[WideRight05]

Kim Davis will be tried in Ashland, Ky this Thursday morning with David Bunning as the judge. This is the same judge that issued a ruling stating that she had to issue marriage licenses after she has taken a stand by refusing to issue marriage licenses of any kind since the Obergefell v. Hodges SCOTUS ruling. Kim lost a case with the appeals court and the SCOTUS declined to take up the case. I'm anticipating that she will either receive a fine or be jailed.

I love it. I wish more Christians displayed the backbone that Kim Davis has. We have a president that refuses to follow the laws on many issues such as immigration with sanctuary cities, so go for it Kim!

[TheRealThing]

Kim Davis will be tried in Ashland, Ky this Thursday morning with David Bunning as the judge. This is the same judge that issued a ruling stating that she had to issue marriage licenses after she has taken a stand by refusing to issue marriage licenses of any kind since the Obergefell v. Hodges SCOTUS ruling. Kim lost a case with the appeals court and the SCOTUS declined to take up the case. I'm anticipating that she will either receive a fine or be jailed.

I love it. I wish more Christians displayed the backbone that Kim Davis has. We have a president that refuses to follow the laws on many issues such as immigration with sanctuary cities, so go for it Kim!

You may recall that I expressed some concern about the last year of the Obama era. I'm afraid it will be a time of no holds (or regulations) barred. In fact, owing to the reams of regs being generated as we speak, many anticipate that it will be relatively far into the next President's term until we even know about them. We Americans find ourselves living in days during which politicians are willing to put party over country, and unfortunately it would seem that malady holds sway over the SCOTUS as well.

At any rate, from among the throngs of folks who lay claim to the Christian faith in this land, it has fallen to little Kim Davis to speak for the nation on the matter of homosexuality. And as the Lord would have it, Ashland is the venue. I agree as heartily as I can, GO KIM!!!

[Harry Rex Vonner]

Have you read the official statement of inclusion released by Wayne Andrews, president of MSU? He "celebrates" diversity specifically naming lesbians, gay (not a word I choose to use), bisexual, transsexual and questioning/queers (What exactly are these oddballs?). Wonder what happened to good old males and females?

Of course, one would expect such a statement from one who has spent his life going to public schools, teaching in public schools, and being an administrator of public schools. His secular humanist, amoral exposure is worse and more deadly than any radio active material. I would add that we should ask God to save us from public educators but He doesn't seem to be involved.

[Motley]

I just hope all this doesn't pour over into her marriage. I'd hate to see her have to get married for a 5th time. You know, with her believing so strongly in the sanctity of marriage and all. Such a brave and good Christian!

[Motley]

I would add that we should ask God to save us from public educators but He doesn't seem to be involved.

Maybe if we all close our eyes and pray really really hard God will intervene and reform the public education system. We can only hope.

[WideRight05]

I just hope all this doesn't pour over into her marriage. I'd hate to see her have to get married for a 5th time. You know, with her believing so strongly in the sanctity of marriage and all. Such a brave and good Christian!

There you are. You never did my question about what made you so great and knowledgeable...

Since you know so much about her, you should know she was divorced multiple times BEFORE she became a Christian. She did not become a Christian until 4 years ago.

If Obergefell v. Hodges were decided five years ago when she was in office, she would have probably issued the licenses with no problem.

Looks like we have a real live one here. :hilarious:

[WideRight05]

Have you read the official statement of inclusion released by Wayne Andrews, president of MSU? He "celebrates" diversity specifically naming lesbians, gay (not a word I choose to use), bisexual, transsexual and questioning/queers (What exactly are these oddballs?). Wonder what happened to good old males and females?

Of course, one would expect such a statement from one who has spent his life going to public schools, teaching in public schools, and being an administrator of public schools. His secular humanist, amoral exposure is worse and more deadly than any radio active material. I would add that we should ask God to save us from public educators but He doesn't seem to be involved.

What a joke. What is he thinking, putting the university into this issue anyways?

The funny thing is, this diverse and inclusive president would probably throw a fit if a Church issued a statement about the issue with differing opinions. Those who preach diversity and inclusion normally practice the opposite.

[TheRealThing]

There you are. You never did my question about what made you so great and knowledgeable...

Since you know so much about her, you should know she was divorced multiple times BEFORE she became a Christian. She did not become a Christian until 4 years ago.

