U.S. Supreme Court declines stay 4 clerk refusing to issue gay marriage certificates

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
jamie26301

jamie26301

Senior Member
#681
May 14, 2011
1,154
10
38
39
#681
Mitspa said:
what does that have to do with this issue? and again pointing to one sin to somehow suggest that other sin must have its place is illogical and unbiblical. Where did Jesus tell a hypocrite "go and promote and approve sin, because your a hypocrite"
Click to expand...
I promoted this where? He didn't say "go and pull the speck out of another's eye" either. He said to clean your own closet before snooping through someone elses, in manner of speaking. My point is before the Christians against this continune thieir anti-gay lifestyle Crusade, it wouldn't hurt to see the Ophthalmologist first.

I'm not an "embrace every form of evil" liberal, and some things are unacceptable, but all that is so easy, pointing at someone else's lack of vision... humility is something that is so hard, admitting oneself needs glasses as well.
 
Last edited:
M

Mitspa

Guest
#682
#682
jamie26301 said:
I promoted this where? He didn't say "go and pull the speck out of another's eye" either. He said to clean your own closet before snooping through someone elses, in manner of speaking. My point is before the Christians against this continune thieir anti-gay lifestyle Crusade, it wouldn't hurt to see the Ophthalmologist first.

I'm not an "embrace every form of evil" liberal, and some things are unacceptable, but all that is so easy, pointing at someone else's lack of vision... humility is something that is so hard, admitting oneself needs glasses as well.
Click to expand...
Jamie that the end of your logic...that somehow because some folks are hypocrites and some folks sin...this lady or no one else really has the right to resist this attack upon our constitution and our society? That's false logic and very unbiblical.

It don't matter who or what this lady is...every citizen and every person with an once of moral fiber should stand up against what this court is trying to do to our society and the perversion they are try to impose upon us all.


And as far as my eye...your not the judge of who has twigs or logs... funny you would use this passage not to judge as an attempt to judge...whose the hypocrite?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jamie26301

jamie26301

Senior Member
#683
May 14, 2011
1,154
10
38
39
#683
Mitspa said:
Jamie that the end of your logic...that somehow because some folks are hypocrites and some folks sin...this lady or no one else really has the right to resist this attack upon our constitution and our society? That's false logic and very unbiblical.

It don't matter who or what this lady is...every citizen and every person with an once of moral fiber should stand up against what this court is trying to do to our society and the perversion they are try to impose upon us all.
Click to expand...
I'll try this one more time... My "logic" is not politically based. It is based in common sense; it is based in the very argument Christians are using to defend this lady: freedom to choose, and a benefit of a doubt - so long as it's a narrow Fudalmentalist Christian choice.

You demand freedom to refuse to serve gay people by conviction (understandable) on one hand, and yet demand other people be forbidden a choice in a very intimate matter which their own beliefs allow. Do you hear yourselves? And the backlash surprises you? Being labeled bigots surprises you?

I am not making a statement one way or the other about what should be done... I'm saying whatever is done, Christians by and large are going about it the wrong way and going to backfire. What is going on is the backfire of the Church's effort to limit choices of free human beings.
 
Last edited:
M

Mitspa

Guest
#684
#684
jamie26301 said:
I'll try this one more time... My "logic" is not politically based. It is based in common sense; it is based in the very argument Christians are using to defend this lady: freedom to choose, and a benefit of a doubt - so long as it's a narrow Fudalmentalist Christian choice.

You demand freedom to refuse to serve gay people by conviction (understandable) on one hand, and yet demand other people be forbidden a choice in a very intimate matter which their own beliefs allow. Do you hear yourselves? And the backlash surprises you? Being labeled bigots surprises you?

I am not making a statement one way or the other about what should be done... I'm saying whatever is done, Christians by and large are going about it the wrong way and going to backfire. What is going on is the backfire of the Church's effort to limit choices of free human beings.
Click to expand...
Not based on logic..but common sense??? wow hard to argue against that...I guess you mean emotionalism? Because under no standard does it make sense to promote this perversion in our society and for sure under no biblical standard could one take your position. Limit the choices of free human beings...to pervert our society and promote wickedness as a civil right? Yes I would limit that for sure !
 
jamie26301

jamie26301

Senior Member
#685
May 14, 2011
1,154
10
38
39
#685
lolololol ahhhh.

