America Now Jailing Christians for Religious Convictions

“Thank you, RC, for pointing out that I am totally ignorant of the whole situation”

You are totally welcome.
I do a can for the ill-informed humans in our country.

“Did her supervisor not realize they were heading for a conflict when the Supremes handed down the ruling?”

She has no supervisor.
SHE IS “IT”.

It’s her office, they all work for her.
They are currently using a stamp with her signature, to issue licenses.

Why don’t you know this?

I guess hate media wants you to be ill-informed, otherwise how can they get you upset?

Does Linda know that it’s a CONSERVATIVE JUDGE that put her in jail?
His words were
“we are a nation of laws, and you silly bitch, need to follow them “

“Why all the vitriol?”
I don’t know, I think low information humans posting crap on the Internet brings it out of me.

Gosh Linda, is no logic involved here.

We call them facts here in America.

This woman was jailed for “CONTEMPT OF COURT”.

Plain and simple. The Constitution really is an issue.

This bimbo was ordered by a federal judge to do her job.

She refused. She pays the price.
Maybe a few months in an all woman’s prison will smarten her up.

There are tens of thousands of county clerks doing their jobs even though they may think it’s against their religious beliefs.
WE ARE A NATION OF LAWS.

Over the top Americans, who force their religion on others, don’t deserve respect.

She was given ample opportunities to stay out of jail.
She refused.

That makes her either a bimbo or publicity seeking zealot.

Now she can quit her job and write a book, going to speaking tour and get rich from Christians giving her money to here speak.

Pathetic is that is.

Gee 57,
that does not compare all.

Because the silly woman is not permitted to practice her religious beliefs while holding public office.

Separation of church and state and all that.

She is allowed to do whatever she likes religiously speaking, in her home or church or private property.

She is not allowed to push her crazy Christian beliefs on the general public as part of her elected position to public office.
There is a spot in the Constitution specifically forbidding religious tests for government office.

He has no proof and he nothing more than a liberal troll who thrives on throwing his two cents into every topic he can. He is as crazy as the SC that enacted or made new law in this case. It was illegal and unconstitutional. Civil disobedience is required in this case. So, just ignore RC as he will never change nor will he ever acknowledge the truth. The only truth he understands is that which his liberal idols proliferate and espouse.

It also shows LGBT has Super- Rights over other protected classes. I knew this would happen if they were given a status. So I don’t recognize that status. The LGBT already had rights under the constitution. Now they have Super-Rights. Supreme Court lopsided , agenda driven , and bigoted. More Dissention to follow.

This conversation isn’t about Muslims, Louis Farrakhan, or President Obama. It’s about Kim Davis. Not saying I support all the other issues you mentioned, but it’s still not the topic here.

She is following the laws of GOD instead of man, since man’s law has be the subservient to GOD’s. If you don’t believe the Bible, you have to suffer the consequences.

Talking about getting the hell out, don’t let the door hit you in the arse.

Miss Mellie, I realize you must have had a very sheltered life, but be advised that “arse” is the British preferred spelling and pronunciation of the part of the anatomy at issue. Go here for probably all you might wish to know–and more–about the matter:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/arse

She has a right to believe and wit s hip who/whatever she believes in. She h a s no right to force her beliefs on others. It’s really simple and you guys just want yo bend abduct e ist the law to make it what you want. She’s only b e ing persecuted for failing yo perform h e r duties as prescribed under the law. Period.

Who’s forcing their beliefs here ?

Uh , is gay marriage the law ? Show me where congress passed the law . Also , Kentuckys’ Constitution only recognizes marriage between a man & a woman. Smart enough for ya ?

I do wonder why, if she is “failing yo perform her duties as prescribed” (sic), her employers (electors) have not asked her to hand in a resignation, or sought to have her impeached, or why there has been no public outcry for a recall election or impeachment. There are any number of legal ways to try to remove from office any official who fails to measure up to the requirements of his/her job. Seems the lack of any of this shows at least tacit approval of her performance by her employers (electors).

Hmmm… That’s why I referred to her employers as electors. Those danged rural Kentucky uneducated hicks, eh? Also seems there is more developing re: the “scofflaw” qualifier. There are now questions as to whether or not there were enacted “Kentucky laws” that this lady might have violated. Seems there might NOT have been. I also wonder why there were no “judge-sourced” calls for scofflaw E. Holder to be jailed re: his attitude toward DOMA enforcement as long as it was a standing law, which many “enlightened” folks also simply disliked. Fast&Furious comes to mind as well, re: Fed firearms laws, and DOJ (?) involvement in Operation Chokepoint. I’m not even going to mention H Clinton’s email issues… oooops, messed up there. Much blatant law-scoffing going on that somehow doesn’t seem to rise to the same level of calling for jail time for those ignoring court-ordered or even Congress-ordered compliance in info providing. The Davis issue seems uniquely targeted, a la IRS/TEA Party scandal. But, I’m sure I’m mistaken in that.