If Obergefell v. Hodges were decided five years ago when she was in office, she would have probably issued the licenses with no problem.

Looks like we have a real live one here. :hilarious:

Individuals such as Motley frequently employ their own interpretation of Scripture when they want to cast aspersions upon the character and motivation of others with whom they disagree. In this case, we find an unbeliever using Scripture (to which they claim not to give any credibility) to judge a believer, now that is what I call hilarious.

What an honor God has chosen to bestow on Kim Davis. Even though she has been married 4 times, she like the homosexual deviants with whom she has been drawn into confrontation, can choose to bow before the Creator, Who has promised to forgive all who do. Like the woman at the well learned when she met The Lord Jesus, "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" none the less, Jesus died for ALL on the cross. As I have said many times, it's a choice.

I know one thing. I and many hundreds of Christians of my acquaintance have gone to Church and served the Lord for decades and, none of us have been afforded the privilege to speak in such grand fashion for the cause of Christ. I am humbled by her example.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

Maybe if we all close our eyes and pray really really hard God will intervene and reform the public education system. We can only hope.

The government schools are beyond repair. Once the excrement has been dumped from the container, you will never remove the stench. And, with those government controlled schools, the initial dumping took place back in the 1960s.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

What a joke. What is he thinking, putting the university into this issue anyways?

The funny thing is, this diverse and inclusive president would probably throw a fit if a Church issued a statement about the issue with differing opinions. Those who preach diversity and inclusion normally practice the opposite.

Being a college "educated" administrator, I would have to conclude that our boy, Wayne, supports all diversity with the exception of Caucasians, heterosexuals, actual taxpayers not drawing handouts to attend his school, conservatives and other believers in traditional Judeo-Christian tenets, and, of course above all, Christians. To college administrators, most all of whom have either spent their lives going to school, teaching school, or running schools, the real world is beyond their grasp. Our boy in Morehead, Wayne Andrews, is a fine specimen. But let's give him his due. He associates well with lesbians, homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, and, my personal favorite classification of the day, questioning/queers. I've used the term "queers" all my life (a most descriptive and exacting term) as has most everyone I know- blue collar, white collar, and no collar. However, I am still not familiar with the "questioning/queer" movement. Are they like maggots?

[Granny Bear]

I just read this about Mike Huckabee. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm just wondering. Is this a matter of semantics, or is Huckabee correct?



Here is what Huckabee told his supporters.


I spoke with Kim Davis this morning to offer my prayers and support. For those of you who don’t know, Kim is the Rowan County Clerk, a Democrat, who is under fire from the left for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses in Kentucky.

I let Kim know how proud I am of her for not abandoning her religious convictions and standing strong for religious liberty. She is showing more courage and humility than just about any federal officeholder in Washington.

Kim is asking the perfect question: ‘Under what law am I authorized to issue homosexual couples a marriage license?’ That simple question is giving many in Congress a civics lesson that they never got in grade school.

The Supreme Court cannot and did not make a law. They only made a ruling on a law. Congress makes the laws. Because Congress has made no law allowing for same-sex marriage, Kim does not have the Constitutional authority to issue a marriage license to homosexual couples.

Kim is a person of great conviction. When people of conviction fight for what’s right they often pay a price, but if they don’t and we surrender, we will pay a far greater price for bowing to the false God of judicial supremacy. Government is not God. No man – and certainly no unelected lawyer – has the right to redefine the laws of nature or of nature’s God. Five unelected lawyers have abused their power by ruling in favor of a national right to same-sex marriage with no legal precedent and with nothing in our Constitution to back it up. They have violated American’s most fundamental right guaranteed by our Constitution — religious liberty.

I stand with Kim Davis and every American of faith under attack by Washington elites who have nothing but disdain for us, our faith and the Constitution.

If you stand with us, please sign my petition in support of religious liberty here.

With gratitude,
Mike Huckabee

[64SUR]

Thank god Kim Davis was a Democrat....:Cheerlead

[Granny Bear]

What difference does that make 64SUR??

