Kentucky court clerk....

[Glocktogo]

Here's one I grabbed quickly.

Within the context of RickN pretending to be the wounded dove and his refusal to concede that the office of the County Clerk is not synonymous with the office holder as a person, that really isn't all that indignant.

No one at any point in this entire debacle has said that she is being denied her religious freedom. She is simply not allowed to impose her personal religious beliefs upon others as a function of the government position she holds.

The highest court in the land has ruled that government cannot discriminate against same sex marriage. She is free to continue discriminating against gays as a person, but her office cannot. If she can't perform the duties proscribed by law to the office of the County Clerk, she has the right to resign. No one is forcing her to remain the County Clerk, she simply wants to retain her power and her salary while refusing to do her assigned duty.

 

[RidgeHunter]

Not sure if you knew and were poking or what...

"Former Republican President George W. Bush nominated David Bunning for a lifetime position as a federal judge in 2001 when he was just 35 years old, halfway through his dad's first term in the Senate."

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-clerk-marriage-case-dealt-nepotism-charges-084747298.html

I know everything, Billybob. You know that.

You think that would be reason number 473 why this is is clear as crystal, but the whiny segment of the majority who absolutely love pretending to be the persecuted minority won't be satisfied.

Unbelievable how whiny the self-proclaimed anti-PC, pull yourselves up by the bootstraps crowd can be.

 

[Dale00]

Within the context of RickN pretending to be the wounded dove and his refusal to concede that the office of the County Clerk is not synonymous with the office holder as a person, that really isn't all that indignant.

No one at any point in this entire debacle has said that she is being denied her religious freedom. She is simply not allowed to impose her personal religious beliefs upon others as a function of the government position she holds.

The highest court in the land has ruled that government cannot discriminate against same sex marriage. She is free to continue discriminating against gays as a person, but her office cannot. If she can't perform the duties proscribed by law to the office of the County Clerk, she has the right to resign. No one is forcing her to remain the County Clerk, she simply wants to retain her power and her salary while refusing to do her assigned duty.

Smoke and mirrors in place of your usually cogent comments. You are not addressing the cited quote but rather misdirecting attention elsewhere.

The statement cited, "I for one have no concern if she suffers greatly, she is intentionally and maliciously tormenting others. Sometimes we call people like that "evil" or "monsters", in her case we call her a Christian.", is extremely close to calling for the imposition of suffering on Christians because they are evil monsters.

 

[Hobbes]

Here's one I grabbed quickly.

Could of been worse.

They could have called her a mooslim, or Dimocrat.

 

[Billybob]

I know everything, Billybob. You know that.

You think that would be reason number 473 why this is is clear as crystal, but the whiny segment of the majority who absolutely love pretending to be the persecuted minority won't be satisfied.

Unbelievable how whiny the self-proclaimed anti-PC, pull yourselves up by the bootstraps crowd can be.

None are so blind as those who will not to see?

 

[RidgeHunter]

Another multi-page thread where someone comes in calling practicing Christians anti-religious Athiests without citing examples (because there are none, read it twice). Throw in an insult towards the Imaginary Athiests' families, saddle up your high horse, and proclaim you're not reading general discussions anymore. But you can't. You can't stop because it satisfies something deep inside you to pretend you're being injured. Flop around like a Killdeer feigning a broken wing and fantasize about being the underdog, coming of the ropes with a knockout in the final round.

Munchausen Christianity.

 

[donner]

"Red herring is a kind of fallacy that is an irrelevant topic introduced in an argument to divert the attention of listeners or readers from the original issue."

Smoke and mirrors in place of your usually cogent comments. You are not addressing the cited quote but rather misdirecting attention elsewhere.

The statement cited, "I for one have no concern if she suffers greatly, she is intentionally and maliciously tormenting others. Sometimes we call people like that "evil" or "monsters", in her case we call her a Christian.", is extremely close to calling for the imposition of suffering on Christians because they are evil monsters.

hardly. I wont pretend to speak for S4F, but i think people are intentionally misrepresenting that phrase for support their feelings of persecution.

He said he doesn't care if she suffers because of the stance she has chosen to take. That he isn't going to feel sorry for her because her chosen course of action has caused torment for others. He is not making her suffer or even advocating for it. It's the path she has picked and any suffering that comes from it is of her making. She has the power to end it at any time at this point.

 

[Eagle Eye]

What I am shocked about is the outright indignation towards those of faith In this thread. Maybe I shouldn't be, but I thought Okies would be better than some of this crap that has been said. Some of you should be disappointed in your writings, but you won't have the faith, conviction or the proper upbringing to even realize it.

Here's one I grabbed quickly.

So there is one thing that was said by one member? Somehow i was getting the impression that it was implied that this thread is littered with christian persecution.. Seems the evidence for that is actually pretty thin.

 

[Dale00]

Donner - I did not post this quote out of the blue. I was responding to a request for examples. You on the other hand did throw out an unsolicited "what if" scenario that was unfounded factually (permits to to allow religious worship).

Regarding your second point, saying that you do not care if someone suffers greatly is a statement of hostility. Perhaps I am overreacting to it. Perhaps not. But to top it off by saying, "...in her case, we call her a Christian." is much harder to explain away.

 

[RidgeHunter]

She's hiding behind her 4-year-old religion as an excuse for ******, federally-illegal behavior.

What's difficult to explain away about that?