Gay judge refuses to marry straight couples. no joke.

[calfoxwc]

This is the corrupt left. anything they feel like doing, had better be okay.

 

anything they don't like, had better change.

 

pretty corrupt, sick stuff.

 

http://libertyalliance.com/39028-2/

[MLD Woody]

This is classic. Just the type of stories these sites post to get people like you in an uproar. Let's do some digging, shall we?

 

Your link takes me to a suspiciously short article, with only one "source".

That link takes me to another suspiciously short article, with no source.

 

Then I googled. Turns out this happened back in 2012. http://abcnews.go.com/US/gay-texas-judge-refuses-perform-marriage-ceremonies/story?id=15784189

 

 

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/gay-texas-judge-tonya-parker-won-perform-marriages-straight-couples-article-1.1027709

 

 

Parker told the audience that while she refuses to conduct the ceremonies, she explains her reasoning to the couples and passes them along to another judge.

“I use it as my opportunity to give them a lesson about marriage equality in the state because I feel like I have to tell them why I’m turning them away,” she said.

“So I usually will offer them something along the lines of, ‘I’m sorry. I don’t perform marriage ceremonies because we are in a state that does not have marriage equality, and until it does, I am not going to partially apply the law to one group of people that doesn’t apply to another group of people.

“And it’s kind of oxymoronic for me to perform ceremonies that can’t be performed for me, so I’m not going to do it,” she added.

[MLD Woody]

So Kim Davis refused to perform an official duty of her job, instructed her staff to do the same, violated order from the federal court, all over her personal religious beliefs.

 

Parker just said she didn't want to perform any marriages, explained why, and then referred them to another judge.

[MLD Woody]

and now she performs marriages again. For everyone...

 

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas-county/1st-dallas-same-sex-marriage-momentous-for-couple-and-judge/148864162

 

 

 

 

It was also an exciting moment for Judge Tonya Parker, who officiated the marriage.

It was her first in three years. She had declined to perform the ceremony until everyone could get married.

"The decision today represents an opportunity where I can now marry couples that come to the courtroom, like any other judge," Parker said.

The judge has quietly waited for this day to come. She has declined to speak out on the subject, other than in written statements, because she did not want to use her position to make a political statement.

So on how many counts do you want to be wrong here?

[Clevfan4life]

The faux outrage was hilarious but kim davis was such an admirable character

[MLD Woody]

The faux outrage was hilarious but kim davis was such an admirable character

 

 

Just leave this thread be. Give Cal a warrior's death in peace.

[calfoxwc]

That's TWO, Woody. You only get three. Everybody on the court saw #1.

 

The point is, the bitch corrupt judge decides to refuse, then goes ahead when

her pouty, selfish desire is met.

 

Nothing about the law. That is the point. She wasn't morally opposed to marrying

straight couples, she refused out of personal spite. That is a judge?

[tiamat63]

That's TWO, Woody. You only get three. Everybody on the court saw #1.

 

The point is, the bitch corrupt judge decides to refuse, then goes ahead when

her pouty, selfish desire is met.

 

Nothing about the law. That is the point. She wasn't morally opposed to marrying

straight couples, she refused out of personal spite. That is a judge?

 

However she applied the law two both sides in fairness by not marrying anyone. Straight or gay.

 

You sure as shit don't see Kim Davis recusing herself in such a manner.

 

This is one of those threads you might have gotten wrong, Cal.

[MLD Woody]

That's TWO, Woody. You only get three. Everybody on the court saw #1.

 

The point is, the bitch corrupt judge decides to refuse, then goes ahead when

her pouty, selfish desire is met.

 

Nothing about the law. That is the point. She wasn't morally opposed to marrying

straight couples, she refused out of personal spite. That is a judge?

 

 

Two what?

[calfoxwc]

two instances where you got personal smartass because you couldn't

really defend your position...or just don't like someone else's opinions.

 

" Give Cal a warrior's death in peace. "

 

That's just being a smartass. You have done it twice to me after your "reset"...

 

You are going to disappoint everybody if you don't stop it.

[calfoxwc]

However she applied the law two both sides in fairness by not marrying anyone. Straight or gay.

You sure as shit don't see Kim Davis recusing herself in such a manner.

This is one of those threads you might have gotten wrong, Cal.

**********************************************************************

could be, but it wasn't fairness to deny doing weddings for most folks because

she didn't get her gay way. the not-really-weddings weren't legal. She was

being unfair to a lot of folks because they were straight. Seems pretty

personal agenda/abuse of public position, and was not a moral issue, apparently,

to doing weddings for those who are normal and not gay.

