Posted on 09/02/2015 4:29:48 AM PDT by Nextrush
She won’t go to jail.
She will get fined.
Religious Conservatives will flock to crowd funding sites to donate to pay the fines. More than enough money will be raised to allow her to hold out for a VERY long time.
IOW it’s a battle of wills right now.
Thank you for keeping this story in breaking news. Let this be a flashpoint. If we let our religious liberty go, the right to act according to our conscious without losing our jobs and property, then we were better off under King George. We’ve allowed the government to dictate their conditions to us irrespective of what we want. That’s tyranny. We need a revolution. Let this be the beginning.
We have the right and the duty to arrest any power that would subjugate us in violation of the supreme law of the land (the constitution including the 10th amendment). We have to make them stop. Civil disobedience is a good start. We have the right under natural law to defend ourselves if our civil disobedience is met with threats to our lives or property.
It seems someone only wants to prove who is the more devout among her circle of friends and family. Ooops, did I just say that?
The courts, by nullifying the will of the people, have entered a “state of war” with the people. They are the rebels.
Second Treatise on Civil Government Chapter 19.
Sec. 227. In both the fore-mentioned cases, when either the legislative is changed, or the legislators act contrary to the end for which they were constituted; those who are guilty are guilty of rebellion: for if any one by force takes away the established legislative of any society, and the laws by them made, pursuant to their trust, he thereby takes away the umpirage, which every one had consented to, for a peaceable decision of all their controversies, and a bar to the state of war amongst them. They, who remove, or change the legislative, take away this decisive power, which no body can have, but by the appointment and consent of the people; and so destroying the authority which the people did, and no body else can set up, and introducing a power which the people hath not authorized, they actually introduce a state of war, which is that of force without authority: and thus, by removing the legislative established by the society, (in whose decisions the people acquiesced and united, as to that of their own will) they untie the knot, and expose the people a-new to the state of war, And if those, who by force take away the legislative, are rebels, the legislators themselves, as has been shewn, can be no less esteemed so; when they, who were set up for the protection, and preservation of the people, their liberties and properties, shall by force invade and endeavour to take them away; and so they putting themselves into a state of war with those who made them the protectors and guardians of their peace, are properly, and with the greatest aggravation, rebellantes, rebels.
bfl
Who doesn’t have contempt for blackrobed tyrants that have been making contemptible laws since the 50s—it is not their job. There is no division among the branches of government. The lawyers do as they please to benefit the shysters that run all branches. They even run healthcare now and are lining their pockets with the profits.
No, the judiciary is a contemptible and corrupt network of shysters. This is not the time of Caesar.
She’s elected, and can’t be fired.
She can be impeached by the state legislature, but that’s not happening due to its makeup.
I do think, though, that the legislature could impeach any judge that brought punishment down on her.
Wouldn’t that be a twist and a half?
There is no way God's word would sanction government-forced abortion because "Caesar says so". Nor is any quarter given for sanction of sodomistic unions in God's word. We can see God's opinion of such aberrant behavior in Genesis, throughout the OT, and in Romans 1.
People with homosexual tendencies need help, yes, compassion, yes, but affirmation of their tendencies? Absolutely not. For their bodies' and souls' sake, no...
Why the heck are you a conservative if you think courts can just dictate how we obey our conscious? I assume you are since you signed up to comment on a conservative forum. Read John Locke: know what conservatism is. It’s. Conservatism is just a good idea. It’s the way things are.
Is NOT just a good idea.
Oh by the way. Ted Cruz is the only candidate who gets this issue.
Not a federal judge.
And people stick their heads in the sand if they don’t believe that our religious freedoms are under attack. God bless this woman for taking a stand - it brings this issue to the front of the news - where it should be.
She needs to show him a written policy stating licenses are issued annually on June 1st. She needs to show a written policy. Should buy her and time
The KY House of Reps us 54-45 in favor of the Democrats.
They can impeach. Sure, the GOP Senate won’t remove, but one would think that the Democrats would seek to utilize the procedure as a symbolic act to show their support for same-sex marriage, right?
(rhetorical) I wonder why they aren’t doing that? (/rhetorical) Hmmmmm ...
Yeah, that’s too bad.
With our complicit Congress, we’ll never get the judiciary under control
without impeaching some of these blatant anti-Constitutional activist judges.
She needs to show him a written policy stating licenses are issued annually on June 1st. She needs to show a written policy. Should buy her and time
There is no Federale law (statute) that says lowly county clerks must issue marriage licenses to gays or anyone. And right now she is issuing no marriage licenses.
So if she continues to hold out she will win or it will take months for the gays to somehow prevail over her via a seat of the pants ruling from a gay-friendly judge
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.