wing parties, LGBT, small government, Israel, military, small minimum wage, police, freedom from taxation, 2nd Amendment, Constitution,

Neutral: religion, Palestine, abortion [to some extent]

Anti: Communism, Socialism, Leftists, gun control, high minimum wage, high income tax, Obama, SANDERS, Hillary, legalizing marajuana, welfare, race card


Trump 2016 Born Right

User avatar
Highfort
Minister
 
Posts: 2910
Founded: May 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Highfort » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:26 pm

Vaikneland wrote:Well you clearly need to get through Christianity somehow. Also, I noticed you're a communist, and I can see why your vision is so clouded ;)


Marriage is not a Christian-exclusive institution. Romans were getting married long before the pathetic figure that is Jesus Christ was nailed to a cross.
First as tragedy, then as farce

User avatar
Furry Alairia and Algeria
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21009
Founded: Apr 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Furry Alairia and Algeria » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:26 pm

Geilinor wrote:
Vaikneland wrote:Well you clearly need to get through Christianity somehow. Also, I noticed you're a communist, and I can see why your vision is so clouded ;)

You don't need Christianity to get married. Do you think non-Christians don't have marriage?

Obviously not. *nods*
In memory of Dyakovo - may he never be forgotten - Дьяковожс ученик


I do not reply to telegrams, unless you are someone I know.

User avatar
Vaikneland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 570
Founded: Feb 01, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Vaikneland » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:27 pm

Mondoncon wrote:
Vaikneland wrote:Well you clearly need to get through Christianity somehow. Also, I noticed you're a communist, and I can see why your vision is so clouded ;)

Christianity neither invented nor owns marriage.

It defines Davis' definition of it
Pro: Conservative, Capitalism, Right-Wing parties, LGBT, small government, Israel, military, small minimum wage, police, freedom from taxation, 2nd Amendment, Constitution,

Neutral: religion, Palestine, abortion [to some extent]

Anti: Communism, Socialism, Leftists, gun control, high minimum wage, high income tax, Obama, SANDERS, Hillary, legalizing marajuana, welfare, race card


Trump 2016 Born Right

User avatar
Furry Alairia and Algeria
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21009
Founded: Apr 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Furry Alairia and Algeria » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:27 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Mondoncon wrote:Christianity neither invented nor owns marriage.

It defines Davis' definition of it

the legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman (or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex) as partners in a relationship.

I don't see religion in that clause anywhere.

the relationship that exists between a husband and a wife

: a similar relationship between people of the same sex

: a ceremony in which two people are married to each other

1
a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>
b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock
c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2
: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3
: an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry — J. T. Shawcross>

So....
In memory of Dyakovo - may he never be forgotten - Дьяковожс ученик


I do not reply to telegrams, unless you are someone I know.

User avatar
Dyakovo
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 83162
Founded: Nov 13, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Dyakovo » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:27 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Mondoncon wrote:Marriage has changed in definition enough times that your argument is, shall we say... A thousand years dead.

Define marriage then.

The legally recognized union of two people in a relationship.
Where do you go for marriages, and who marries you?

The courthouse, and a justice of the peace.
What do those things involve, sir?

The government.
Last edited by Dyakovo on Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Don't take life so serious... It isn't permanent...
Freedom from religion is an integral part of Freedom of religion
Married to Koshka
USMC veteran MOS 0331/8152
Grave_n_Idle: Maybe that's why the bible is so anti-other-gods, the other gods do exist, but they diss on Jehovah all the time for his shitty work.
Ifreann: Odds are you're secretly a zebra with a very special keyboard.
Ostro: I think women need to be trained
Margno, Llamalandia, Tarsonis Survivors, Bachmann's America, Internationalist Bastard B'awwwww! You're mean!

User avatar
Geilinor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41328
Founded: Feb 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Geilinor » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:27 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Mondoncon wrote:Christianity neither invented nor owns marriage.

It defines Davis' definition of it

Davis' personal definition doesn't matter to the county.
Member of the Free Democratic Party. Not left. Not right. Forward.
Economic Left/Right: -1.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.41

User avatar
Mondoncon
Envoy
 
Posts: 240
Founded: Feb 23, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Mondoncon » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:27 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Mondoncon wrote:Christianity neither invented nor owns marriage.

It defines Davis' definition of it

Which makes her incapable of serving in her position, which means she must resign or face the legal consequences. She has options which preserve her rights, and she refused to take them.
Que?

User avatar
Vaikneland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 570
Founded: Feb 01, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Vaikneland » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:28 pm

Highfort wrote:
Vaikneland wrote:Well you clearly need to get through Christianity somehow. Also, I noticed you're a communist, and I can see why your vision is so clouded ;)


Marriage is not a Christian-exclusive institution. Romans were getting married long before the pathetic figure that is Jesus Christ was nailed to a cross.