Roger that, Prof. I just replied to another commenter along the same lines. Hold the line, Bro.

Evolved I think you did come from the monkey thru evolution. But I was created in the image of GOD, but you wouldn’t know about that.
Don’t take offense, I am just having a little fun and cutting up a bit. However, I do believe we must uphold the standards. Of that I am sure. In all honesty, she probably should resign, no body is making her do this. But she got released today, we will see what happens. May GOD bless and keep you.

“Separation of powers?” That principle does not even enter into this controversy!
Or are you so Constitutionally illiterate as not to know the difference between separation of powers and separation of church and state? And YOU call others “pathetic” and tell them to “Go back to school”!? Best pack up your own pencil box and wide-lined tablet!

Then, in your wisdom, show us where the separation of powers doctrine was violated in any way in the case of the stubborn Kentucky clerk!

Want to try again shirley. Your post doesn’t make sense.

Congress passed a law ? Show me !

Considering, braindead judges, making the law, fit their, delusions; every, incompetent decision, is, passing, law, from the bench…… Edgrrr…

Mark Roe: We are saying the same thing in different ways. I used a lot less words. That’s all.

And you would apply that “logic” to any and all judicial rulings that you disagree with?
That, Laddyboy, is a sure and certain path to chaos!

I know this is pointless, but no matter how many exclamations points you use, the judges were only applying an existing law that’s been around for some hundreds of years.

I wonder. If I check back, will I find that you made any comments on the ‘hobby-lobby’ decision?” That decision created one of the most dangerous and stupid precedents ever seen, granting that a corporation may have a religion, and that the bigotry of a given religious group, may trump worker welfare laws that were meant to protect and include everybody. Now that one was a pulled-it-right-out-of-their-asses novelty. On the other hand, This whole equality before the law thing, has actually been kicking around for quite a while.

In a moment or two, I’m going to count those, Laddyboy. I’m creating a graph.

The judges didn’t “reinterpret” anything. They merely applied an existing standard, the legal definition of marriage and the codified benefits and recognition of status conferred upon them therein, to everyone. As… Was altogether fitting and proper for them to do. That is what is in the constitution, rights and protections that apply to every citizen.

You might also consider another point, if you can get your finger unstuck from between the [#1] and [Tilde] keys on your keyboard. The definition of marriage was never a christian property. That is as silly as the christian need to think that Christianity, and/or the second most evil character in all of fiction after Allah, is was the author of wisdom and morality. All of these things are part of human nature, and existed a couple of hundred thousand years before Christianity or Judaism.

The definition of marriage is unchanged, it’s just that now, the court has legally decreed that status can no longer be withheld from other citizens by bigots and morons. It’s not even the first time that’s had to happen, either.

Seriously, need to, use, proper sentence, structure.

Some Sheeple evade the issue, with, their pseudo, education, as if, that format, supercedes, the subject…. which, they obviously get, well, enough, to sleaze in their strawman, soap operas….. …Edgrrr…

Let me explain to you what article 7 means. It means that a person does not have to pass a test concerning religion in order to acquire a job with the state. It is so that a state cannot force religion on anyone in order for them to acquire a job in state government.

It relates back to the 1st amendment-Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; Neither congress nor a state has the right to require anyone to be religious in order to work for any public office. Nor do those same entities have a right to interfere, or prohibit a religious person from exercising their religious beliefs.

Ask yourself why 2 gays, drove all the way from Ohio, passing states where they could have stopped and gotten a marriage license anywhere along the way, just to go to this town in Kentucky, with the media in tow? It is obvious that they were there to make an example out of this clerk, and show her that their rights trumped hers. Her rights today, your rights tomorrow. I look forward to telling you that I told you so.

Wow, you came up with that spin all by yourself! So many words, yet, you said nothing of substance. Why don’t you try the actual facts and look up the law headoncrooked. Oh, my bad, I remember that liberals and facts are oxymoron. As for chaos, your very post is just that.

