Posted on 09/03/2015 10:03:37 AM PDT by GIdget2004
Dan Griffin @WSAZDanGriffin 2m2 minutes ago Judge says financial fines not enough. #WSAZ
Dan Griffin @WSAZDanGriffin 4m4 minutes ago BREAKING: Davis held in contempt taken by U.S. Marshals. #WSAZ
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
Exactly right.
Your thought about the Judge crossed my mind as well. Iirc his mother said (noted on an earlier thread) that he disagreed with the decision but felt obligated to implement it.
So he puts her in jail, but doesn’t impose fines that would cause her any long-term financial distress. She’s now a martyr and folk hero. There’s immediate blowback against Progressives, which will be exacerbated with their triumphalism and cheering of her jailing.
And the “cooler” heads within the Democratic Party have nowhere to go on this.
I feel really bad for her right now, but this is probably the least-worst scenario for her and her beliefs.
Because it might eventually require them to start tattooing dissidents before loading them into the cattle cars.
I have a different philosophy. In that direction lies Nazism.
Wait till the judge leaves the courthouse and let the Sheriff arrest the judge?
If a county clerk says owning a dog is against the law of nature, do you have any recourse?
A mulsoom clerk might say so???
That is not the question. The question is "Can immoral laws compel obedience?
The "Following Orders" excuse led to some very horrible results. I eschew a philosophy underpinned by that principle.
No. You don't have to obey immoral orders. In fact, you have a duty to fight them.
Yeah, I have been trying for many years now to get folks to open their eyes. The States’ religion is secular humanism and the State is forcing its’ religion on the country. This is a direct violation of the First Amendment.
According to Kentucky law, as posted above, you have to apply for a marriage license in the county in which the female lives.
These two sick faggots cannot comply with that requirement of Kentucky law. Not only is neither a female, neither of them live in Kentucky. They are from Ohio.
So how is she supposed to follow the law in issuing a "marriage" certificate?
I notice everyone glosses over the requirements of the law unless it's requirements that *THEY* want to enforce. Those other requirements? "Well we can just ignore those."
Lemme know when he shows up to spring Kim from the cell.
She is not government. She is a government office holder. Your are being foolish.
They can go ahead and pull the trigger. I will not participate, I will not yield, I will not condone a sexual perversion that will bring down the Wrath of God.
Boycott Kentucky...especially their sporting events...even at their away games.
And so it begins...
My goodness, you are arguing like a perfect relativist. Here. Read. Learn.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law
This concept has been the universal bedrock of Christian law from the scholastics up to and including the Founding Fathers. And the very POINT of natural law is be a check on the power of the state. The state is not allowed to take away what nature and God have given us.
Likewise the state has no right to declare sodomy marriage because nature and God have already defined marriage. Period. End of story.
“When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors.” :)
Don't know, still trying to sort out all the details on this.
AFAIK she is following KY law, I guess her mistake was showing up in a Federal court thereby giving them jurisdiction.
Like I wrote, still trying to sort it all out.
Im glad that you mentioned this. Note that the 14th Amendment applied the Constitutions Clause 3 of Article VI, particularly the prohibition of religious tests, to the states.
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.