If you aren't Christian, and you wish to get married through Davis, you obviously had to get some form of Christian values connected to you at that point
Pro: Conservative, Capitalism, Right-Wing parties, LGBT, small government, Israel, military, small minimum wage, police, freedom from taxation, 2nd Amendment, Constitution,

Neutral: religion, Palestine, abortion [to some extent]

Anti: Communism, Socialism, Leftists, gun control, high minimum wage, high income tax, Obama, SANDERS, Hillary, legalizing marajuana, welfare, race card


Trump 2016 Born Right

User avatar
Highfort
Minister
 
Posts: 2910
Founded: May 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Highfort » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:28 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Mondoncon wrote:Christianity neither invented nor owns marriage.

It defines Davis' definition of it


Davis is a government employee and their definition of marriage supersedes her own as far as her work as county clerk is concerned. If she was a court judge and defined murder differently from how the government defines it, that wouldn't permit her to let murders go off scotch-free or to give them lighter sentences just because she disagrees with the jury and the law.
First as tragedy, then as farce

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44623
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:29 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:
Kim Davis has nothing to do with the Christian church while she is in the office. She might have a connection outside office, but while she is in the office she is solely a county clerk.

Wow her whole identity changes when she walks through the doors at the cout house! Please tell me how she does that, I wish I could do the same. :o


Become a government employee, and thus, obligated to serve all people, regardless of what your misguided pastor tells you, based on a handful of misinterpreted passages from a 2-millenia old book.
Lib-left. Antifascist, antitankie, anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist (including the imperialism of non-western countries). Christian (Unitarian Universalist). Background in physics.
Mostly a girl. She or they pronouns, please. Unrepentant transbian.
Reject tradition, embrace modernity.
People who call themselves based NEVER are.
The truth about kids transitioning.

User avatar
Vaikneland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 570
Founded: Feb 01, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Vaikneland » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:29 pm

Mondoncon wrote:
Vaikneland wrote:It defines Davis' definition of it

Which makes her incapable of serving in her position, which means she must resign or face the legal consequences. She has options which preserve her rights, and she refused to take them.

Yes, so you fire her. Not throw her in jail with no bail. If anyone should be thrown in jail, it should be Hillary Clinton or Obama. But no they're above the law because they're in office and they're Liberal.
Pro: Conservative, Capitalism, Right-Wing parties, LGBT, small government, Israel, military, small minimum wage, police, freedom from taxation, 2nd Amendment, Constitution,

Neutral: religion, Palestine, abortion [to some extent]

Anti: Communism, Socialism, Leftists, gun control, high minimum wage, high income tax, Obama, SANDERS, Hillary, legalizing marajuana, welfare, race card


Trump 2016 Born Right

User avatar
Highfort
Minister
 
Posts: 2910
Founded: May 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Highfort » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:29 pm

Vaikneland wrote:If you aren't Christian, and you wish to get married through Davis, you obviously had to get some form of Christian values connected to you at that point


Nope. Davis is supposed to issue licenses for any marriage, and if she wasn't then she would be violating the Establishment Clause by having the government she was representing favor certain religions when it came to marriage. If a Muslim, Jewish, atheist, Buddhist, or gay couple wants to get a government marriage license, it is her job to provide one.
First as tragedy, then as farce

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 40542
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:29 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:
Kim Davis has nothing to do with the Christian church while she is in the office. She might have a connection outside office, but while she is in the office she is solely a county clerk.

Wow her whole identity changes when she walks through the doors at the cout house! Please tell me how she does that, I wish I could do the same. :o


Her identity no, her religion while she is in office however is completely irrelevant and limited as per the first amendment. If she is unable to do her job because of her beliefs then she needs to resign. As she refuses to do that, and refuses to do her job as a representative of the US government, thus depriving homosexual individuals of the Constitutionally protected right of equality before the law, she is thus being held in contempt of court. It has nothing to do with her religion and everything to do with her failing to obey the legal orders of a court and her failure to obey the law of the land.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
Mondoncon
Envoy
 
Posts: 240
Founded: Feb 23, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Mondoncon » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:30 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Highfort wrote:
Marriage is not a Christian-exclusive institution. Romans were getting married long before the pathetic figure that is Jesus Christ was nailed to a cross.

If you aren't Christian, and you wish to get married through Davis, you obviously had to get some form of Christian values connected to you at that point

No you don't, that's the point. Kim Davis is not a church official. The Church is irrelevant here. Christianity is irrelevant here. Christianity is between her and god. It does not come between her and her duties, and if it does, it's entirely on her to reconcile those issues by resigning from her position.

Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's.
Que?

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44623
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:30 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Mondoncon wrote:Christianity neither invented nor owns marriage.

