America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 8 years ago by frankj1. 29 replies replies.
I applaud this woman.......seriously
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
JadeRose Offline
#1 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 1:48 PM EST
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525



I may not agree with her convictions but I applaud her for taking action about them. She isn't hiding behind some moron Attorney General or whine. She doesn't agree...so she left.



http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2015/06/30/grenada-circuit-clerk-resigns-over-same-sex-marriage/29508097/
Gene363 Offline
#2 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 2:08 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,822
True, but like the flag and Ten Commandments issues on public land this is a public office requiring her to do something against her religion and compelling her to quit.

WARNING: We need to be really careful about building religious exemptions, religious accommodations or religious based requirements into laws and regulations. Sooner or later, such laws are going to shoved up our collective azzes by muslims crying about pigs, bacon, liquor etc.
victor809 Offline
#3 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 2:17 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Gene363 wrote:


WARNING: We need to be really careful about building religious exemptions, religious accommodations or religious based requirements into laws and regulations. Sooner or later, such laws are going to shoved up our collective azzes by muslims crying about pigs, bacon, liquor etc.


I've been saying this for years. Everything people have been trying to get for their pet christian religion can be applied to any religion they may not agree with. No one seems to understand that "religion" doesn't mean "christianity".
Speyside Offline
#4 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 2:23 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
The lines have become blurred by some about the separation of church and state. This slippery slope needs to end.
Gene363 Offline
#5 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 2:27 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,822
victor809 wrote:
I've been saying this for years. Everything people have been trying to get for their pet christian religion can be applied to any religion they may not agree with. No one seems to understand that "religion" doesn't mean "christianity".


True, even scientology got itself classified as a religion, though Germany correctly calls it a cult.
JadeRose Offline
#6 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 2:48 PM EST
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
Gene363 wrote:
True, but like the flag and Ten Commandments issues on public land this is a public office requiring her to do something against her religion and compelling her to quit.

WARNING: We need to be really careful about building religious exemptions, religious accommodations or religious based requirements into laws and regulations. Sooner or later, such laws are going to shoved up our collective azzes by muslims crying about pigs, bacon, liquor etc.




I don't think the 10 commandments or any flag that is not the official flag of the country, state, county or municipality DOES belong on public land. Not because I have anything against them but because of EXACTLY what you said. If you put the Christian 10 Commandments or a Confederate flag on public grounds, what will stop Muslims from demanding that passages from the Koran be put up or the gays from demanding a rainbow flag from flying. Nothing..and I'm shocked it hasn't happened yet.


Separation of church and state. This is a nation of laws....not of religion.
bgz Offline
#7 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 3:01 PM EST
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Yep, separate that chit, they don't belong together.

Remember that satanic statue they were going to put up in Oklahoma till someone destroyed the 10 commandments statue?

What's next, muslims are going to put up a statue of a suicide bomber in the name of the one true moon god?

Or scientologists are going to put up a giant statue of their little alien reader thingamajiggy's that takes upskirt photos when chicks walk by... (ok, I might support this one as long as the images were public domain).

Well, you get the point.
DrafterX Offline
#8 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 3:03 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
freak... Mellow
tailgater Offline
#9 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 3:26 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.
jetblasted Offline
#10 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 3:33 PM EST
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
Separation of Chirch & State only means the State can't force you to follow only the State religion, as in the Church of England.
JadeRose Offline
#11 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 3:39 PM EST
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
jetblasted wrote:
Separation of Chirch & State only means the State can't force you to follow only the State religion, as in the Church of England.





Nope......it has (wisely) been interpreted much broader than that. As Victor points out...religion does not mean 'Christianity Only".
dstieger Offline
#12 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 3:39 PM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
Jet, Constitution explicitly says a little more than that...but not much:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."


only 16 words....and there have been millions, if not billions written since trying to interpret those 16 words....amazing
bgz Offline
#13 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 3:44 PM EST
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
jetblasted wrote:
Separation of Chirch & State only means the State can't force you to follow only the State religion, as in the Church of England.


You should be free to believe what you want, whether it be a recognized religion, or a very popular religion that should be downgraded to the status of death cult... which is a whole different issue, and it's covered by freedom of religion.

What we're talking about here is a different animal, separation of church (not chirch, had to throw that in because I'm a azzhole) and state.

Certain evidence or testimony should not be allowed in court due to their subjective or otherwise biased stance because, well... it's biased.

So official government building should not promote one religion over another because it would be seen as biased by a third party observer.

Laws should not be created because of legislators personal beliefs, granted it happens, but luckily over time if tested, those laws should and rightfully so be deemed unconstitutional.

So there is a difference between the terms "freedom of religion" and "separation of church and state".
JadeRose Offline
#14 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 4:37 PM EST
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
I'll go a little further. I thought it was in poor taste that the White House was bathed in rainbow colors last Friday. It showed a lack of decorum and it felt like a "thumbing of the nose" by Obama at all the people that do NOT agree with Gay marriage. I want my Govt to be as neutral as possible. I don't want it liberal or conservative. I want it to make good laws, provide for the common defense, build good infrastructure and leave people alone.
bgz Offline
#15 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 4:41 PM EST
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
JadeRose wrote:
I'll go a little further. I thought it was in poor taste that the White House was bathed in rainbow colors last Friday. It showed a lack of decorum and it felt like a "thumbing of the nose" by Obama at all the people that do NOT agree with Gay marriage. I want my Govt to be as neutral as possible. I don't want it liberal or conservative. I want it to make good laws, provide for the common defense, build good infrastructure and leave people alone.