[luke skywalker]

So everyone thinks it's ok to be in public office, a government job and run it by that persons religious beliefs? So I'm sure you would also be the same way if a non-believer or a Muslim did the same thing and ran it with their personal beliefs. I highly doubt it but let's continue. First I am against same sex marriage, but this whole thing stinks, she's not smart enough to realize the legal council is just using her to further their own agenda, all of her supporters and followers are not smart enough to realize she is just cashing in at the expense of religion and Christians. Read today she is looking at a book deal, next thing you know she will be taking money to be on talk shows..

Here is my other question, If by her own beliefs it is a sin for her to sign a marriage license for a gay couple, why would it not be a sin to sign a license for someone that has committed adultery and now wanting to get married again without being forgiven first for the adultery? I'm sure I'm going to hear the standard answer of well she didn't know about that, or don't ask don't tell, but the gay couple is obvious, but I'm always interested to hear the next excuse as to why it's ok. Sorry, but her personal beliefs are just that, and shouldn't play a part of the county clerks office, like I said, let's put a muslim, or non believer in there and let them run it by their beliefs and see what happens. I'm not bashing her or anyone, I'm bashing the fact that she has disobeyed a judges ruling, and when she is fined how many of you supporters will be there with your checkbooks open willing to pay it for her? I'm guessing not very many.

[64SUR]

What difference does that make 64SUR??

Well let's see D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T. Now lets make her a rich woman. :popcorn:

[Granny Bear]

^what?

She has been found guilty and remanded to custody.

[64SUR]

^what?

She has been found guilty and remanded to custody.

:please: Granny Bear I also believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I just get tired of republican bashing democrats. Saying things like you cant go heaven if you are a democrat. Now look for Kim Davis to speak at the Republican national conventions. 64SUR. :yikes::yikes::yikes:

[Motley]

So everyone thinks it's ok to be in public office, a government job and run it by that persons religious beliefs? So I'm sure you would also be the same way if a non-believer or a Muslim did the same thing and ran it with their personal beliefs. I highly doubt it but let's continue. First I am against same sex marriage, but this whole thing stinks, she's not smart enough to realize the legal council is just using her to further their own agenda, all of her supporters and followers are not smart enough to realize she is just cashing in at the expense of religion and Christians. Read today she is looking at a book deal, next thing you know she will be taking money to be on talk shows..

Here is my other question, If by her own beliefs it is a sin for her to sign a marriage license for a gay couple, why would it not be a sin to sign a license for someone that has committed adultery and now wanting to get married again without being forgiven first for the adultery? I'm sure I'm going to hear the standard answer of well she didn't know about that, or don't ask don't tell, but the gay couple is obvious, but I'm always interested to hear the next excuse as to why it's ok. Sorry, but her personal beliefs are just that, and shouldn't play a part of the county clerks office, like I said, let's put a muslim, or non believer in there and let them run it by their beliefs and see what happens. I'm not bashing her or anyone, I'm bashing the fact that she has disobeyed a judges ruling, and when she is fined how many of you supporters will be there with your checkbooks open willing to pay it for her? I'm guessing not very many.

You're fighting an uphill battle against some true believers on here who think this country was actually founded on Christian principles. Good luck. Hope Kim has a good time in jail. I'm sure she'll have a gofundme account (probably set up by someone on here) that pays for all this and then some.

[64SUR]

You're fighting an uphill battle against some true believers on here who think this country was actually founded on Christian principles. Good luck. Hope Kim has a good time in jail. I'm sure she'll have a gofundme account (probably set up by someone on here) that pays for all this and then some.

She has out smarts them all GoFundMe account she just won the lottery. Show me the money. :Cheerlead

[Granny Bear]

:please: Granny Bear I also believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I just get tired of republican bashing democrats. Saying things like you cant go heaven if you are a democrat. Now look for Kim Davis to speak at the Republican national conventions. 64SUR. :yikes::yikes::yikes:

Okay, two things I can say unequivocally:

1) Your party affiliation will not determine your eternal destination
2) Kim Davis will not be speaking at the Republican National Convention


And actually there is a third:

3) Democrats AND Republicans will always bash each other. Gotta find the real person underneath all that candy coating!!

[64SUR]

Okay, two things I can say unequivocally:

1) Your party affiliation will not determine your eternal destination
2) Kim Davis will not be speaking at the Republican National Convention


And actually there is a third:

3) Democrats AND Republicans will always bash each other. Gotta find the real person underneath all that candy coating!!