"Do unto others" So simple but certianly not logical! Also a command that seems ignored almost every time when talking of the Lord's instructions for life.

You sincerely think that how you approach and address people has nothing to do with it? How they see and relate to you has nothing to do with it? Regardless of your message, how you deliver it will affect someone's willingness to listen. And if no one hears you because they don't perceive understanding, then you might as well be talking to a wall.

Faith comes by hearing, so it might help if people actually want to listen to you. There's even studies on this! Called " perspective taking." There's research that supports this, as well as common sense! Treat others how you'd like to be treated! What a concept!
 
Last edited:
K

KennethC

Guest
#686
#686
jamie26301 said:
lolololol ahhhh.

"Do unto others" So simple but certianly not logical! Also one command that seems missing from so many Bibles.

You sincerely think that how you approach and address people has nothing to do with it? How they see and relate to you has nothing to do with it? Regardless of your message, how you deliver it will affect someone's willingness to listen. And if no one hears you because they don't perceive understanding, then you might as well be talking to a wall.

Faith comes by hearing, so it might help if people actually want to listen to you. There's even studies on this! Called " perspective taking." There's research that supports this, as well as common sense! Treat others how you'd like to be treated! What a concept!
Click to expand...

Even the bible speaks on it when it talks about how false doctrines will blind people to the truth.
 
K

KennethC

Guest
#688
#688
jamie26301 said:
... wow.... Wow (to make the message longer)
Click to expand...
I was just responding to the last part about saying a person has to want to listen to what another says, not trying to put you down or anything.

Do on to others as you would have them do on to you is a great concept and should be followed, for if a person wants respect they need to show respect to others.

Sorry if you took what I said wrong !!!
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#689
Mar 19, 2011
12,500
1,077
113
#689
What if I stood out in front of a strip club and block people from getting in there because I don't think they should go in there, what do you think would happen? I would go to jail..
 
jamie26301

jamie26301

Senior Member
#690
May 14, 2011
1,154
10
38
39
#690
KennethC said:
I was just responding to the last part about saying a person has to want to listen to what another says, not trying to put you down or anything.

Do on to others as you would have them do on to you is a great concept and should be followed, for if a person wants respect they need to show respect to others.

Sorry if you took what I said wrong !!!
Click to expand...
It's alright, please forgive me... I'm confused what verse you speak of? I mistook your meaning for tell the truth as you'd want to be told the truth kinda thing.
 
crossnote

crossnote

Senior Member
#691
Nov 24, 2012
30,742
3,670
113
#691
A Liberty Counsel Update..


Unfortunately, many media outlets are reporting half-truths and a number of commentators are passing on misconceptions about the Kim Davis case. This battle is just beginning in Kentucky and nationwide. Further, Liberty Counsel has initiated new legal action on Kim Davis' behalf.

Please see my update below on these important developing events — Mat.
​



We are very pleased that Kim Davis was released from jail yesterday. But the battle in Kentucky is far from over for Kim and other county clerks — and for many other states' public officials who are facing similar threats of fines, incarceration, or removal from their positions over their conscience-based opposition to same-sex "marriage."

One fact that is widely misunderstood by many in the media is this: Kim's case is also about her faithful adherence to Kentucky law and not solely about her fight to protect her First Amendment rights.

+ + Kim Davis carefully followed the Commonwealth of Kentucky's law!

While the Supreme Court struck down federal and state laws defining marriage as being between one man and one woman, the Court cannot create a new law. The five lawyers on the Supreme Court who created a "right" to same-sex "marriage" did so without constitutional authority and have thus created legal chaos. The Constitution states that the creation of laws must always come from the Legislative Branch.

Kentucky's law still states that marriage is between one man and one woman. It takes action by the Kentucky legislature and governor to change their state laws to reflect the Supreme Court's ruling. The law cannot simply be "deemed" into place!
Kim Davis is adhered to Kentucky law while standing for her First Amendment right to religious liberty and freedom of conscience.
​
 
L

LanceA

Guest
#692
#692
I think the best example of conforming to the law of the land is with Daniel. Daniel refused to follow his governments laws when they conflicted with his obedience to God. Daniel honored God and therefore God blessed Daniel. As a Christian we are to put God first before anything we do in life. In Acts 5:29 we read "We must obey God rather than men." We are to follow our governments laws as long as they don't go against God's law.