Well as soon as you find a real situation for your hypothetical spin, your questions cannot be answered. As for the clerk in question, she offered alternatives that would not have violated her religious convictions, but like a good little nazi, the judge was not interested in anything but to make an example out of her.

You know constitutional law, imagine that! Just for the record, I am being sarcastic. Amazing that your arrogance has you believing that you and you alone know the constitution and what it stands for. Let me give you a refresher on the 1st amendment concerning religious liberty- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; That liberal judge is violating the 1st by his ruling to put that clerk in jail for exercising her 1st amendment right. We can argue this issue until hell freezes over, but the facts will not and can not be changed.

The activist gays made a point to drive through states that would gladly have issued their marriage license, with media in tow, to also make an example out of this clerk. That clerk didn’t discriminate against gays by not issuing those marriage license. She didn’t issue license to anyone that wanted marriage license. Simply put, she tried to find a way that her name would not be on a document that violated her religious beliefs.

The supreme court ruling was never about gay marriage, it was about the destruction of our religious liberty’s. Those gay supporting justices knew that people would resist due to their beliefs, and that the law could be used to silence that decent.

This is the last time I will respond to your post as your rhetoric is becoming boring, so take this however you will. We can argue this indefinitely, and maybe you have that much time on your hands, but I do not.

Controversy is the only thing commie’s have to offer. Read the Preamble and note the word Tranquility. Does the Supreme Courts decision create Tranquility?

Wow. You’re the one who doesn’t seem to understand reality hadenough57. No government employee can force their religious beliefs on the public. Are you really so wound up that you don’t understand the basics of the 1st amendment?

You might want to grow up and stop calling everyone who disagrees with you a liberal. I’m a fiscal conservative, you little cretin.

No member of the public can force their beliefs on an elected official, either.

Is there ANY conspiracy theory you dingbats have not bought into? Marriage licenses in this Nation go back over 300 years. I make that to antedate the establishment of the dreaded Federal Reserve Bank by a considerable margin.

“In the last several hundred years, the state has played a greater role in marriage. For instance, Massachusetts began requiring marriage licenses in 1639, and by the 19th-century marriage licenses were common in the United States.”

Read more and get your presumptuous ignorant self educated:

http://www.livescience.com/37777-history-of-marriage.html

You wingnuts just pull bogus information out of thin air or out of the termini of your alimentary canals and boldly blurt it out as though it were undisputed gospel truth. And you act as though you know s-o-o-o-o much more than the rest of us! Such a pitiful, hapless, fumbling lot you are!

Tsk, tsk. As usual, insults are all you have. You really need to get new material from your borg masters. The insults are just boring and predictable……Yawn…….

I think as a clerk on Kim’s place I would have done the same thing and not provided the license……no marriage can take place ‘tween the same sex….nothing to join!!!!!!!
Gay people should come up with another word for their togetherness….make up a word….oh. oh, no ..marriage has already been defined. The Supreme Court should reconvene on this issue.

This same court caused pain and suffering for families on the abortion issue….for over 40 years …… selling baby parts…come on….no medical advancement has been made using aborted baby parts……look on line…..no progress……….look at the facts….don’t take the word of another writer on this blog. I was once stupid, as well!!!!!

I am reading this comment again……the first amendment states plainly the Kim cannot be forced to do something against her religious beliefs. And she believed this.

Even the judge who sent her to jail referred to her breaking law. YET, I repeat what law was broken. Laws are formed, debated, finally decided by Congress……..this SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the US) decision was a huge surprise to the American people.

Laws by Congress usually take a while to cone to bring a law, so people are pretty much prepared for a law (Well normally)…..but this decision was not liked by the vast majority of people on the US.
BUT. like the Roe V. Wade SCOTUS decision, peopke rush ahead and call it a law and take appropriate action they think.

What is sad, I believe, is that the children in both decisions lost a great deal. 72 million babies were aborted. The group who perform the vast majority of abortiions is selling the baby parts to research laboratories. When you consider that no good medically has ever come using aborted baby parts, you have to wonder how smart people are.

When certain Midwest states under pressure from gay activists, refused to permit a Roman Catholic Adoption agency from processing adoptions only to married and not same-sex ‘couples’ the stated closed down this agency even though they were an award-winning agency.

Childrenbv report greater happiness with a mom and a dad vs. two mom’s or two dads. So much sadness for children when adults do not take them under consideration.

Actually, these are very interesting times……….She had a man by her side leading her away from jail…..a lawyer, a friend, a relative…… Lawyers are really getting publicity……we are seeing that the Clinton are lawyers, Trey Gowdy is a lawyer as is the prez…..all are different..