Oh yes she will I have inside information about the conventions. hh:

[TheRealThing]

So everyone thinks it's ok to be in public office, a government job and run it by that persons religious beliefs? So I'm sure you would also be the same way if a non-believer or a Muslim did the same thing and ran it with their personal beliefs. I highly doubt it but let's continue. First I am against same sex marriage, but this whole thing stinks, she's not smart enough to realize the legal council is just using her to further their own agenda, all of her supporters and followers are not smart enough to realize she is just cashing in at the expense of religion and Christians. Read today she is looking at a book deal, next thing you know she will be taking money to be on talk shows..

Here is my other question, If by her own beliefs it is a sin for her to sign a marriage license for a gay couple, why would it not be a sin to sign a license for someone that has committed adultery and now wanting to get married again without being forgiven first for the adultery? I'm sure I'm going to hear the standard answer of well she didn't know about that, or don't ask don't tell, but the gay couple is obvious, but I'm always interested to hear the next excuse as to why it's ok. Sorry, but her personal beliefs are just that, and shouldn't play a part of the county clerks office, like I said, let's put a muslim, or non believer in there and let them run it by their beliefs and see what happens. I'm not bashing her or anyone, I'm bashing the fact that she has disobeyed a judges ruling, and when she is fined how many of you supporters will be there with your checkbooks open willing to pay it for her? I'm guessing not very many.

Okay then luke, in all due respect, maybe you can answer the question Kim Davis is asking?
‘Under what law am I authorized to issue homosexual couples a marriage license?’ Obviously I don't have the legal connections that Mike Huckabee has but, the argument seems worthy of an answer if you ask me. And, if there is a law which authorizes her to issue homosexuals a marriage license why doesn't some big time liberal dig it up for her?

But, I am happy to see that you understand the basic problem in all of this. And, I would answer your question as follows; The laws of man ought not ever challenge, or by reason of disagreement, change or alter God's law. That's the real rub. The institution of marriage was given to man in the Garden of Eden, as God Himself defined the union of man and woman thousands of years ago. And as Kim Davis has in the last four years, become quite aware and has become therefore, understandably concerned about her own behavior in all of this, it's worth questioning.
Genesis 2:24 (KJV)
24 "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."

Man has always had God's leave to go about his own business in complete contradiction to His established Word without intervention. That is to say in times past, if somebody walked the homosexual lifestyle, he could do so even though he may have been looked down on by those who knew about it. What is different in this day is that man expects the court to sanction his rebellion, it makes him feel better I suppose. But more than that, you can bet the PC police will be rounding up anyone who openly disparages a homosexual before it's all over. That (their acceptance by society) will give them the only absolution that they will ever see however, because all men will face God at the Judgment at the appointed time. And then there is this, just because the SCOTUS or the Podunk court of KY makes a ruling or proclamation being in clear and direct contravention to the long established law of God, doesn't mean the majority will ever truly accept it. A Lemmings whole existence is summed up in following the Lemming ahead of him. Those who prefer to think for themselves have a bit of a problem with that kind of thing.

You're fighting an uphill battle against some true believers on here who think this country was actually founded on Christian principles. Good luck. Hope Kim has a good time in jail. I'm sure she'll have a gofundme account (probably set up by someone on here) that pays for all this and then some.

Perhaps if you were to actually spend some quality time with the founding documents you would see the reality of the matter. And it's got nothing to do with true believers. Any college history student is familiar with the tyranny of Mad King George and the misery he exacted upon his subjects through the Church of England. And, any high school history student is familiar with the story about our forefathers fleeing England so as to escape religious persecution there in England.

The facts of history are clearly set forth in the writings of the time. In the eyes then of any reasonably objective investigator, the fact that this nation was founded on Christian principles is inescapable. Maybe not the DNC, but the annals of history and the library of Congress is chocked full of this stuff.


AFTR, I for one will be happy to open my checkbook!

[Motley]

Perhaps if you were to actually spend some quality time with the founding documents you would see the reality of the matter. And it's got nothing to do with true believers. Any college history student is familiar with the tyranny of Mad King George and the misery he exacted upon his subjects through the Church of England. And, any high school history student is familiar with the story about our forefathers fleeing England so as to escape religious persecution there in England.

