Jail Time vs. Suspension

[sinkspur]

My solution is to FOLLOW the Constitution and impeach every single federal judge who refuses to do that!

LOL!  Yeah, that'll work.

The judges are following Supreme Court rulings.  The precedent for that is at least 200 years old.

Congress is not going to waste its time impeaching federal judges for adhering to Supreme Court rulings.

[Bigun]

LOL!  Yeah, that'll work.

The judges are following Supreme Court rulings.  The precedent for that is at least 200 years old.

Congress is not going to waste its time impeaching federal judges for adhering to Supreme Court rulings.

They are?  Well how did we get from "no substantial federal question" just a few years ago to law of the land by judicial fiat today?  Same Constitution in both cases!

[Carling]

So they gay couples did not complain.  No one's rights were violated if no one complained.

Yes, and why do you suppose the left didn't target these Muslim bakeries like they targeted Christian bakeries?  I know you're not naive enough to think that these Christian bakeries weren't purposely selected by the Homofascist faction of the left.

[sinkspur]

Yes, and why do you suppose the left didn't target these Muslim bakeries like they targeted Christian bakeries?  I know you're not naive.

Why did none of these gay couples complain? 

[Carling]

Why did none of these gay couples complain?

Because the Homofascist liberals don't target Muslims.  It's funny that you think this was some sort of organic movement.  Here in Oregon, the state government was colloborating  with the Homo groups long before this small bakery was targeted, fined, and then forced to give the "victims" $135,000, too.

I'm not a Christion, but it's obvious that solely Christian bakeries were targeted by the left and their media.  I'll leave it to you and Dexter to figure out why that would be.  It should be obvious to everybody else.  When our prissy president goes to Nigeria and scolds the Christians there about gay marriage while ignoring Boko Harem, while at the same time is negotiating with Iran, where gays are executed for simply being gay, things become undeniable.

[Fishrrman]

Dexter wrote above:
[[ If Kim was a Muslim she would still be in jail right now. ]]

Wrong, of course.

The corrected version:
If Kim was a Muslim, the two homosexuals who chose to make an example of her would have gone somewhere else with their agenda.
They would NEVER have dared raise their case against a muslim.

Only Christians need apply for that cross.

[libertybele]

This is far from over.  There are at least two states that have laws allowing employees with religious objection to refuse service to same sex couples and it appears that refusal to service same sex couple is happening in other counties despite the Supreme Court ruling.

North Carolina and Utah Laws Allow Clerks to Refuse Same-Sex Marriages

While Rowan County, Kentucky, clerk Kim Davis is in jail for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses, more than 30 magistrates in North Carolina have legally refused to perform weddings for gay couples.

As CBN reports, almost immediately after the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, the North Carolina legislature passed a law allowing state officials to opt out of performing all marriages.

The law in North Carolina was specifically written for court officials with religious objections to gay marriage. Its sponsor, Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger said, “It’s keeping folks from having to choose between their job and their religious beliefs.”

“I think that’s important,” he added. “I think the law is working very well.”

Similarly, in Utah, Gov. Gary Herbert (R) signed a bill in March allowing state officials to refuse to marry any couples, including same-sex couples, for religious reasons.

As the Associated Press reported, the law requires a county clerk’s office to appoint someone else to marry all couples if a clerk opts out of performing a marriage...

https://a4cgr.wordpress.com/2015/09/07/02-1691/

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GAY_MARRIAGE_NORTH_CAROLINA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/09/05/kentucky-clerk-same-sex-marriage-license-religious-freedom/71770124/

[Godzilla]

This is far from over.  There are at least two states that have laws allowing employees with religious objection to refuse service to same sex couples and it appears that refusal to service same sex couple is happening in other counties despite the Supreme Court ruling.

North Carolina and Utah Laws Allow Clerks to Refuse Same-Sex Marriages

While Rowan County, Kentucky, clerk Kim Davis is in jail for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses, more than 30 magistrates in North Carolina have legally refused to perform weddings for gay couples.