I realize we are embroiled in a great Civil War being battled in the courts. Other issues like defunding PP and the US southern border and immigration await serious attention as well as a prez completely out of control.

If you missed the visual on some cite recently…it was an excellent photo of the veeerY long and strong ‘fence’ all along the southern Mexico border with Guatemala.

RC, now that statement that you never lie, was the biggest lie you have written so far.

Separation of church and state.
Sorry David, but you have a couple hundred year precedent to overcome.

As soon as you can put that nativity scene in front of the White House, you will know you have one

Apples and oranges! Or maybe more extreme–like watermelons and kumquats!

Religion might have had some “effect” on how Kennedy made some decisions, but insofar as his decisions fell within the requirements of the law, they were legitimate. The Kentucky clerk’s actions were OUTSIDE of an in violation of those requirements. BIG difference!

I am very familiar with Title VII. If you believe it has applicability to Ms. Davis’ case, then please explain why. Your generalized reference to Title VII does nothing to support your position.

Other than that, I feel no need to comment further, because events, as they have unfolded, confirm my impressions.

How many of her employees requested reasonable accommodation from her? _0_
It was she that asked the State of KY for two things: 1.FINALLY update the licensing process to make it read in such a way that the staff can comply with it and the court order without confusion and conflict and
2. Get my personal name off of all licenses and revise the certification process to be more flexible.
These two things are what the state would have to do anyway because their process and forms haven’t been revised since the ruling. There are over 50 people who have requested KY RFRA and Title VII accommodations.
She informed her staff that they she would not be signing any marriage licenses whatsoever which means there was no point in taking data onto applications, since by current law, every license HAS to bear her signature. Now that the “temporary” accommodation” is that the staff issues the licenses, Kim has noted that those licenses are not really lawful. And that is the federal court who ordered that to happen. Meanwhile the Democratic KY Gov. plays his little “I can’t do anything” game.
No phone…no pen..poor feller.
What I think is really cool is that no one of any consequence really cares what you think about how this should be worked out. And the really funny thing is that you cited the police example, which is an example of undue hardship, and then the office with several workers, which is the example of an environment with a greater chance of a de Minimus solution. Yes, Rowan clerks office is unique because of the state law that requires her signature and only hers. If KY fixes that, we call that a de minimus accommodation.
But of course, the SJW juggernaut grinds on, feeling offended, feeling wounded, feeling outrage, whining, puling. No one of consequence really cares anymore, it has gotten tedious.
As another commenter said, the gaystapo just can’t take yes for an answer.

So, your another Dred Scott supporter headupazz. Got it!

As usual, when you have nothing that resembles an intelligent response, you insult. Are you pretending to be that stupid, or do you not know about the Dred Scott case? Considering that your post were consistent with your belief that the supreme court justices rulings were to be followed without question or without descent, the Dred Scott case, being one of those past rulings, gives credence that you support the Dred Scott decision. If Mrs Davis cannot choose to follow a ruling that she disagrees with, neither can you head.

The clerks actions were NOT outside the law, they were in conformity with the KY Constitution to which she took her oath of office to..

Sorry Troll, it is you who does not know. As long as her name is on the document she can tell her assistants to do or not to do. And there is nothing in the Constitution which applies here.

Actually it was an article on MSN home page, it was not about his Catholic teachings it was how those teachings influenced his decisions in a positive way, unlike the current Islamic Marxist.

I hope you hear that pop soon.

Appears you have not heard the POP yet.
And, what is “UN-Constitutional”?

Yes, there was a little “dust up” over the death of the 10th Amendment. It died April 9, 1865.

So glad you brought that up. If secession was TREASON why was Jefferson Davis not tried for treason. He sat in jail 2 years and then was———- released?

Right. Why not show some of that “compassion” for Kim Davis? Secession was not illegal; Davis knew that; and chief justice Taney knew that. Though Davis begged for his public trial, he was just jailed for 2 years, charged with————–nothing and released. GOTTCHA reality.

So, she is an office holder that has not been tested about her religious convictions. What is your point?

Thanks, Will check it out.

LOL! Learn how your government works, ya dingbat. And to anyone with a working mind, it’s clearly unConstitutional for a government employee to force the people who work for her to comply with her religious beliefs. Honestly, you folks don’t have a clue what the 1st Amendment says.

I have my Constitution right before me . I think you meant Article 6 (no religious test shall be required in order to hold office).

Here we go…this ole lonely man,trying to look intelligent but ends up as a FOOL.