The facts of history are clearly set forth in the writings of the time. In the eyes then of any reasonably objective investigator, the fact that this nation was founded on Christian principles is inescapable. Maybe not the DNC, but the annals of history and the library of Congress is chocked full of this stuff.


AFTR, I for one will be happy to open my checkbook!

Why didn't the founding fathers just write that we were a Christian nation in any of the founding documents then? Especially the Constitution. Seems like something they would have included if that's their intention.

You can't honestly tell me that the Deists and Freemasons that played the biggest part in our founding had any intentions of one religion trumping all others.

They set up barring of religious tests for political office for a reason as well. I don't need much beyond the opening words of the 1st Amendment to tell myself that Christianity has no place in our government nor does any other religion.

Keep telling yourself that, and keep desperately grasping on to your fairy tale story of what this country was meant to be. I don't need to defend or argue much. Things are going my way after all.

[TheRealThing]

Why didn't the founding fathers just write that we were a Christian nation in any of the founding documents then? Especially the Constitution. Seems like something they would have included if that's their intention.

You can't honestly tell me that the Deists and Freemasons that played the biggest part in our founding had any intentions of one religion trumping all others.

They set up barring of religious tests for political office for a reason as well. I don't need much beyond the opening words of the 1st Amendment to tell myself that Christianity has no place in our government nor does any other religion.

Keep telling yourself that, and keep desperately grasping on to your fairy tale story of what this country was meant to be. I don't need to defend or argue much. Things are going my way after all.

You know, some things just cannot be hidden. Like when certain folks cannot hide their anger with regard to the truths of God. I recognize the circular logic of your posts from discussions of the past. Notwithstanding I cannot comply with your suggestion owing to the fact that, as I have already mentioned, history and the founding documents are literally replete with references to God. It is not a matter of deluding myself ala the manner of the liberal, it's more reading comprehension I would say.

Yours' is a false argument. Never have I heard, even one single hair on fire, hard right conservative, say that the US was founded as a theocracy. "The God of Nature" is cited however, and so is reference to the laws of nature. Nor has any credible authority ever suggested that ALL the founding fathers were believing/professing Christians. There is a natural order of things, and those things existed long before the twisted liberal view which states that the Constitution guarantees deviants the right to pursue their perversions as a protected class slimed it's way onto the world stage. That only happened since the Supremely misguided court made certain rulings. But, as Huckabee said, there is no such law, and the SC certainly is not authorized under the Constitution to write one. At any rate, my point would be that the consciences of the majority of US public servants were greatly influenced by their faith in God up until the recent past. Therefore, they tended to govern with dignity and respect. Not so much right now, and therein lies and exposes the true failing of the Church.

I understand the false sense of glee from among liberals however, as the court's apparent ruling seems to give the citizens of this land no alternative. Things really are going your way, in that we conservative Christians have seemingly been legislated into submission. But then, that is consistent with prophecy, is it not?

[WideRight05]

Why didn't the founding fathers just write that we were a Christian nation in any of the founding documents then? Especially the Constitution. Seems like something they would have included if that's their intention.

You can't honestly tell me that the Deists and Freemasons that played the biggest part in our founding had any intentions of one religion trumping all others.

They set up barring of religious tests for political office for a reason as well. I don't need much beyond the opening words of the 1st Amendment to tell myself that Christianity has no place in our government nor does any other religion.

Keep telling yourself that, and keep desperately grasping on to your fairy tale story of what this country was meant to be. I don't need to defend or argue much. Things are going my way after all.

That is what many of the world's evil leaders have thought.

[RunItUpTheGut]

I do LOVE how the media has completely ignored the fact that Davis is a Democrat. They will not say that anywhere.
That's how divided our two party system has gotten us. If you vote Dem you are only supposed to believe one way on all issues, and vise versa for Repubs.

Ive seen on all of these reports that 117 out of 120 clerks are following the law, so who are the other two besides Davis? Ive not seen them mentioned at all. I think one was in Casey County. I know Whitleys wasn't but don't care enough to look and see if she still isn't. Are those the other two not issuing gays licenses?

I find this so hilarious it almost makes me want to go troll these people for being so stupid when they could have just went and got a license right down the road, but some little drama queens (and by queen I mean king, no queen, hell I don't know what some of them are). Its all becoming more and more funny. I cannot wait to pledge my full support for polygamist, goats, and the dead to all get married. If we are going to let the gays do it under an amendment not allowing discrimination of a choice, then there is no reason a polygamist shouldn't be able to get married.
Lets watch it fall further and further. Maybe if we just start pushing it, the big man will go ahead and burn it down.

