Some Inspiration

General discussion about Defcon

Moderator: Defcon moderators

User avatar
kudayta
Introversion Staff
Introversion Staff
Posts: 945
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:25 pm

Some Inspiration

Postby kudayta » Sat Jun 27, 2015 2:22 am

"No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies
the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice,
and family. In forming a marital union, two people become
something greater than once they were. As some of
the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage
embodies a love that may endure even past death. It
would misunderstand these men and women to say they
disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do
respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its
fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned
to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s
oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the
eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit is reversed."
It is so ordered.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, United States Supreme Court - June 26, 2015 - OBERGEFELL v. HODGES .


It's not often that I'm proud of where I live. But today is one of those days.
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby xander » Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:37 am

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the tears of Antonin Scalia."

xander
User avatar
kudayta
Introversion Staff
Introversion Staff
Posts: 945
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby kudayta » Sat Jun 27, 2015 5:25 am

xander wrote:"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the tears of Antonin Scalia."

xander


Image
User avatar
trickser
level5
level5
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:15 pm
Location: The Senate ; GMT+1
Contact:

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby trickser » Sat Jun 27, 2015 9:27 am

I don't like it. Too much pathos, was that really necessary? Wouldn't some ethics glued with logic be sufficent to make the point?
User avatar
Siсiliаn Ноundd
level5
level5
Posts: 1440
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:32 am

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby Siсiliаn Ноundd » Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:40 pm

I know I partied my brains out yesterday when the ruling came out. #LoveWins
User avatar
Endless
level5
level5
Posts: 1343
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby Endless » Sat Jun 27, 2015 5:18 pm

kudayta wrote:"No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies
the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice,
and family. In forming a marital union, two people become
something greater than once they were. As some of
the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage
embodies a love that may endure even past death. It
would misunderstand these men and women to say they
disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do
respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its
fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned
to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s
oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the
eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit is reversed."
It is so ordered.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, United States Supreme Court - June 26, 2015 - OBERGEFELL v. HODGES .


It's not often that I'm proud of where I live. But today is one of those days.


Kudos to you kud.
User avatar
Siсiliаn Ноundd
level5
level5
Posts: 1440
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:32 am

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby Siсiliаn Ноundd » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:31 pm

"The government must never pressure a person to abandon or violate his or her sincerely held religious beliefs..." - Texas governor Grey Abbott
Ken Paxton, the current attorney general in Texas, has hit out at the recent change in marriage laws in the US. As a senior figure in one of America's most conservative states, he has vowed to defend those civil servants who refuse to register a gay marriage.

-http://www.gaytimes.co.uk/Interact/Blogs.aspx?articleid=15350&sectionid=798

That inbreed hillbilly needs to crawl back into his hole and go back to the dark ages. If you can't separate church & state then you should not be in the political career, that dumb shit man. Its now LAW and you can't go against the Supreme Court.
User avatar
Endless
level5
level5
Posts: 1343
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby Endless » Wed Jul 01, 2015 8:57 pm

What exactly does he say that makes him an "imbreed hillbilly?" It doesn't say he is against gay marriage. Him calling it lawless is saying that the county clerks should not be forced to do something against they're religious belief. Before the separating the church and state argument comes out, these people also have their first amendment rights, which means they cannot be persecuted or discriminated against for their religious beliefs. To remove them from office because of that is a whole other deal.

I am indifferent to the supreme courts ruling, because it doesn't affect me. This whole thing though, has a lot of kinks that need to be worked out.
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby xander » Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:00 pm

Can you imagine how Abbott would react if Obama pulled an Eisenhower and sent in the National Guard? I can't wait to hear all of the racist, homophobic screeds...

xander

EDIT: Endless, you are free to voice your opinions, as are the clerks. What they are not allowed to do is use their positions as public servants to voice their opinions. If they cannot do their jobs under the constitution, then they should not be in those positions. It is no different from requiring that public school teachers not teach creationism. They can believe that the world was created in 6 days some 6000 years ago, but if they teach that to their public school classes, they are in violation of the establishment clause of the first amendment.
User avatar
Siсiliаn Ноundd
level5
level5
Posts: 1440
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:32 am

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby Siсiliаn Ноundd » Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:26 pm

Endless wrote:What exactly does he say that makes him an "imbreed hillbilly?"

Its upsetting that elected leaders that swore a oath to enforce and follow the law. EVEN if they don't believe in it. So if he douse go this rout he needs to be removed from office and anyone else who gos against this law. Maybe I should of chosen better words then inbreed hillbilly but I am going to stick with it.(:

xander wrote:Can you imagine how Abbott would react if Obama pulled an Eisenhower and sent in the National Guard?