With Kim Davis, it was a moral issue. She didn't refuse weddings, she just did not want her

name on them. People say "that's her job". No, it isn't her job to betray her religious beliefs

to have a job. That is a slippery slope - depending, on whether or not it's reasonable and

a clear basis for said beliefs are easily shown.

It's not like she can claim that only white people can get married or something asinine like that.

It's the gov forcing the redefining of a social/legal/religious institution that she had a right to object to.

The judge was self-absorbed in personal bitchiness about gays not being allowed to get married.

I'll think on it...but haven't seen where I'm wrong on it, yet....

[MLD Woody]

two instances where you got personal smartass because you couldn't

really defend your position...or just don't like someone else's opinions.

 

" Give Cal a warrior's death in peace. "

 

That's just being a smartass. You have done it twice to me after your "reset"...

 

You are going to disappoint everybody if you don't stop it.

 

 

Hahahahhahahah. I should have assumed you'd do this. You'd take comments that weren't really personal insults, claim that they were, and then begin insulting me again while claiming self defense. I can only imagine what you considered the first instance of these horrible attacks...

 

 

I defended my position just find. I did it so well it left your original post in a burning heap in the corner. That's why you've decided to change the topic to my supposed injustices against you...

[MLD Woody]

 

However she applied the law two both sides in fairness by not marrying anyone. Straight or gay.

You sure as shit don't see Kim Davis recusing herself in such a manner.

This is one of those threads you might have gotten wrong, Cal.

**********************************************************************

could be, but it wasn't fairness to deny doing weddings for most folks because

she didn't get her gay way. the not-really-weddings weren't legal. She was

being unfair to a lot of folks because they were straight. Seems pretty

personal agenda/abuse of public position, and was not a moral issue, apparently,

to doing weddings for those who are normal and not gay.

With Kim Davis, it was a moral issue. She didn't refuse weddings, she just did not want her

name on them. People say "that's her job". No, it isn't her job to betray her religious beliefs

to have a job. That is a slippery slope - depending, on whether or not it's reasonable and

a clear basis for said beliefs are easily shown.

It's not like she can claim that only white people can get married or something asinine like that.

It's the gov forcing the redefining of a social/legal/religious institution that she had a right to object to.

The judge was self-absorbed in personal bitchiness about gays not being allowed to get married.

I'll think on it...but haven't seen where I'm wrong on it, yet....

 

 

 

How was she being unfair? She just referred them to another judge. No skin off of their bones. That's why this happened over 3 years ago and there was nothing that could be done to attack her and bring her down.

 

Be honest, you had no idea this story was over 3 years old when you found it on one of your biased right wing sites. Right?

 

 

It was Kim Davis's job to issue these licenses. She refused to for gay couples and instructed her staff to do the same. If her personal religious beliefs prevented her from performing her job, she should have found a new one. She definitely has the right to object to it, but she did not have the right to not perform her govt job and refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay couples.

 

FYI, you're in the minority here on gay marriage. This isn't a rouge president "redefining" marriage. It reflects the will of the people. From this point on, as older people die off, the percentage that are pro gay marriage will continue to grow. There isn't a fight to have here. Your side lost. It is only a matter of time.

 

Of course you haven't seen where you're wrong. You could come here with a link from the Blaze saying 2+2=5 and no matter what we post, you won't see where you're wrong.

[MLD Woody]

 

 

Too bad you were born a few decades too late to be a part of this lovely movement.

[calfoxwc]

that's 2.5.

 

kim Davis simply referred them to another person who would.

 

the Christian baker simply referred them to another baker.

 

the judge simply referred them to another judge.

 

I have never been any kind of a racist. And my values don't depend on how many

others share the same values... it isn't a wimpy popularity contest for me. It is for you.

 

Too bad you were born too late to be a part of this movement...

you lost out on constructing the death camps.

 

[calfoxwc]

don't forget to raise your hand, Woody ...

 

[calfoxwc]

and your insults are so ingrained in your garbage posts, you pretend not to notice?

 

Give me death....? You lied about the reset thing. You just want no consequences for your

insults.

[calfoxwc]

And, Kim Davis's job was to issue licenses for Real Marriages.

 

The government demanded that the farce marriages also apply.

 

Your analogies are self-serving, but are invalid - they aren't true.

 

Do you accept our Constitution? the majority of people do.

Do you accept our 2nd Amendment and gun ownership and concealed carry? all fifty states have laws supporting it.

do you admit that your mmgw is NOT an absolute truth, and it isn't a big worry?

 

Despite a big PR push by President Barack Obama to tout his administration’s global warming agenda, most Americans have been unconvinced it’s the country’s most pressing issue. A Fox News poll from November found only 3 percent of Americans list global warming as their top concern.