[RunItUpTheGut]

I just read this about Mike Huckabee. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm just wondering. Is this a matter of semantics, or is Huckabee correct?



Here is what Huckabee told his supporters.


I spoke with Kim Davis this morning to offer my prayers and support. For those of you who don’t know, Kim is the Rowan County Clerk, a Democrat, who is under fire from the left for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses in Kentucky.

I let Kim know how proud I am of her for not abandoning her religious convictions and standing strong for religious liberty. She is showing more courage and humility than just about any federal officeholder in Washington.

Kim is asking the perfect question: ‘Under what law am I authorized to issue homosexual couples a marriage license?’ That simple question is giving many in Congress a civics lesson that they never got in grade school.

The Supreme Court cannot and did not make a law. They only made a ruling on a law. Congress makes the laws. Because Congress has made no law allowing for same-sex marriage, Kim does not have the Constitutional authority to issue a marriage license to homosexual couples.

Kim is a person of great conviction. When people of conviction fight for what’s right they often pay a price, but if they don’t and we surrender, we will pay a far greater price for bowing to the false God of judicial supremacy. Government is not God. No man – and certainly no unelected lawyer – has the right to redefine the laws of nature or of nature’s God. Five unelected lawyers have abused their power by ruling in favor of a national right to same-sex marriage with no legal precedent and with nothing in our Constitution to back it up. They have violated American’s most fundamental right guaranteed by our Constitution — religious liberty.

I stand with Kim Davis and every American of faith under attack by Washington elites who have nothing but disdain for us, our faith and the Constitution.

If you stand with us, please sign my petition in support of religious liberty here.

With gratitude,
Mike Huckabee

This is exactly what I have been saying since long before the ruling ever got to the supreme court.
The supreme court has never, and will never, have the right to make or change laws. If they did, we would be Nazis with one court of a few judges deciding everything and have no need for legislators.

If we are going strictly by what the law books read, this clerk has been falsely imprisoned and continues to be. As Scalia stated in his dissent, the supreme court should have never accepted the case as it does not pertain to them.
They are supposed to interpret the law. The law was clearly defined as one man and one woman. They did not have the authority to do that. They should have denied the case and told the plantiffs they needed to talk to there local congressmen about changing the laws.

IMHO, and I mean this with every breath in me, those judges on the supreme court who made this mess by breaking the law and going above the constitution should be tried, and ultimately hanged for treason.

That is just my two cents, and I would say EXACTLY the same if the law stated anybody can marry anything and the supreme court was reversed and decided to change it too one man and one woman. They would have no authority to do so without legislators changing the law. Those senators and congressmen represent the people. This is not a civil problem. Nobody can prove anyone is gay at birth and without the proof, the science community can only agree that for now, it is a choice, no matter how much they want to lie. Those who scream about discrimination obviously don't understand that blacks had no choice when it came to skin color. These are two separate and entirely different issues.
Im extremely curious as to what would happen if the republicans take the white house, the complete majority, and have all the authority in the country to make laws. Are those on the supreme court still going to tell them they are wrong and cant do it? Its eventually coming to a head because we have too many loose laws in this country without an exact definition that are too often let up to a bias court making the ruling.

Obamacare got passed on a technicality and lie about it being a tax.
gay marriage got passed because of 5 liberals who decided to change the laws themselves.

Grab the popcorn and see what happens.

[Granny Bear]

Whitley, Rowan and Casey are the three counties involved. I saw that on the news last night.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

Why didn't the founding fathers just write that we were a Christian nation in any of the founding documents then? Especially the Constitution. Seems like something they would have included if that's their intention.

You can't honestly tell me that the Deists and Freemasons that played the biggest part in our founding had any intentions of one religion trumping all others.

They set up barring of religious tests for political office for a reason as well. I don't need much beyond the opening words of the 1st Amendment to tell myself that Christianity has no place in our government nor does any other religion.

Keep telling yourself that, and keep desperately grasping on to your fairy tale story of what this country was meant to be. I don't need to defend or argue much. Things are going my way after all.