As CBN reports, almost immediately after the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, the North Carolina legislature passed a law allowing state officials to opt out of performing all marriages.

The law in North Carolina was specifically written for court officials with religious objections to gay marriage. Its sponsor, Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger said, “It’s keeping folks from having to choose between their job and their religious beliefs.”

“I think that’s important,” he added. “I think the law is working very well.”

Similarly, in Utah, Gov. Gary Herbert (R) signed a bill in March allowing state officials to refuse to marry any couples, including same-sex couples, for religious reasons.

As the Associated Press reported, the law requires a county clerk’s office to appoint someone else to marry all couples if a clerk opts out of performing a marriage...

https://a4cgr.wordpress.com/2015/09/07/02-1691/

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GAY_MARRIAGE_NORTH_CAROLINA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/09/05/kentucky-clerk-same-sex-marriage-license-religious-freedom/71770124/

Needless to say, those laws still mandate that services are still provided by the business, institution, government office.  So, Kim Davis would still be in jail in those states as she ordered her clerk office and all its workers to refuse service.

[libertybele]

Needless to say, those laws still mandate that services are still provided by the business, institution, government office.  So, Kim Davis would still be in jail in those states as she ordered her clerk office and all its workers to refuse service.

Needless to say, the point still remains that Kim Davis' 1st Amendment rights are still being violated.

[Godzilla]

Needless to say, the point still remains that Kim Davis' 1st Amendment rights are still being violated.

How?  She is still free to practice her religion and still free to say what she wants.  Her freedom of movement is restricted as she continues to try and deny others their 1st Amendment rights.

[Carling]

How?  She is still free to practice her religion and still free to say what she wants.  Her freedom of movement is restricted as she continues to try and deny others their 1st Amendment rights.

Should officials in "sanctuary cities" be jailed for not adhering to federal immigration laws if the direct result is IS citizens being victimized?

Kate Steinle dies and nothing happens.  Some clerk doesn't want to issue gay marriage licenses and so-called "conservatives" like you can't agree more with her being jailed.

[Godzilla]

Should officials in "sanctuary cities" be jailed for not adhering to federal immigration laws if the direct result is IS citizens being victimized?

Kate Steinle dies and nothing happens.  Some clerk doesn't want to issue gay marriage licenses and so-called "conservatives" like you can't agree more with her being jailed.

Had she not directed her staff not to do so as well... and let them process the licenses while she did not... I doubt anything would have ever happened to her.  She active injected herself into the process to stop some peoples from enjoying the same rights as others.

[Paladin]

"Had she not directed her staff not to do so as well... and let them process the licenses while she did not... I doubt anything would have ever happened to her.  She active injected herself into the process to stop some peoples from enjoying the same rights as others"

That is not an answer to Carling's question: "Should officials in "sanctuary cities" be jailed for not adhering to federal immigration laws if the direct result is IS citizens being victimized?"

[Bigun]

This is far from over.

Damn right it is!

[Godzilla]

"Had she not directed her staff not to do so as well... and let them process the licenses while she did not... I doubt anything would have ever happened to her.  She active injected herself into the process to stop some peoples from enjoying the same rights as others"

That is not an answer to Carling's question: "Should officials in "sanctuary cities" be jailed for not adhering to federal immigration laws if the direct result is IS citizens being victimized?"

You did see the OP, right?  It had two parts, two independent topics.

And the first paragraph looks to be desperate attempt to divert attention away from the topic.

[Carling]

You did see the OP, right?  It had two parts, two independent topics.

And the first paragraph looks to be desperate attempt to divert attention away from the topic.

So some federal laws matter more than others.  For you, not issuing gay marriage licenses is worthy of being jailed, and harboring and protecting illegal aliens who then commit violent crimes is not.

Got it.

Your mask is slipping.

[Godzilla]

So some federal laws matter more than others.  For you, not issuing gay marriage licenses is worthy of being jailed, and harboring and protecting illegal aliens who then commit violent crimes is not.

Got it.

Your mask is slipping.

