SCOTUS orders thrice-divorced KY county clerk to issue marriage license

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-08-2015, 02:34 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: I know the guy pisses you off, but is it really fair game to talk about his marriage/wife ?
The other marriages we talk about (in the news), those people are not members here and they'll never see it.
Do what you will, but these are the types of things that can make an unstable person do something terrible.
Maybe George Zimmerman had guys making fun of his relationship on that fateful night.
Just sayin'....

Such phony outrage lol. If somebody is going to say that the government should get out of being involved with marriages, then it's fair to question why they have a government recognized marriage, something that nobody has to do.

[Rotobeast]

(09-08-2015, 02:39 AM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Such phony outrage lol. If somebody is going to say that the government should get out of being involved with marriages, then it's fair to question why they have a government recognized marriage, something that nobody has to do.

It's not outrage, it's concern, and it's sure as hell not phony.
I think you're bright person, which is why you going to a personal level seems beneath someone like you.
Perhaps I have too much faith in people.
Whoops there's that faith word.
Bet I get tossed in the rube-bin for that.

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-08-2015, 03:16 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: It's not outrage, it's concern, and it's sure as hell not phony.
I think you're bright person, which is why you going to a personal level seems beneath someone like you.
Perhaps I have too much faith in people.
Whoops there's that faith word.
Bet I get tossed in the rube-bin for that.

I don't think it was personal at all. Lucie is against government marriage licenses, yet appears to have one, which raises a legitimate question about hypocrisy; unless their marriage is only recognized by the Internet and/or the Renn Fest.

[BmorePat87]

(09-08-2015, 02:34 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: I know the guy pisses you off, but is it really fair game to talk about his marriage/wife ?
The other marriages we talk about (in the news), those people are not members here and they'll never see it.
Do what you will, but these are the types of things that can make an unstable person do something terrible.
Maybe George Zimmerman had guys making fun of his relationship on that fateful night.
Just sayin'....

I guess she shouldn't make blanket statements about other people's marriages, though I don't see her complaining about anything we have said. It seems like she probably didn't have her marriage recognized by the government since she said that government marriages are the most worthless marriages. I'm assuming she had a king recognize hers. 

[Blutarsky]

The word "marriage" is now obsolete.  From its origin the word implied man and woman.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=marry

No more "marriage" licenses should be granted by the government but rather a civil union license, whether hetero or ***** couples.
If the couple wants God involved, go to a church and celebrate the Rite of Holy Matrimony, or continue to call it marriage..no law against using a defunct word is there?

Watch, more whining and crying from the perpetually unhappy left is coming.
http://www.charismanews.com/world/40685-millionaire-gay-couple-sues-to-force-church-wedding

[Goalpost]

I don't think she should be in jail. I could see her being fired, but jail seems extreme.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-08-2015, 09:50 AM)Blutarsky Wrote: The word "marriage" is now obsolete.  From its origin the word implied man and woman.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=marry

No more "marriage" licenses should be granted by the government but rather a civil union license, whether hetero or ***** couples.
If the couple wants God involved, go to a church and celebrate the Rite of Holy Matrimony, or continue to call it marriage..no law against using a defunct word is there?

Watch, more whining and crying from the perpetually unhappy left is coming.
http://www.charismanews.com/world/40685-millionaire-gay-couple-sues-to-force-church-wedding

Odd that you'd acknowledge marriages have been between men and women prior to modern times but neglect to mention that marriage is a much older concept than the christian god.  So christianity has nothing to do with marriage.

(09-08-2015, 10:22 AM)Goalpost Wrote: I don't think she should be in jail.  I could see her being fired, but jail seems extreme.

She can't be fired as she's an elected official.

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-08-2015, 10:22 AM)Goalpost Wrote: I don't think she should be in jail.  I could see her being fired, but jail seems extreme.

Contempt of court means jailtime. Period.

[*michaelsean*]

At first I thought this lady was wrong, but her husband says the judge doesn't know the law, so I'm going to defer to him.

[Blutarsky]

(09-08-2015, 10:29 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Odd that you'd acknowledge marriages have been between men and women prior to modern times but neglect to mention that marriage is a much older concept than the christian god.  So christianity has nothing to do with marriage.

Oh but it is, sorry for not acknowledging that, but my post had less to do with religion than the meaning of the word.
The Romans married way before JC showed up, but what difference does that make?  They didn't marry two guys did they?

[GMDino]

(09-08-2015, 11:23 AM)Blutarsky Wrote: Oh but it is, sorry for not acknowledging that, but my post had little to do with religion.
The Romans married way before JC showed up, but what difference does that make?  They didn't marry two guys did they?

http://www.livescience.com/50725-same-sex-marriage-history.html

Quote:Same-sex precedence

Ancient Romans, or at least Roman men with power and wealth, couldmarry same-sex partners, said Elizabeth Abbott, author of "A History of Marriage" (Seven Stories Press, 2011).