I think the clerk could have used some wisdom and asked another clerk to put her stamp or signature on the document. Did the clerk show any type of Love toward the gay couple? We as Christians need to be wise in our decisions as well as doing things out of Love . Just my take on the subject.
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
#693
#693
Dude653 said:
What if I stood out in front of a strip club and block people from getting in there because I don't think they should go in there, what do you think would happen? I would go to jail..
Click to expand...
When they start passing laws that tells us strippers are a protected class of people and you must approve their behavior...then you will have a point.
 
G

Galahad

Guest
#694
#694
BarlyGurl said:
Conversely,---WHERE--- did Jesus suggest we should PREVENT homosexual deviants from getting married????
Click to expand...
BarlyGurl,

So you believe, as I think your question implies, that issuing the license does not necessarily mean the issuer or signer advocates or condones the union of the persons named on the license. Or that it can be interpreted as giving support. That's a good point. It is.

Similarly, some signers would believe it is condoning the sin. It is their judgment, and so it would violate their conscience. And that's the problem.

If I had the opportunity to vote for a law that restricted marriage between a man and woman, I would vote for it. And I would vote for any person who would support such a law.
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
#695
#695
jamie26301 said:
lolololol ahhhh.

"Do unto others" So simple but certianly not logical! Also a command that seems ignored almost every time when talking of the Lord's instructions for life.

You sincerely think that how you approach and address people has nothing to do with it? How they see and relate to you has nothing to do with it? Regardless of your message, how you deliver it will affect someone's willingness to listen. And if no one hears you because they don't perceive understanding, then you might as well be talking to a wall.

Faith comes by hearing, so it might help if people actually want to listen to you. There's even studies on this! Called " perspective taking." There's research that supports this, as well as common sense! Treat others how you'd like to be treated! What a concept!
Click to expand...
Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
 
G

Galahad

Guest
#696
#696
Mitspa said:
When they start passing laws that tells us strippers are a protected class of people and you must approve their behavior...then you will have a point.
Click to expand...
Yes. The determining factor between his scenario and the case being considered is not a common denominator of the two.
 
jamie26301

jamie26301

Senior Member
#697
May 14, 2011
1,154
10
38
39
#697
Galahad said:
Similarly, some signers would believe it is condoning the sin. It is their judgment, and so it would violate their conscience. And that's the problem.
Click to expand...
I agree, esp with privately owned businesses. It gets a little murkey where the gov is involved. For one, no one is forced to work a gov job. Gay marriage is all over the news; it's not like what happened was an impossibility. Why not try to live in peace with others if at all possible (Pauline verse), and start looking for another job?

If I had the opportunity to vote for a law that restricted marriage between a man and woman, I would vote for it. And I would vote for any person who would support such a law.
Click to expand...
One issue voter? Is there anything else on a political platform that would be of equal concern? If a Democrat supported such a law, would you vote for him?
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
#698
#698
jamie26301 said:
I agree, esp with privately owned businesses. It gets a little murkey where the gov is involved. For one, no one is forced to work a gov job. Gay marriage is all over the news; it's not like what happened was an impossibility. Why not try to live in peace with others if at all possible (Pauline verse), and start looking for another job?


One issue voter? Is there anything else on a political platform that would be of equal concern? If a Democrat supported such a law, would you vote for him?
Click to expand...
This lady is a Democrat...the judge that threw her in Jail was a Republican....
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#699
Mar 19, 2011
12,500
1,077
113
#699
Mitspa said:
When they start passing laws that tells us strippers are a protected class of people and you must approve their behavior...then you will have a point.
Click to expand...
No one says we have to approve. The law says we can't interfere... So my analogy is valid.
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
#700
#700
Dude653 said:
No one says we have to approve. The law says we can't interfere... So my analogy is valid.
Click to expand...
No we are told that we must accept and approve this perversion as if it is a protected civil right...and if you don't approve it...you go to jail .... that's exactly what happened to this lady.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.