The Fox poll came out just before Obama met other world leaders in Paris to kick off another round of negotiations for an international treaty to cut carbon dioxide emissions. After weeks of haggling, United Nations delegates agreed to non-binding emissions cuts.

[calfoxwc]

the majority of Americans do NOT support boys going into girls'

bathrooms and lockerrooms.

 

so, woody, you are always arguing the "most people" angle.....

 

change your mind about boys using girls lockerrooms yet?

[One Post]

This is the corrupt left. anything they feel like doing, had better be okay.

 

anything they don't like, had better change.

 

pretty corrupt, sick stuff.

 

http://libertyalliance.com/39028-2/

First of all appointing a gay judge is wrong.

[MLD Woody]

Oh damn Cal, you went on a little rant above. I'll go one by one I guess.

 

 

- "that's 2.5". No it's not Cal. You can't take someone disagreeing with you, and making points to show why they disagree with you, as personal insults. But like I said above, I should have known you would do this. It was your out and it was only a matter of time.

 

- There is a very clear comparison in being against same sex marriage and being against interracial marriage. You personally would never be against interracial marriage, but at one point the people in your position now were. The social conservatives of that era were. This is just history repeating itself and the same outcome will happen (and is already happening). If you kept the beliefs you had today, and went back in time, you'd be considered a liberal (we've been over this before).

 

- I am not sure how I am a nazi now, but that seems like one of your go-to's in situations like this. It is lazy, not very clever, and not very funny. It isn't a good look to be "beaten" in a thread and then come back blindly throwing nazi reference... It reeks of desperation.

 

- "Give Cal a warrior's death" was a joke aimed at your original post basically getting blown up. Hell, you probably didn't even know the story was over 3 years old. In know way was that a "personal insult", but like I said, I should have expected you to react the way you did and grasp at anything you could to start saying "woodpecker" again. It is much easier for you instead of debating for what you read online, I'm sure.

 

- I really have no idea how you got from this to "mmgw". I am not sure what you're getting at with the Constitution either. Apparently because I think we should be reviewing and updating it, that means I think it is a terrible document and I don't accept it? What kind of simplistic, black and white view is that?

 

- Climate Change is a scientific issue at its core, not a social one. The opinion of the general public shouldn't matter nearly as much. This is especially true when the majority of the population is scientifically illiterate, and can be manipulated by skethy science from right wing think tanks funded by oil companies...

 

- You've posted a poll like that before (even though the links back to the source don't work). Assuming the Fox News poll is accurate (probably a hefty assumption), it isn't saying 97% of Americans don't care about climate change. You've already posted that incorrect interpretation of the data on here before, and it was shot down then too.

 

- I am not always arguing the "most people" angle. The majority of people are fine with gay marriage, and we can see the laws of the land slowly reflecting that. It is only a matter of time until it is legal every where. This isn't me saying it is right because most people think that, it is me saying these laws are being put into place because most people think that. It isn't evil Obamao and his evil staff conspiring to ruin real marriage for real americans. It is laws changing to reflect the will of the general public. Do you comprehend the difference between the two?

[Clevfan4life]

 

 

Just leave this thread be. Give Cal a warrior's death in peace.

 

⚔??⚒?⚰

[Clevfan4life]

Cal is the need to call woody a peckerhead and post pictures of woodpeckers so overwhelming you have to manufacture insults against you? Maybe i havent noticed but has woody started 5 threads a day with the explicit premise of attacking you personally? Cause thats what got on the boards nerves, thread after thread.

[Clevfan4life]

As per topic, i kind of think this judge was equally full of shit as kim davis was. You're a govt employee sonyou're obligated to the whole of society whether you like it or not. I dont agreevthat just cause she referred to anorher judge seperates hervall that much from what kimbdavis did.

 

But cal how on earth can you critisize this judge in one breath and hail kim davis in the next? At the the very least this judge didnt prevent couples from getting married period like what kim davis tried to do

[calfoxwc]

I think Kim davis was standing on moral ground.

 

the judge was standing on personal vendetta and anger. that's dishonest.

 

kim davis, seems to me, was being honest. and moral.

 

and there is no freaking religious support anywhere in the Bible,

for racism.

 

But Adam and Eve were MAN and WOMAN. It doesn't say one of them was one

color, and the other another color. We have all sorts of colors of men and women.

 

Real Marriage has nothing to do with race. That is completely WRONG.

 

So, Woody, read what I just said, stop your asshole smartmouth that is a "joking" personal

insult, and try to THINK about that. It.....is......not.........anywhere.........near......being...........similar.....at.........all.

 

God created Man and Woman to be together.

 

Now, if you don't believe in God... okay...but there are still two sexes, Man and Woman.