LibertyBelle, yes, and the Constitution says “Ultimately The People”, But this is not taught in schools anymore and if people do not know they cannot respond. Americans have been dumbed down so far there is only the attitude that government knows best and they are bought off with “benefits”, which will some day cease, then where will the useful idiots turn? I will not help them..

You can’t be pro-white trash county clerk who thinks she has the right to force her religious beliefs on her employees and talk intelligently.

Good luck with that, ya nitwit. The 1st Amendment clearly prohibits government employees from forcing their religious beliefs on the people who work for them. You have to be a complete moron not to see it.

You are ignorant of Title VII civil rights act, my left-behind friend.

Exactly. We need to ignore reality check because it doesn’t have any sense of reality whatsoever and it is just trolling, as it does on other websites.

Considering, some people are referred to as Liberals, based upon their sleight of mind, tricks, why don’t we, name them for what they, are; GLIB-erals….??? …Edgrrr…

It is called rhetoric. Like what lawyers do in a court room when they have no more arguments. Just words that expect nor deserve a response.

See Article VI, paragraph 3 of the Constitution. Don’t YOU have a copy of the Constitution that you wingers claim to love and cherish? Why should it fall upon a liberal like me to be your tutor on matters Constitutional? My copy is within arm’s reach as I sit here at the keyboard. Where is your old dusty copy–assuming you have one at all?

Now THAT is a truly meaningful response. It means, marlene, that you don’t have a clue!

Patriciaicon, your post will have liberal heads exploding with the common sense in your post. Good job!

There was no law broken. The judge used his position on the bench to make an example of Kim Davis, because she refused to bow to the un elected activist justices on the supreme court, who overstepped their judicial bounds to make law, and calling it an interpretation of the 14th amendment. That so called interpretation may work for the liberals, as well as the so called conservatives who “go along to get along”, but not for people like us that know the truth.

What we are seeing, is judicial tyranny at it’s finest!

”If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

George Washington

You are welcome.

I can’t believe that you are so indoctrinated, but people like you prove me wrong concerning that fact on a daily basis!

Evilhuman, your wrong as usual. But I do agree with the fact that BIGOTS like you do try to force their gay religion down peoples of faith throat, no pun intended. The supreme court made law, and only congress has the power to do that. Three of those justices that have supported the gay agenda, should have been recused. That’s ok though, because people of faith, which also includes gays, will have the final word. Just wait and see, you silly ass bigot.

Why do I care about your sexual orientation. I explained what law the the supreme court created evilhuman. There is nothing in the 14th amendment that they used to create their ruling, that concerned marriage. Not my fault that you are so stupid that you can’t understand. However as a liberal, comprehension is not your strong suit, so that “you don’t get it” is the norm. As for shutting my “pie hole” you first azzwipe.

Evilhuman, you really are delusional if you think that I am a liberal. And I am not your sweetheart. And why do I care who you vote for. As for the rest of your post, you are bloviating ignoramus. The supremes are judicial activist, and their vote is right in line with every other freedom zapping zealot oligarchy. And you are just another of their useful idiots.

Hadenough, the Supreme Court has said that those laws are not constitutional. If it isn’t constitutional it is no longer a law in effect in Kentucky or any other backward ass state. Therefore the law in the land, even inbred shitholes like KY is that same sex couples may legally wed. Now she refused and a Federal judge directed her to issue the licenses. She refused and as a result was in direct violation of a federal court directive. As a result she was sent to jail until such a time where the clerks office issued the licenses

Next thing you know, the braindead judges, will be wearing other religious attire, instead, of their, quasireligious, ministerial, robes….. Edgrrr…

Liberals have no logic which is why they resort to insults and misinformation, like the comedy team of reality (LOL) check and Shirley Lane.

