Conquer Club

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.

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

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

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.

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

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

Was she born with a brain the first time around?

Just post the fkn link.

Settle down miss or you WILL be spanked

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

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.

If Kim Davis stand has any logic, then the Westboro opinion of her is perfectly valid.

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.

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.

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?

Federal trumps state.

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?

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.

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.

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.

Tell that to the Feds. ..just saying.

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

Actually, the feds don't outlaw medical marijuana, to the best of my knowledge.

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

I stand corrected then.

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

I'm like Bobby Fisher on this topic.

Checkmate!!

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

--Andy