It defines Davis' definition of it


Davis is not the government. Davis doesn't get to define the government's definition of marriage.
Lib-left. Antifascist, antitankie, anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist (including the imperialism of non-western countries). Christian (Unitarian Universalist). Background in physics.
Mostly a girl. She or they pronouns, please. Unrepentant transbian.
Reject tradition, embrace modernity.
People who call themselves based NEVER are.
The truth about kids transitioning.

User avatar
Geilinor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41328
Founded: Feb 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Geilinor » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:30 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Mondoncon wrote:Which makes her incapable of serving in her position, which means she must resign or face the legal consequences. She has options which preserve her rights, and she refused to take them.

Yes, so you fire her. Not throw her in jail with no bail. If anyone should be thrown in jail, it should be Hillary Clinton or Obama. But no they're above the law because they're in office and they're Liberal.

Elected officials can't be fired and the legislature isn't in session.
Last edited by Geilinor on Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Member of the Free Democratic Party. Not left. Not right. Forward.
Economic Left/Right: -1.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.41

User avatar
Highfort
Minister
 
Posts: 2910
Founded: May 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Highfort » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:30 pm

Vaikneland wrote:Yes, so you fire her. Not throw her in jail with no bail.


You cannot fire an elected official in her county. Elected officials must resign or do their jobs; she chose neither so now she is in jail for contempt of court.
First as tragedy, then as farce

User avatar
Dyakovo
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 83162
Founded: Nov 13, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Dyakovo » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:30 pm

Stellonia wrote:
Dyakovo wrote:He's demonstrated far greater uunderstanding of the constitution than you have.
Not only was she violating the fourteenth amendment, she was alsoviolating the first.
As a court clerk, she's an agent of the government. Her choosing to use her government position to enforce her religious valuesupon others violates the separation of church and state proscribed in the first amendment.

The separation of church and state is not established by the First Amendment.
Yes, it is.
Don't take life so serious... It isn't permanent...
Freedom from religion is an integral part of Freedom of religion
Married to Koshka
USMC veteran MOS 0331/8152
Grave_n_Idle: Maybe that's why the bible is so anti-other-gods, the other gods do exist, but they diss on Jehovah all the time for his shitty work.
Ifreann: Odds are you're secretly a zebra with a very special keyboard.
Ostro: I think women need to be trained
Margno, Llamalandia, Tarsonis Survivors, Bachmann's America, Internationalist Bastard B'awwwww! You're mean!

User avatar
Vaikneland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 570
Founded: Feb 01, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Vaikneland » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:30 pm

Highfort wrote:
Vaikneland wrote:If you aren't Christian, and you wish to get married through Davis, you obviously had to get some form of Christian values connected to you at that point


Nope. Davis is supposed to issue licenses for any marriage, and if she wasn't then she would be violating the Establishment Clause by having the government she was representing favor certain religions when it came to marriage. If a Muslim, Jewish, atheist, Buddhist, or gay couple wants to get a government marriage license, it is her job to provide one.

Look, I'm an atheist believe it or not. If I wanted to get married through her, and Shes Christian, is end up being influenced by her beliefs
Pro: Conservative, Capitalism, Right-Wing parties, LGBT, small government, Israel, military, small minimum wage, police, freedom from taxation, 2nd Amendment, Constitution,

Neutral: religion, Palestine, abortion [to some extent]

Anti: Communism, Socialism, Leftists, gun control, high minimum wage, high income tax, Obama, SANDERS, Hillary, legalizing marajuana, welfare, race card


Trump 2016 Born Right

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44623
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:31 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Highfort wrote:
Marriage is not a Christian-exclusive institution. Romans were getting married long before the pathetic figure that is Jesus Christ was nailed to a cross.

If you aren't Christian, and you wish to get married through Davis, you obviously had to get some form of Christian values connected to you at that point


Says who?
Lib-left. Antifascist, antitankie, anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist (including the imperialism of non-western countries). Christian (Unitarian Universalist). Background in physics.
Mostly a girl. She or they pronouns, please. Unrepentant transbian.
Reject tradition, embrace modernity.
People who call themselves based NEVER are.
The truth about kids transitioning.

User avatar
Mondoncon
Envoy
 
Posts: 240
Founded: Feb 23, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Mondoncon » Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:31 pm

Vaikneland wrote:
Mondoncon wrote:Which makes her incapable of serving in her position, which means she must resign or face the legal consequences. She has options which preserve her rights, and she refused to take them.

Yes, so you fire her. Not throw her in jail with no bail. If anyone should be thrown in jail, it should be Hillary Clinton or Obama. But no they're above the law because they're in office and they're Liberal.

You can't fire an elected official without an impeachment, which would require a special session, which the governor needs incredibly good reason to call. The Kentucky senate only meets 90 days of the year, after all.. The easier option is to force her to resign or preform her job through court order, because it doesn't violate anyone's rights, just her misconception of what her rights entails.
Last edited by Mondoncon on Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Que?

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Greater Cesnica, Ifreann, Raskana, Sklobia, Techocracy101010

Advertisement

Remove ads