 

[Carling]

No, this thread is about a state government worker ignoring federal law. And being jailed for it.  It's also applicable to state government managers who have their subordinates ignore federal immigration laws on deportation, which then directly leads to US citizens being  harmed.  Logically, shouldn't those managers also be jailed when the end result is citizens' rights being violated?

Why won't you answer the question? 

[Oceander]

Should officials in "sanctuary cities" be jailed for not adhering to federal immigration laws if the direct result is IS citizens being victimized?

Kate Steinle dies and nothing happens.  Some clerk doesn't want to issue gay marriage licenses and so-called "conservatives" like you can't agree more with her being jailed.

If they end up being held in contempt of court, then that would be a possibility.  Other than that, if the statutes themselves don't provide for that then the answer is no.  This lawless little twit of a county clerk is in jail for contempt of court.

[Carling]

If they end up being held in contempt of court, then that would be a possibility.  Other than that, if the statutes themselves don't provide for that then the answer is no.  This lawless little twit of a county clerk is in jail for contempt of court.

Got it.  So you accept the anti-Christian lobby deliberately targeting Christians, while at the same time ignoring courts throwing out cases against government workers who ignore immigration laws.

There is a strong anti-Christian sentiment in this country, and I see many so-called "conservatives" following these liberal groups and their selective outrage. 

It's a bit frightening to me.  Even some members of this board have gone strongly anti-Christian over the past year.  It's getting hard to tell the difference between their arguments compared to what I read on DailyKos.

[Oceander]

Got it.  So you accept the anti-Christian lobby deliberately targeting Christians, while at the same time ignoring courts throwing out cases against government workers who ignore immigration laws.

There is a strong anti-Christian sentiment in this country, and I see many so-called "conservatives" following these liberal groups and their selective outrage. 

It's a bit frightening to me.  Even some members of this board have gone strongly anti-Christian over the past year.  It's getting hard to tell the difference between their arguments compared to what I read on DailyKos.

Not at all.  You're putting words into my mouth that I neither said and that my own statements do not commit me to.  Ms. Davis is in jail for a very specific reason:  she was ordered to follow the law in carrying out her government office and she refused.  The punishment for that is imprisonment for contempt of court. 

[Carling]

Not at all.  You're putting words into my mouth that I neither said and that my own statements do not commit me to.  Ms. Davis is in jail for a very specific reason:  she was ordered to follow the law in carrying out her government office and she refused.  The punishment for that is imprisonment for contempt of court.

I didn't mean to imply you.  Quite to the contrary, I agree with you in this specific case.  My larger point is that this is only happening to Christians, and it's a deliberate by the far left.

I'm agnostic, fwiw, and many posters know this about me.  I tend to look at these things from a social-engineering 30k level, and at times do consider an anecdotal case such as this a very small part of a much larger problem.  It's how my brain works, and I didn't mean to insult you!

[truth_seeker]

I do not feel there is an anti-Christian movement or attitude. Instead many are fed up with the assumption that Christians are entitled to push their beliefs on everybody.

This clerk is a good example.

[Carling]

I do not feel there is an anti-Christian movement or attitude. Instead many are fed up with the assumption that Christians are entitled to push their beliefs on everybody.

This clerk is a good example.

You contradicted yourself.  Do you believe homosexuals should be allowed to force their beliefs on the rest of us?  I agree with them,by the way, but not of their tactics.

How about Muslims?

Transgenders?

Is the line between liberalism and libertarianism eroding, with a vague anti-Christian belief (which you have,even if you don't accept it) being the common denominator?

[Godzilla]

You contradicted yourself.  Do you believe homosexuals should be allowed to force their beliefs on the rest of us?  I agree with them,by the way, but not of their tactics.

How about Muslims?

Transgenders?

Is the line between liberalism and libertarianism eroding, with a vague anti-Christian belief (which you have,even if you don't accept it) being the common denominator?

Non sequitur.  Not wishing to be subject to the beliefs of Christians is not support of a 'gay agenda', or a muslim one.