Let’s all overlook, the hiring of braindead judges, to, aid and abet, the, al law mob. In what way, are all the other, clerks, unable, to step up, and, fill in, for anyone, so as to let the dissenter, not have to face any fanatic, to ignore their own fanatism, to be forced to be misprisoned, by a fanatic judge….??? While fanaticisms, are being juggled, who says, the judges, fanatism, is any more valid, than, anybody elses….??? As for anybody, getting a State issued license to do anything,, to make legal, what’s not, illegal, to begin with, is, just another sleight of mind, soap opera, to empower, State control, over, that which, is none of their business, in the first place; and, constitutes, an illegal, and, unrevealed contract; whereby, organized crime at law, usurps, the intent of the Sheeple, as if, any license, is actually, meant to be an Ameruican, begging forgiveness, from, a, fascist state, and its’ braindead judges, whose, antics are to sit on a perch, and, dictate, martial law…. with, impunity. Translation, is the clerk, cannot live by thyeir convictions, while, othes, can live by theirs, and, force their beliefs, upon another, and, be backed by a braindead judge, for, doing what they have a right to do….just as much as a brsindead judge, has a right, to, sleaze his opinion in, to control, what isn’t any of his business, at all…. because, the braindead judge is subject to, superior law, and, his ignorance of the law, is no excuse…. Where’s another judge, to, volunteer to overrule, that judge….??? Where’s the law, which permits, a braindead judge, to, impose a sentence, that, is indefinite, for exercising, a, freedom, guaranteed, by the superior laws, he’s too simpleminded, realize, not to recuse himself, and, admitting he has no such, jurisdiction..embezzling the separation between, church, and, state…. Translation; marriages, are religious rites, amd, anybody, stupid enough to, beg forgiveness, from the corporate state, for, a license, is, fair game for, the at law, outlaws, to control, usurp, regulate, and, own the assets of, those who volunteer, to waive, their religious rights, Where’s the lynch mob; letting, a braindead judge, usurp, his sworn oath.??? Where’s thepaymasters, issuing his paycheck….??? Where’s all the quasilereligious, Sheeple, who should be, standing up for the rights, some of us, fought for….??? Baaaaaaa…. Edgrrr…

Yes Edgar….I can’t figure out what you actually mea. A summary would be helpful.

I know you are NOT kidding

You are such a dunce !

Glad, you npticed….. Commas, needn’t put anybody in a coma…. and, they give pause, for the bluebloods, to have a way, of slithering around the issue….. Edgrrr…

Just go ! I don’t want you to drown.

Marlene you seriously need professional help with your being so disillusioned.

Marlene you are much to up tight ! Just maybe it would help if you got some stress relief by getting laid ?

TAKE MARLENE WITH YOU.

GOSH EDGAR YOU NEED TO GO BACK TO SCHOOL & TAKE A REFRESHER COURSE ON GRAMMAR.

Moron ?

“Crazy Christian beliefs” is an maligning opinion, but you are allowed to have such. Where in the Constitution is forbidding religious tests for government office stating you cannot run and have your personal beliefs? Constitution prohibits the government from creating a religion…it actually is a protection for religion from the government. Not the other way around. The government needs to explain why and how they can push beliefs contrary to ones religion on them after the fact.
She had a job that all of a sudden steps on her religious beliefs with the passage of calling marriage between whatever legal. She has religious beliefs, which she was stalwart enough to follow and to opine. Sad day when one trumps another…I doubt she would have run for that position, if the law had been in effect when she did.
This administration has walked all over the Constitution and trashed our laws like no other in history. Yet, he roams free making promises that he will not be accountable for. This is the government under Obama and it is atrocious.

Your statement is even more BS because unknown by you because you don’t pay attention, it’s too late to hold presidents accountable for their actions years after they left office – DUH!

Yes, there was a case of a previous president being held accountable for his actions. It’s completely irrelevant in today’s political arena. There is isn’t one politician in this communist atmosphere who is willing or able to pull it off. Like, I said – it’s too late.

And after he’s in jail, throw away the key.

Racist much?, Stupid much? The racist card is passe, over, finito, done, get with the times.

Oblunderbutt has EVERYTHING to do with it .

Instead of waiting for the government to explain it’s unconstitutional behavior, we, the people, need to demand that congress remove these corrupt judges from the bench. Now, that’s IN the constitution. Article III, Section 1 and explained in Federalist 83, 88 and the 14th Amendment.

The homosexuals should not be allowed to push their ungodly beliefs on her. They simply need to get another court clerk to issue the license. First take her name off the license and put the Judge’s name on instead. Let him have all the blame.

So far you have been correct except with that “separation of church and state” thing. Go back up to where I posted Amendment 1 and read it carefully.
Also, you are getting a bit rude with your statements and that accomplishes nothing, just ticks people off, and then they don’t listen to you.
But, as I said, you are mostly correct.
Have a nice day.

There is no legal application on separation of church and state, that is a misstatement, Franklin made a statement like that to the Danbury Baptists, it is not in the Constitution!
TROLL.