Yes it should be done, if elected officials are not following the law of the land, then it needs to be forced and the officials removed.
User avatar
Endless
level5
level5
Posts: 1343
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby Endless » Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:34 pm

xander wrote:Can you imagine how Abbott would react if Obama pulled an Eisenhower and sent in the National Guard? I can't wait to hear all of the racist, homophobic screeds...

xander

EDIT: Endless, you are free to voice your opinions, as are the clerks. What they are not allowed to do is use their positions as public servants to voice their opinions. If they cannot do their jobs under the constitution, then they should not be in those positions. It is no different from requiring that public school teachers not teach creationism. They can believe that the world was created in 6 days some 6000 years ago, but if they teach that to their public school classes, they are in violation of the establishment clause of the first amendment.


This is a totally different entity. Teachers applied for the job and were hired by superintendents and board members. County clerks are elected. To remove them from office would be no different than removing a governor or president from office for not pardoning a criminal because what the act committed violated his beliefs.

I agree, if they cannot do their job, then they shouldn't be there. But to drop a bomb on them out of no where and say do this or you're fired is ignorant and discriminate of them. Maybe they should make an amendment for the next elections saying that future office holders must abide by this.
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby xander » Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:24 pm

Endless wrote:This is a totally different entity. Teachers applied for the job and were hired by superintendents and board members. County clerks are elected.

I don't see how this mitigates in any way, but if you prefer, replace the classroom teacher in the above analogy with an elected superintendent of schools or elected school board. If the superintendent or the board cannot fulfill their duties under the constitution, they should resign. If they do not resign and they refuse to perform their duties, they should be removed from office.

Endless wrote:To remove them from office would be no different than removing a governor or president from office for not pardoning a criminal because what the act committed violated his beliefs

The constitution does not say that a president or governor must pardon criminals, so I don't see how this hypothetical president or governor is failing to perform their duty. Perhaps you could clarify? Again, these clerks have two choices: they can (1) do their jobs then go home and be homophobic, or (2) adhere to their deeply held principles and resign. If they do neither, they should be quickly removed from office.

Endless wrote:I agree, if they cannot do their job, then they shouldn't be there. But to drop a bomb on them out of no where and say do this or you're fired is ignorant and discriminate of them.

Again, they have a choice. Compromise their principles and do the jobs that they were elected to do (most elected officials have an oath of office that includes a line about upholding and defending the constitution---if their job is to administer marriages, they must treat all marriages the same, and SCOTUS just ruled that same-sex marriage *is* marriage---the oath that they affirmed makes the administration of same-sex marriages part of that), or resign.

Endless wrote:Maybe they should make an amendment for the next elections saying that future office holders must abide by this.

Again, they already swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution. Do that, or resign. No extra laws are needed. It is no different form the school administrators that were required to open their doors to black students in the '60s. You know, when Ike called in the National Guard? Do we really need that kind of executive power play again?

xander
User avatar
Endless
level5
level5
Posts: 1343
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby Endless » Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:50 pm

Look, I completely understand your point of views and I agree with them completely. But, if they are removed forcibly from office, or are charged with the misdemeanor of not upholding the laws of the constitution, they will be found not guilty, and will most likely sue the government for violation of the 1st amendment. That alone will draw out this process several years longer than what it needs to be. Hell, in my state alone (Kentucky) several clerks are not issuing licenses to any couples at all because it is against their beliefs.

We can do the legislative and the right thing to do, by giving these people the chance to finish their terms but, make it clear that effective after the next term, they must comply and issue licenses to everyone. As an alternative, or in the mean time, let couples get a license in any county in the state. Another alternative is to create a new office, i.e. a marriage clerk, that simply just issues marriage licenses, while the county clerk takes all other responsibilities. Or you could just have people apply directly to the state and have the state issue the license and not the county.

There are so many other ways to resolve this than to forcibly remove someone from office because of a religion issue. To randomly rule on a case that has been on the circuits since 2005, then expect people to be immediately ok with that is not right.
User avatar
kudayta
Introversion Staff
Introversion Staff
Posts: 945
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby kudayta » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:36 am

Well, Endless, the National Guard's involvement with the Little Rock Nine was because the Governor initially refused to back down on desegregation. The National Guard was first used by Gov. Faubus to block the black kids from entering the school! It wasn't until the Mayor of Little Rock asked for Ike's help that Ike federalized the AR National Guard.

But you bring up a good point with respect to due process (one of the other parts of the 14th Amendment and a big part of the 5th Amendment for the kids playing at home). But if there's no mechanism to remove a misbehaving County Clerk in KY outside of elections, then force has to be applied in order for justice to be served.

Fortunately there does appear to be a mechanism for removing County Clerks in Kentucky, under section 100 of Kentucky Constitution. Hell, even section 81 is probably enough. Your governor's got a lot of leeway.

And of course, full disclosure, I'm not a lawyer. Your mileage may vary.
User avatar
Endless
level5
level5
Posts: 1343
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Some Inspiration

Postby Endless » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:39 am

Yes the clerks can be removed by the Judge Executive or the governor (I believe). But it is for now unlawful to remove them because of their religious beliefs.

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests