Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
r/Actscelerate

"10 Questions for Rule-of-Law Critics of Kim Davis" (L)
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Bonnie - you are still talking apples and oranges Could It Be True
[quote="bonnie knox"]
Quote:
What's wrong with civil disobedience?


You are talking about a person who holds a public position. That is completely different from the way people worship and practice their religion in their private lives. I respect the fact that her religious convictions preclude her from issuing same sex marriage licenses. But, that does not exempt her from doing her job. It's like people who work in a grocery store that sells alcohol and tobacco. If they choose to work in that business then their religious convictions do not exempt them from handling and ringing up those items.

Civil disobedience would be appropriate if they came into the church and tried to force a same sex marriage.
_________________
Scars are tattoos with better stories.
Acts-celerater
Posts: 716
9/27/15 3:37 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post bonnie knox
I think the questions in the article I linked to are much better stated than I could state. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. [Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
9/27/15 3:47 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post The questions in the article Could It Be True
bonnie knox wrote:
I think the questions in the article I linked to are much better stated than I could state. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.


The questions in the article you linked render themselves irrelevant to the conversation because they are patently biased.

For example look at Question 1 which stated: If, as many conservatives argue, Obergefell v. Hodges is a legal abomination, and there is no right to same-sex “marriage” in the Constitution, isn’t Davis actually seeking to uphold the constitutional order, the one that we wrote down so we wouldn’t lose it.

The fact is regardless of what most conservatives would argue, including myself, the SC found constitutional grounds (via the equal protection clause) for their ruling. Kim Davis has not been appointed to uphold constitutional order. She was elected to do her job.

I could go on and refute every question in that article if I had the time.
_________________
Scars are tattoos with better stories.
Acts-celerater
Posts: 716
9/28/15 3:51 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.