Conquer Club

Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby DaGip on Thu Sep 10, 2015 8:28 am

I was curious this morning why I haven't heard anything from the wackos from Westboro Baptist Church in the media. You would think that now gay marriage is legal and the whole Kim Davis debacle the media would have them all over your television sets.

The reason why might surprise you as it did me.

The Westboro Baptist Church actually does not support Kim Davis at all on the matter of gay marriage license issuance (or the lack thereof), but instead supports her resignation. Not because they support gay marriage, but on the grounds that Kim Davis decided to serve the government as an elected official. Therefor, because the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage, Kim Davis must then uphold the law or resign. Pretty much the same opinion as the protesters against Kim Davis' office, albeit being on the totally opposite side of the spectrum (by totally...I mean like somewhere past the Milky Way).

And why would Kim Davis resign? She makes over 80k a year for snubbing the decisions of the Supreme Court. If you lived in hillbilly land where almost everyone you meet is impoverished, would you want to let go of a 80k a year job? I think not.

The WBC also goes on to call Kim Davis an adulteress and a "delusional tyrant" and a "dummy" for not upholding the vows of her office.

I would post a link to the WBC website, but it contains a word or words that may be offensive to some members, so if you want to hear the video on the WBC stance on Kim Davis, you will have to search their website yourself. I summed up their point of view on the matter fairly well, I think.
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class DaGip
 
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:48 am
Location: Watertown, South Dakota

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby KoolBak on Thu Sep 10, 2015 8:49 am

Stupid woman....eighty grand a year job is an eighty grand a year job.....she must simply be a complete psycho. Bet her home life is the tops too :lol:
"Gypsy told my fortune...she said that nothin showed...."

Neil Young....Like An Inca

AND:
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
User avatar
Private KoolBak
 
Posts: 7393
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 1:03 pm
Location: The beautiful Pacific Northwest

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby DaGip on Thu Sep 10, 2015 9:41 am

KoolBak wrote:Stupid woman....eighty grand a year job is an eighty grand a year job.....she must simply be a complete psycho. Bet her home life is the tops too :lol:


She's Apostolic. I went to school with Apostolic kids. They all seemed like they were abused. They all were very quiet and were not allowed to watch television, videos, or movies with us. They had to go to the library and read books. I don't know if they are still that way, but back in the 70s and 80s, the Apostolic Church didn't allow their kids to watch television, movies, or video tapes. If the school celebrated Christmas with the children by letting us go into the gym and watch Walt Disney cartoons...these poor children had to be locked away in the library. And all the girls grew their hair extremely long, just like Kim Davis. That must be part of their teachings as well.
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class DaGip
 
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:48 am
Location: Watertown, South Dakota

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby AndyDufresne on Thu Sep 10, 2015 10:55 am

DaGip wrote:
KoolBak wrote:Stupid woman....eighty grand a year job is an eighty grand a year job.....she must simply be a complete psycho. Bet her home life is the tops too :lol:


She's Apostolic. I went to school with Apostolic kids. They all seemed like they were abused. They all were very quiet and were not allowed to watch television, videos, or movies with us. They had to go to the library and read books. I don't know if they are still that way, but back in the 70s and 80s, the Apostolic Church didn't allow their kids to watch television, movies, or video tapes. If the school celebrated Christmas with the children by letting us go into the gym and watch Walt Disney cartoons...these poor children had to be locked away in the library. And all the girls grew their hair extremely long, just like Kim Davis. That must be part of their teachings as well.

I think she's mentioned before in interviews that she's born again, and maybe wasn't raised with her beliefs that she currently has.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24935
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby jonesthecurl on Thu Sep 10, 2015 1:38 pm

Was she born with a brain the first time around?
instagram.com/garethjohnjoneswrites
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class jonesthecurl
 
Posts: 4616
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:42 am
Location: disused action figure warehouse

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby mrswdk on Thu Sep 10, 2015 1:44 pm

Just post the fkn link.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby notyou2 on Thu Sep 10, 2015 2:54 pm

Settle down miss or you WILL be spanked
Image
User avatar
Captain notyou2
 
Posts: 6447
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:09 am
Location: In the here and now

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby mrswdk on Thu Sep 10, 2015 3:10 pm

Yeah, but not by you. You'd probably break your wrist if you hit an ass as firm as mine.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby Funkyterrance on Thu Sep 10, 2015 3:40 pm

mrswdk wrote:Yeah, but not by you. You'd probably break your wrist if you hit an ass as firm as mine.

No, I'm sure his wrist is sufficiently strong.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby jonesthecurl on Thu Sep 10, 2015 11:54 pm

If Kim Davis stand has any logic, then the Westboro opinion of her is perfectly valid.
instagram.com/garethjohnjoneswrites
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class jonesthecurl
 
Posts: 4616
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:42 am
Location: disused action figure warehouse

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby mrswdk on Fri Sep 11, 2015 2:26 am

Funkyterrance wrote:
mrswdk wrote:Yeah, but not by you. You'd probably break your wrist if you hit an ass as firm as mine.

No, I'm sure his wrist is sufficiently strong.


NUH UH.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby DaGip on Fri Sep 11, 2015 8:49 am

mrswdk wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
mrswdk wrote:Yeah, but not by you. You'd probably break your wrist if you hit an ass as firm as mine.

No, I'm sure his wrist is sufficiently strong.


NUH UH.


Depends on which wrist.
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class DaGip
 
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:48 am
Location: Watertown, South Dakota

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby warmonger1981 on Fri Sep 11, 2015 8:44 pm

Just saying...

http://marriage.laws.com/gay/state-laws/kentucky

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/legresou/constitu/233a.htm
Section 233A
Valid or recognized marriage -- Legal status of unmarried individuals.

Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.



State rights anyone?
User avatar
Captain warmonger1981
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: ST.PAUL

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby notyou2 on Mon Sep 14, 2015 2:56 pm

Federal trumps state.
Image
User avatar
Captain notyou2
 
Posts: 6447
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:09 am
Location: In the here and now

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby warmonger1981 on Mon Sep 14, 2015 5:26 pm

So states have no rights? Then why are we the United States? It should be United State then. If federal trumps the state then why hasn't Kentucky and numerous other states changed their State Constitutions to strictly federal code? Why hasn't the Federal government held states liable for marijuana laws? It seems Federal doesn't trump State rights does it?

State rights anyone?
User avatar
Captain warmonger1981
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: ST.PAUL

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby notyou2 on Mon Sep 14, 2015 5:42 pm

Because the feds haven't pushed the issue, but they will over time. Some things are state jurisdictions, other are federal, and some are still being defined. It's not a difficult issue to grasp. Perhaps you will in your early 20's.
Image
User avatar
Captain notyou2
 
Posts: 6447
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:09 am
Location: In the here and now

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby warmonger1981 on Mon Sep 14, 2015 6:22 pm

So the Feds dictate state laws? So basically the Feds allow states to govern themselves as long as its in alignment with federal code. So why have independent states governing themselves? If the Feds wanted to press an issue on particular subjects they will, that's obvious. But why press one subject over the other if either subject is against Federal law? I haven't seen much action on marijuana laws even though states have defied the Feds for years. It seems like this current case is a "feel good" prosecution for the Feds and nothing to do with breaking the law. If it was strictly about abiding by the law the Feds would have a hay day prosecuting millions of marijuana smokers without having to spend much time prosecuting. Remember marijuana is a scheduled 1 narcotic. Meaning it has no medical use. Sounds like a open/shut case.
User avatar
Captain warmonger1981
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: ST.PAUL

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby subtleknifewield on Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:42 pm

warmonger1981 wrote:So the Feds dictate state laws? So basically the Feds allow states to govern themselves as long as its in alignment with federal code. So why have independent states governing themselves? If the Feds wanted to press an issue on particular subjects they will, that's obvious. But why press one subject over the other if either subject is against Federal law? I haven't seen much action on marijuana laws even though states have defied the Feds for years. It seems like this current case is a "feel good" prosecution for the Feds and nothing to do with breaking the law. If it was strictly about abiding by the law the Feds would have a hay day prosecuting millions of marijuana smokers without having to spend much time prosecuting. Remember marijuana is a scheduled 1 narcotic. Meaning it has no medical use. Sounds like a open/shut case.

Actually...there is such a thing as medical marijuana...just saying.
Sergeant 1st Class subtleknifewield
 
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby warmonger1981 on Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:44 pm

Tell that to the Feds. ..just saying. :)
User avatar
Captain warmonger1981
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: ST.PAUL

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby subtleknifewield on Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:51 pm

warmonger1981 wrote:Tell that to the Feds. ..just saying. :)

Actually, the feds don't outlaw medical marijuana, to the best of my knowledge.
Sergeant 1st Class subtleknifewield
 
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby warmonger1981 on Mon Sep 14, 2015 8:40 pm

How about the DEA website

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... FgDAQEKPFQ



This is from Wikipedia.. Remember it is Wikipedia.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removal ... tances_Act
User avatar
Captain warmonger1981
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: ST.PAUL

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby subtleknifewield on Mon Sep 14, 2015 8:57 pm

I stand corrected then.
Sergeant 1st Class subtleknifewield
 
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby Phatscotty on Thu Sep 17, 2015 1:05 am

warmonger1981 wrote:So the Feds dictate state laws? So basically the Feds allow states to govern themselves as long as its in alignment with federal code. So why have independent states governing themselves? If the Feds wanted to press an issue on particular subjects they will, that's obvious. But why press one subject over the other if either subject is against Federal law? I haven't seen much action on marijuana laws even though states have defied the Feds for years. It seems like this current case is a "feel good" prosecution for the Feds and nothing to do with breaking the law. If it was strictly about abiding by the law the Feds would have a hay day prosecuting millions of marijuana smokers without having to spend much time prosecuting. Remember marijuana is a scheduled 1 narcotic. Meaning it has no medical use. Sounds like a open/shut case.


The Federal gov't straight hijacked marriage
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby warmonger1981 on Thu Sep 17, 2015 7:08 am

I'm like Bobby Fisher on this topic.

Checkmate!!
User avatar
Captain warmonger1981
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: ST.PAUL

Re: Westboro Baptist Church vs Kim Davis

Postby AndyDufresne on Thu Sep 17, 2015 11:46 am

Phatscotty wrote:
warmonger1981 wrote:So the Feds dictate state laws? So basically the Feds allow states to govern themselves as long as its in alignment with federal code. So why have independent states governing themselves? If the Feds wanted to press an issue on particular subjects they will, that's obvious. But why press one subject over the other if either subject is against Federal law? I haven't seen much action on marijuana laws even though states have defied the Feds for years. It seems like this current case is a "feel good" prosecution for the Feds and nothing to do with breaking the law. If it was strictly about abiding by the law the Feds would have a hay day prosecuting millions of marijuana smokers without having to spend much time prosecuting. Remember marijuana is a scheduled 1 narcotic. Meaning it has no medical use. Sounds like a open/shut case.


The Federal gov't straight hijacked marriage


Image


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24935
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Next

Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users