Emperor Nero (ruled A.D. 54 to A.D. 68) castrated a boy named Sporus to make him womanlike, and then married him in a traditional ceremony, which included a bridal veil and a dowry, according to the Roman historian and biographer Suetonius (circa A.D. 69).
Emperor Elagabalus (ruled A.D. 218 to A.D. 222) married Zoticus, a famous male athlete, and referred to his slave, a man named Hierocles, as his husband, Abbott said.

There are also texts referring to lesbian relationships, but not marriages, in ancient Rome, Abbott said. Perhaps these women did not have enough power or influence to actually marry, she said.

"Wealthy, powerful men in ancient Rome could do it, and find ways of doing it because they were rich and powerful," Abbott told Live Science. However, it doesn't appear that same-sex marriage was widespread in ancient Rome.

"In other words, it was a thought people had," Abbott said. "But there were very few people who were actually able to do it.

[*Nately120*]

(09-08-2015, 02:34 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: I know the guy pisses you off, but is it really fair game to talk about his marriage/wife ?
The other marriages we talk about (in the news), those people are not members here and they'll never see it.
Do what you will, but these are the types of things that can make an unstable person do something terrible.
Maybe George Zimmerman had guys making fun of his relationship on that fateful night.
Just sayin'....

I get what you are saying, and I don't make a point to directly criticize his family but he seems to have no qualms about mentioning his personal life as a means of saying "I'm doing things the right way, and others are not" so I can see where people want to rebut such things. I just pointed out that he has pictures of his wife and kids and mentions them a good bit so he needs to stop shoving his heterosexuality in our faces and just keep it on the DL, right?

[Blutarsky]

(09-08-2015, 11:31 AM)GMDino Wrote: http://www.livescience.com/50725-same-sex-marriage-history.html

Ok that is a valid point, but way too may ifs, ands, or buts.  Not commonplace. Seemed abnormal then as it does now.
Castration?

Whats funny is that before Romes collapse, sexual freedom, homosexuality, and pedophilia were practiced openly.
Although it has been tossed out there, I don't see accepting pedophilia as the norm on the horizon. So we'll be OK for a while.lol

The fact remains that the original meaning of the word cannot be disputed.

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-08-2015, 02:33 PM)Blutarsky Wrote: Whats funny is that before Romes collapse, sexual freedom, homosexuality, and pedophilia were practiced openly.
We haven't got to accepting pedophilia as the norm yet, so we're we'll be OK for a while.lol

Correlation does not prove causation.

[BmorePat87]

(09-08-2015, 10:34 AM)michaelsean Wrote: At first I thought this lady was wrong, but her husband says the judge doesn't know the law, so I'm going to defer to him.

He is a smart man. He married a woman who was knocked up with another man's kids while married to her first husband, then adopts those kids.

She eventually left him for the father of her kids, but now they're married again. 

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-08-2015, 02:42 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: He is a smart man. He married a woman who was knocked up with another man's kids while married to her first husband, then adopts those kids.

She eventually left him for the father of her kids, but now they're married again. 

I wonder if any of her three ex-husbands have ever secretly pondered that they could have avoided all this shit if they'd just married a guy.

[BmorePat87]

(09-08-2015, 10:22 AM)Goalpost Wrote: I don't think she should be in jail.  I could see her being fired, but jail seems extreme.

This has been said, but she can't be fired. She was elected.

She also refused to follow a court order and broke the law, so jail is the consequence. 

[Blutarsky]

(09-08-2015, 02:41 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Correlation does not prove causation.

Is that what you got out of that? Don't read into something that's not there. I take those theories with a grain of salt.

The word "funny" and the "lol" should have given you a clue.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

I'm confused.

This woman asked that the state or county or whatever for a way to have her name removed from the liscences or she won't issue them because she feels it violates her religious convictions. The state said no, put her in jail and then issued liscences without her name on them which is all she wanted and now she is out of jail.

Isn't that what this is about?

[BmorePat87]

(09-08-2015, 03:53 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: I'm confused.

This woman asked that the state or county or whatever for a way to have her name removed from the liscences or she won't issue them because she feels it violates her religious convictions. The state said no, put her in jail and then issued liscences without her name on them which is all she wanted and now she is out of jail.

Isn't that what this is about?

She refused to issue them at all.

Since she was in jail, her deputies were charged with issuing them as she obviously couldn't. They did.

Now that she's out, she'll have to issue them or face more jail time.