I agree with you.
Gene363 Offline
#16 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 4:45 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,822
JadeRose wrote:
I don't think the 10 commandments or any flag that is not the official flag of the country, state, county or municipality DOES belong on public land. Not because I have anything against them but because of EXACTLY what you said. If you put the Christian 10 Commandments or a Confederate flag on public grounds, what will stop Muslims from demanding that passages from the Koran be put up or the gays from demanding a rainbow flag from flying. Nothing..and I'm shocked it hasn't happened yet.


Separation of church and state. This is a nation of laws....not of religion.


Hence the, "WARNING:" part, which means you agree with an opinion expressed by a South Carolina resident. Yeah, I'm shocked too. LOL
Gene363 Offline
#17 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 4:57 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,822

FWIW, I completely agree with the separation of church and state. I just do not believe because an object, e.g. The Ten Commandments, codified by the bible, that is fully codified in our current law can be found offensive. The display of a historic basis for modern law in no way promotes a particular religion, denigrates an existing religion or undermines and non belief philosophy. For atheists I question their motives when they claim they are offended by something they completely deny exists.

Times ten for a Christmas tree, the only thing religious is name, but Christmas IMO, is pretty much a commercial thing now for even a lot of so called Christians.
bgz Offline
#18 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 5:15 PM EST
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Gene363 wrote:
FWIW, I completely agree with the separation of church and state. I just do not believe because an object, e.g. The Ten Commandments, codified by the bible, that is fully codified in our current law can be found offensive. The display of a historic basis for modern law in no way promotes a particular religion, denigrates an existing religion or undermines and non belief philosophy. For atheists I question their motives when they claim they are offended by something they completely deny exists.

Times ten for a Christmas tree, the only thing religious is name, but Christmas IMO, is pretty much a commercial thing now for even a lot of so called Christians.



It's not about whether someone is offended or not by it, it's a matter of principle that it should not be promoted by the government, because it leaves the door open for other wack jobs to put their crap in places of official government business.

George Carlin summed up the 10 commandments nicely into 2:

Thou shalt always be honest and faithful to the provider of thy nookie.

And

Thou shalt try real hard not to kill anyone, unless of course they pray to a different invisible man from the one you pray to.

As far as Christmas trees go (and Christmas in general), it's basically a hijacked tradition / holiday to celebrate the winter solstice that was pretty much celebrated across the globe. Well, maybe not the tree part, I think that part was "borrowed" from a group of pagans that used it as a phallic symbol to celebrate the coming fertility of the new season...

but we all already knew that right?


With that said, I like Christmas :)
Gene363 Offline
#19 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 6:01 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,822
bgz wrote:
It's not about whether someone is offended or not by it, it's a matter of principle that it should not be promoted by the government, because it leaves the door open for other wack jobs to put their crap in places of official government business.

George Carlin summed up the 10 commandments nicely into 2:

Thou shalt always be honest and faithful to the provider of thy nookie.

And

Thou shalt try real hard not to kill anyone, unless of course they pray to a different invisible man from the one you pray to.

As far as Christmas trees go (and Christmas in general), it's basically a hijacked tradition / holiday to celebrate the winter solstice that was pretty much celebrated across the globe. Well, maybe not the tree part, I think that part was "borrowed" from a group of pagans that used it as a phallic symbol to celebrate the coming fertility of the new season...

but we all already knew that right?


With that said, I like Christmas :)


Mere existence is not promotion, and in the case of the Commandments, they were the basis for much modern law long before Carlin or his great grandparents were living.

FWIW, I not a big fan of Christmas. Brick wall
frankj1 Offline
#20 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 6:14 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
I am unaware of any modern laws limiting the number of gods and/or idols one may worship.
JadeRose Offline
#21 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 6:50 PM EST
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
Gene363 wrote:
Hence the, "WARNING:" part, which means you agree with an opinion expressed by a South Carolina resident. Yeah, I'm shocked too. LOL





I gotta change my views. BAN THE BIBLE!!!!Sarcasm





I can live with us agreeing on stuff, Gene. It just shows that no matter where you lie on the political spectrum...right is right.
Gene363 Offline
#22 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 7:35 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,822
JadeRose wrote:
I gotta change my views. BAN THE BIBLE!!!!Sarcasm





I can live with us agreeing on stuff, Gene. It just shows that no matter where you lie on the political spectrum...right is right.


True that! If it helps I'm right on the Georgia border, I can see Georgia out the window.
jetblasted Offline
#23 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 8:08 PM EST
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
Gene363 wrote:
I can see Georgia out the window.


Oh, what a heavenly sight . . .
tailgater Offline
#24 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 8:26 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
I am unaware of any modern laws limiting the number of gods and/or idols one may worship.


Just say it.
You worship me.
VaMtnMan Offline
#25 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 8:36 PM EST
Joined: 06-25-2007
Posts: 3,743
My Muslim brothers and sisters, thank you all for your support.
frankj1 Offline
#26 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 8:43 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
tailgater wrote:
Just say it.
You worship me.


It's impossible to not worship you...is that breaking #1 or #7?
Gene363 Offline
#27 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 9:05 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,822
jetblasted wrote:
Oh, what a heavenly sight . . .


Looks pretty dark right now. Anxious
tailgater Offline
#28 Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2015, 9:49 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
It's impossible to not worship you...is that breaking #1 or #7?


Both if we do it right.

Plus #13.
But Mel Brooks already broke the last five.
frankj1 Offline
#29 Posted: Wed, Jul 1 2015, 7:52 AM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
tailgater wrote:
Both if we do it right.

Plus #13.
But Mel Brooks already broke the last five.


you always know when to distract me.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top