The “establishment clause” has nothing to do with Separation of Church and State.
What that is saying is Congress is barred from making any law which has any effect on religion. Even the part where it referred to Establishment is misread/applied, that does not mean the creation of a religion, it means the entity of religion, the concept of religion.
Liberals/democrats/communists have twister and spun this for all the could, and it has worked for them to continue to destroy America. There is nothing n the Constitution which even hints to a separation of Church and State beyond the Establishment clause which is saying: Government, stay the hell out of religion, only.
AND, as far as the Constitution being based on Christianity, may I suggest you read up on some of the founders position on this. It IS based more on the concept of Christianity than any other religious belief. TROLL!

Wrong.
I remember this being taught when I was in High School, nearly 65 years ago.

why don’t you go and find a tall building and make a lot of people happy?
TROLL~!

well RC…is that a challenge or just another of your soulless slanders?

NO. You atheists and queers ARE NOT going to tell Christians WHERE we can practice our religion. We will die first.

The Apostle Paul said it best: “We will obey God rather than man.” I fully expect Christians to die in this country for their beliefs.

Sigh…… I always get the best of liberals.

You liberals ALWAYS resort to name-calling (ad hominem) because you have no logical debate points.

Well, you know (or maybe YOU don’t) that old adage, “never argue with a fool; a stranger may happen by and not realize which one is the FOOL.”

Well, Bible scholar, you even got THAT wrong. It is Peter, not Paul, who is associated with that bold statement. Paul was still energetically persecuting Christians when Peter made his statement. And he said “must”, not “will.” Check it out, Miss Mellie ; it’s at Acts 5:29:

“Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.”

Is it too much to expect self-identified Christians in this country to correctly quote the scriptures?. It is bad enough that so many of them butcher the Constitution! I am a conservative Christian, Mellie, albeit a politically liberal one, and I take seriously the obligation to study the Word. Looks as though could benefit from a few more hours of Bible study time before you get back to this forum. That might cut your risk of again bungling New Testament history.

Put your emotions aside, much as I hate to admit it, she was wrong. Her religious beliefs have no place in the discharge of her duties as a servant of the people. Think about this:
if all public servants could perform their jobs according to their religious beliefs, can you explain to me how that might work? All activities, rules and regulations would be superseded by someones religious beliefs, how would that work? As I said at the beginning, put your emotions aside and deal with it objectively.

Religious zealots refuse to acknowledge that the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion and freedom FROM religion. That’s why there’s separation between church and state.

That silly woman as you call her, is allowed to practice her religious convictions wherever and whenever she chooses. The Constitution does not say she can only follow them when she is not working or when she is in church. Are you a Constitutional scholar? Have you ever studied American history? Obviously not. If you had, you would know that the three branches of government were set up to check and balance each other, not be a rubber stamp for the party in power. The Supreme Court’s duty is to enforce Constitutional law, not make it up as they did in this case. As to her “crazy Christian beliefs,” why are muslims not being prosecuted for treason by attempting to establish sharia law in violation of the Constitution? Sharia law is a State established religion which, if you read the Constitution, is expressly forbidden. By the way, show me the spot in the Constitution that forbids religious tests for Government office.

” By the way, show me the spot in the Constitution that forbids religious tests for Government office”

Funny, you feel qualified to debate me about constitutional issues,
and then you asked that question?

Article 7 last paragraph

“why are muslims not being prosecuted for treason by attempting to establish sharia law in violation of the Constitution?”

NOT CORRECT.

Well George you are betting 1000 it comes to being wrong.

Is not treason to attempt to establish sharia law.
The Constitution does not find treason in the manner.

If that were the case many Christians would be tried for treason for trying to establish “Christian law” in America.

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War
against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and
Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony
of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
article 3
Stop making up poo and putting it on the Internet, George

“There is a spot in the Constitution specifically forbidding religious tests for government office”.
This part you got right and it runs directly counter to your claim that she should “leave her religious beliefs” at home or church “Because the silly woman is not permitted to practice her religious beliefs while holding public office.” No where in the Constitution does it show where “gays” are legally allowed to marry yet, here we are, religious rights are specifically enumerated. And, that “silly woman” (your disdain is showing which reveals your bias from the beginning) knows that right well, especially when she stated that all the marriage licenses issued since she has been in jail are void (not legal) because they don’t have her signature on them….being that she is a duly elected (by the people) County Clerk. Even the Lawyers had to agree with that. For her Deputy Clerks to legally sign off on the marriage license, the “rules” have to be changed. They haven’t been. The Law is a pesky thing for those who try to usurp it by hook or crook, or even a personal/political agenda is it not?

And the SC doing so infringed on this clerks constitutional rights to freedom of religion.

You are right about religious people; GODLY people are a different story. We have strayed so far from the truth in this country, that even Christ would be misunderstood just like he was while on earth. Judgment day will prove who is bright or dim.

well, reality check, just like it always happens “the truth will find you out” …..God said..
and YOU cannot gainsay GOD, that in the times men would say, since the forefathers
they have been saying God will return…but where is He…just keep denying Him oh you
LITTLE man….and as He said as you deny Me…so will I deny YOU before my Father..
what do you have to gain from your disputing of God and His works….where do you
hope to arrive…is it the applause and/or acceptance of those whom you so readily
show contempt for? What is YOUR HOPE? and do not make light of my question nor
your words ….for every word that you utter will you be held accountable for….I truly hope
that you will finally arrive as did the prodigal son….to correct thinking and reason…..

If you are referring to Kim Davis, she was elected to her office, and the voters had the option to vote for someone else if they disagreed with what she believed in!….there was no “religious test” involved. It is unfortunate if you don’t like the way her supporters voted.

How about you showing me where in the Constitution where it states “Separation of church and state”?

Reality check you are completely off base in your comments. There is nothing in the Constitution that says anything about THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. What it does say is this, “THE GOVERNMENT SHALL NOT ESTABLISH A RELIGION.” In effect, the Supreme Court decision has DISESTABLISHED THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION which was the basis of our founding fathers in establishing the union. And, the Supreme Court made law which is a violation of their constitutional authority. The leftists, one of who is reported to be a lesbian, had conducted gay marriages and therefore were prejudiced before the issue came to the court. Thus, they should have recused themselves if they were honest and ethical which they are obviously NOT.

Christianity is practiced 24/7. You can’t switch it off.

You just make this drivel up as you go…You are ignorant of Title VII civil rights act, my left-behind friend.

Alinskyite troll .

hmmmmm.
I’m going to go with, “there are no Gestapo in America”
for 100 points Edgar.

And for question two, tradition is why they where those robes.

Anymore questions just let me know Edgar

No one is stopping her from finding another job. She took an oath to uphold the law and fulfill the requirements of her office, She is in violation of her oath. According to the book of Romans, Christians are bound to uphold earthly laws and fulfill any oath they may take. If you claim to be a Christian, at least try to learn your own religeon.

We are quick to say this is a fact of nature, but just what if what we’ve been told and conditioned to believe is riddled with evidentiary truth that much has been devotion and lies. Research, do some real due diligence. The truth is out there and we’ve all been duped for over a century. Please, please disprove, debunk Anything, everything, please. In

It, is just another, strawman, curveball, from another, oddball, who thinks a Nation without principles, is a way to embezzle inalienable rights, into, conditional, use, permits… …Edgrrr…

I suspect you haven’t actually read the real Constitution unless you got a copy from the archives in DC. The National Center for Constitution Studies has replicated the original Constitution in 2013 complete with the original spelling and punctuation. The real 13th Amendment is not inclusive as it had not yet been authenticated in 2013, Is optionbut can be found at NH State Legislature + 13th Amendment + authenticated. 5 submitted copies to their hearings that were authenticated as ratified and verified through existing documients by New Hampshire and Virginia. Many, many of our Constitutional rights are ignored by the greedy evil-doers. No tax law was ever ratified though exposing this cost JFK his life (and gave Hinckley a target in Reagan). How about! Yet, they continue to rob us all with unconstitutional taxes and not a penny of those taxes stays in America. That’s right, those taxes go to the crown and the vatican and this is not opinion, but fact.There is much Is option to be re-taught/re-learned. Paul Revere is screaming from beyond – Listen honorable Americans for you shall SEE and hear if you would bother to get your heads out of the sand – it’s now CRITICAL!

I suspect that even immediate help would be too late. Liberty Belle has gone completely “round the bend.” I fear the alleged “greedy evil-doers” less than I fear what would happen to this Great Nation were the ignorant, ranting, dense-as-depleted-uranium know-nothings like Liberty Belle were to gain any measure of control over public affairs!

This guy has no life..this site is what he does for a living. What a pitful lonely person. Go to where you can fit in. How about, Iran?

You are ignorant of Title VII civil rights act, my left-behind friend.

There’s thousands of other counties, and clerks that don’t mind risking hell damn nation, why this one?

You sure proved to me that you are immature and I am betting that I am a lot younger than you. I will not reply to you anymore as you have proved you are not worthy to be talked to. Good Bye.