calfoxwc Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 for not violating her religious beliefs. Indefinately. For whatever reason, he has shown pro-gay isses in the past. what an arrogant dirtbag he has turned out to be. U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 I was about to say why wouldnt' they just fire her....but then I remembered she's elected. That's a non doable situation. They need to be able to fire people like that who don't feel the need to perform the duties pertaining to their job. While I don't feel she's done anything to warrant jailtime, I do feel that she has zero business being in the type of employment that she is. Don't know why we have elected officials the only ones to hand out marriage liscenses. Any asshole then can say "hey i'm an atheist now so that cross you're wearing to the ceremony...uh uh, take it off". How would that go over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Some fag judge who works for the Anti-Christ Obammy. What did you expect. Its already begun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 But he probably made the only call he could in this situation. If she's an elected official and decides to impose her spiritual beliefs on the public, than she's unfit to serve. DOn't know why they can't just fucking remove her but whatever. My sympathy for her is strained, you don't like handing out liscenses to gays fine...resign. That simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 If she won't do her job, that she was elected to do, then get rid of her. You can have all the religious beliefs you want, but if they interfere with your sworn PUBLIC duty, then you gotta go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Yet, she was elected by a lot of folks, who knew her convictions. This whole Obamao perversion uprising is going to cost a lost of good folks their liveliehoods, their honor, friends, and tolerance is going to change - to intolerance. It's already been pushed way too far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Her public duty changed to demanding she accept perversion. That won't fly in the long-run. Which is immoral, and unconsitutional. Unless you think that most of the public that elected her, knew that the definition of marriage was going to be subverted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 She is most certainly in the wrong. You've got to do your job or you've got to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Her public duty changed to demanding she accept perversion. That won't fly in the long-run. Which is immoral, and unconsitutional. Unless you think that most of the public that elected her, knew that the definition of marriage was going to be subverted. If her PUBLIC duty changed, and she doesn't like it, then she has to go. It's that simple. Put someone in that PUBLIC job that will do it. Jobs change all the time, and you if can't handle the changes then quit or get fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 She has been married four times and cheated during her first marriage with the guy who would eventually be her third husband. Ended up getting pregnant from the adultery. Her religious convictions are hit or miss. The trial was 20 minutes from where I live. It was a zoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Maybe some of our union or labor relations guys can chime in here. Her job Description requires she obey the law, fine. Her job Description changed by no fault of her own, fine. I'd say it's the responsibility of the government to reassign her. Or find a workaround. (Of course compromise is no fun for people who want to shock and offend, and that could probably go either way) WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 If they had let her pull the religious freedoms card, any worker of any religion could pull that nonsense. Muslim working at a restaurant? No pork for anyone. Muslim working at the DMV? No licenses for women. Jehovah witness nurse? No blood transfusion for you. Etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 She still gets paid while in jail. I wish they would just go ahead with the special session and impeach her. Throwing her in jail just made her a martyr. I bet she makes a killing on the book deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dste Ace Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 "I myself have genuinely held religious beliefs, but I took an oath" ----Judge David Bunning And that, ladies and germs, pretty much sums it up. We don't get to pick and choose which laws we obey. She, too, took and oath, one I'm pretty sure ended with "so help me god." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 If they had let her pull the religious freedoms card, any worker of any religion could pull that nonsense. Muslim working at a restaurant? No pork for anyone. Muslim working at the DMV? No licenses for women. Jehovah witness nurse? No blood transfusion for you. Etc.No. That's not what she was hired to do. They change her job description after she was put in that position.Had that been the law when she got the job they could have easily refused it to her. It's more like killing your Muslim employees sorry towelheads from now on bacon on everything you eat. Had that been the rule before they got the job they could have easily refused to take that job. Right? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Sorry, Steve... not the case... Her job, or at least part of it, is to issue marriage licenses. That has not changed yet. She is not doing her job. And her remedy is for the state to accommodate her beliefs by removing the need for County Clerks to sign marriage licenses??? How does removing her signature indemnify her? She is still the head of the process that would produce the devil licenses. It's a distinction without a difference that I do not think God would appreciate. Based on my take He's not big on hair-splitting... Yet, she was elected by a lot of folks, who knew her convictions. Any evidence of that? Campaign literature? Web-site? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 No. That's not what she was hired to do. They change her job description after she was put in that position. Had that been the law when she got the job they could have easily refused it to her. It's more like killing your Muslim employees sorry towelheads from now on bacon on everything you eat. Had that been the rule before they got the job they could have easily refused to take that job. Right? WSS So if the law changed at all she should have not acknowledged any new laws because they didn't apply at the time of her getting elected into office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 So if the law changed at all she should have not acknowledged any new laws because they didn't apply at the time of her getting elected into office? Because in that instance she wouldn't have been able to perform the duties of the job. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Kind of like if someone got elected to some high office in the United States and were required to take an oath to uphold the laws and the constitution of that particular country... And he decided in good conscience he couldn't enforce the laws in sanctuary cities he, like this chick, should be disqualified from that particular gig. Now if you lefties think that hypothetical commander in chief should also be thrown in jail now for refusing I'm all ears. WSS WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Kind of like if someone got elected to some high office in the United States and were required to take an oath to uphold the laws and the constitution of that particular country... And he decided in good conscience he couldn't enforce the laws in sanctuary cities he, like this chick, should be disqualified from that particular gig. Now if you lefties think that hypothetical commander in chief should also be thrown in jail now for refusing I'm all ears. WSS WSS I am not a lefty and yeah you should do your job if elected regardless of your position. I still don't agree with her getting elected. However, I think she should be impeached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 She knew one of her job duties is to sign marriage licenses. No one told her that it was just straight couples. I am sure she never saw gay marriage coming. But that doesn't mean she gets to stop signing marriage licenses. I still think she is full of shit and selectively religious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 I am not a lefty and yeah you should do your job if elected regardless of your position. I still don't agree with her getting elected. However, I think she should be impeached. No you are not, that's who I was addressing. And possibly she should. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 So what say by some fucked up twist of law a 12 year old was sentenced to death. You suppose you guys would be as angry with the executioner if he refused to do it? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 So what say by some fucked up twist of law a 12 year old was sentenced to death. You suppose you guys would be as angry with the executioner if he refused to do it? WSS If it is the law by some sick fucked up way, then the executioner can do their job or resign on principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 No you are not, that's who I was addressing. And possibly she should. WSS I meant to say "getting jailed". It doesn't matter to me what the people of Rowan County decided at the elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Ok no point going any further. I say they chanegd her job from what it was to something she couldn't morally do. I'd expect there are plenty of hypotheticals that you guys would refuse but why waste time? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 I wonder what the opinion would be if a Democrat clerk refused to issue handgun permits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 I wonder what the opinion would be if a Democrat clerk refused to issue handgun permits What would be the similarities? If she had previously not been required to issue handgun permits but now was and said she couldn't do it in good conscience?Perhaps she was a Quaker who can easily do the job until they added this requirement? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Ok no point going any further. I say they chanegd her job from what it was to something she couldn't morally do. I'd expect there are plenty of hypotheticals that you guys would refuse but why waste time? WSS I just know that if my job responsibilities are altered at work that they would boot my ass if I decided to intentionally refuse to fulfill my job duties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 What would be the similarities? If she had previously not been required to issue handgun permits but now was and said she couldn't do it in good conscience? Perhaps she was a Quaker you can easily do the job until they added this requirement? WSS The similarity is personal convictions can't override legislation and court decisions. A civil servant must serve under the guidelines provided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.