Indeed, "things" are going your way, Motley. Sadly, they are not going the way intended by the framers of the US Constitution. Nor are they going the way of the writers of the Fourteenth Amendment which was adopted as a post-Civil War amendment solely intended to grant full protection and equal rights to blacks and other former slaves.

If those who wrote the constitution and those who wrote the Fourteenth Amendment intended to include homosexual marriage, why was it always a moot issue never remotely considered in the writings, discussion, and findings of the court until a couple of months ago? And, where is "marriage" even mentioned in the constitution? The answer is, of course, that it isn't there directly or indirectly. It clearly fell, with most everything else, under the Tenth Amendment meaning that it was always intended to be a states rights issue decided by each state.

Now, that is the law coming from one who studied constitutional law, practiced constitutional law, and, unlike Obama who was merely a low level lecturer and never a professor, has taught constitutional law.

However, we can agree on one fact. The liberal "interpretation" of the Fourteenth Amendment in the last forty plus years or so has turned this well-intended amendment into a toxic landfill to be dumped on by those seeking "rights" that they cannot legitimately find in the constitution or win by a vote of the electorate.

It never hurts to "enlighten" the "debate" with a few actual true facts from one who actually knows the history of the law. It won't convince the Motleys of the world but I learned long ago that it is usually a waste of time confusing such individuals with the truth. He/She will still hold on to his/her multi-colored flag while the rest of us hold to the actual rule of law intended by our forefathers and foremothers.

[TheRealThing]

This is exactly what I have been saying since long before the ruling ever got to the supreme court.
The supreme court has never, and will never, have the right to make or change laws. If they did, we would be Nazis with one court of a few judges deciding everything and have no need for legislators.

If we are going strictly by what the law books read, this clerk has been falsely imprisoned and continues to be. As Scalia stated in his dissent, the supreme court should have never accepted the case as it does not pertain to them.
They are supposed to interpret the law. The law was clearly defined as one man and one woman. They did not have the authority to do that. They should have denied the case and told the plantiffs they needed to talk to there local congressmen about changing the laws.

IMHO, and I mean this with every breath in me, those judges on the supreme court who made this mess by breaking the law and going above the constitution should be tried, and ultimately hanged for treason.

That is just my two cents, and I would say EXACTLY the same if the law stated anybody can marry anything and the supreme court was reversed and decided to change it too one man and one woman. They would have no authority to do so without legislators changing the law. Those senators and congressmen represent the people. This is not a civil problem. Nobody can prove anyone is gay at birth and without the proof, the science community can only agree that for now, it is a choice, no matter how much they want to lie. Those who scream about discrimination obviously don't understand that blacks had no choice when it came to skin color. These are two separate and entirely different issues.
Im extremely curious as to what would happen if the republicans take the white house, the complete majority, and have all the authority in the country to make laws. Are those on the supreme court still going to tell them they are wrong and cant do it? Its eventually coming to a head because we have too many loose laws in this country without an exact definition that are too often let up to a bias court making the ruling.

Obamacare got passed on a technicality and lie about it being a tax.
gay marriage got passed because of 5 liberals who decided to change the laws themselves.

Grab the popcorn and see what happens.

^^Agreed. The reason IMHO, that the SC has been drug into all this is due to Congressional gridlock. Nothing gets solved by the Congress because of the two warring points of view espoused by the liberals and the conservatives. Conservatives do have nearly our entire existence as a nation to cite in justification for their stand, while the libs just want change. The SC should not be making law but, that is what they have been doing because the Republicans will not line up with Dems on the matters you have mentioned above.

Most want to blame ALL of the Congress but I disagree with them. I would analogize as follows. Let's say a man was out to sea on the cruise ship 'US Ship of State', and to his horror he finds that the crew is divided into two warring factions. One faction, calling themselves liberals is dedicated to drilling holes in the hull. The other faction calls themselves conservatives and are doing their best to stop the drilling until they can get back to port, where the owner of the cruise ship will have a chance to fire those who are trying to destroy or sink the ship. To my mind that is what America is going through as we speak.

The Republicans, though I am admittedly disappointed in their efforts, are doing what they think is their best to keep this land free until 'we the people' have a chance to change out certain of the congress and in this case, a complicitous President. Republicans certainly are obstructing the madness, but that's a good thing in my book.