And humans would not exist if the man and woman didn't get together, as naturally, they did,

 

So, Biblically, Real Marriage is between a Man and a Woman. Historically, since humans

came to be in existence....marriage/common law getting

together sexually/ etc.... is between a Man and a Woman.

 

There is no correlation between colors of skin, and the abhorent and perverse redefinition of Real Marriage.

 

I think so much of this gay/trans whatever war being started.... is more about driving conservatives out of government

jobs, out of business, and harassing and alienating them into silence... unless they join the nazi party.

 

And there is a historical comparison in that.

 

and woody, "joking" about ridiculing other people's careers is a personal attack. and belittling every conservative on this board is a personal attack. and smarting off about letting me die, is not going

to reset anything with me.

 

You feel entitled to smarting off to people you disagree with, and ridiculing them for the same reason,

without consequences.

 

Not with me you don't. Disagree with us all you want to - we all disagree with each other a good bit,

at least at one time or another. But your mo of personal insults and derogatory statements is

no reset. I don't post five threads in a row, unless I happen to see things I want to post for the subject matter.

 

You can't handle the opposing viewpoints - it shows in the huge majority of your posts.

 

I stopped, and you did...for what....uh... two days? this isn't the first time, either. you did the exact same

thing the last time I tried for a reset of sorts. And I completely stopped and gave you your op.

You are addicted to personal insults for some reason, towards any poster whose opinions you

disagree with.

[LogicIsForSquares]

Cal, the judge was taking a moral stand. Davis felt she was also making a moral stand.

 

Both of them were not sticking to the law of the land and should have been reprimanded.

[MLD Woody]

Cal, the judge was taking a moral stand. Davis felt she was also making a moral stand.

 

Both of them were not sticking to the law of the land and should have been reprimanded.

 

 

It looks like Davis violated the law by refusing to perform an essential part of her job, but the judge didn't because there is nothing requiring them to issue marriage licenses. I would say that is a crucial distinction as well.

 

 

If there was any case to be made to jail the black, female, lesbian judge for not issuing marriage licenses to make a pro gay marriage statement, in Texas, I think it would have happened.

[calfoxwc]

Cal, the judge was taking a moral stand. Logic

*********************************************

ah. Lemme think about that for a sec.... I think the judge was taking a hateful stand.

 

Davis rejected, on moral and religious grounds, the redefinition of Real Marriage.

 

The judge rejected Real Marriage, because it hadn't been redefined yet, and that made

the judge spiteful..... ?

[MLD Woody]

I think Kim davis was standing on moral ground.

 

the judge was standing on personal vendetta and anger. that's dishonest.

 

kim davis, seems to me, was being honest. and moral.

 

and there is no freaking religious support anywhere in the Bible,

for racism.

 

But Adam and Eve were MAN and WOMAN. It doesn't say one of them was one

color, and the other another color. We have all sorts of colors of men and women.

 

Real Marriage has nothing to do with race. That is completely WRONG.

 

So, Woody, read what I just said, stop your asshole smartmouth that is a "joking" personal

insult, and try to THINK about that. It.....is......not.........anywhere.........near......being...........similar.....at.........all.

 

God created Man and Woman to be together.

 

Now, if you don't believe in God... okay...but there are still two sexes, Man and Woman.

And humans would not exist if the man and woman didn't get together, as naturally, they did,

 

So, Biblically, Real Marriage is between a Man and a Woman. Historically, since humans

came to be in existence....marriage/common law getting

together sexually/ etc.... is between a Man and a Woman.

 

There is no correlation between colors of skin, and the abhorent and perverse redefinition of Real Marriage.

 

I think so much of this gay/trans whatever war being started.... is more about driving conservatives out of government

jobs, out of business, and harassing and alienating them into silence... unless they join the nazi party.

 

And there is a historical comparison in that.

 

and woody, "joking" about ridiculing other people's careers is a personal attack. and belittling every conservative on this board is a personal attack. and smarting off about letting me die, is not going

to reset anything with me.

 

You feel entitled to smarting off to people you disagree with, and ridiculing them for the same reason,

without consequences.

 

Not with me you don't. Disagree with us all you want to - we all disagree with each other a good bit,

at least at one time or another. But your mo of personal insults and derogatory statements is

no reset. I don't post five threads in a row, unless I happen to see things I want to post for the subject matter.

 

You can't handle the opposing viewpoints - it shows in the huge majority of your posts.

 

I stopped, and you did...for what....uh... two days? this isn't the first time, either. you did the exact same

thing the last time I tried for a reset of sorts. And I completely stopped and gave you your op.

You are addicted to personal insults for some reason, towards any poster whose opinions you

disagree with.

 

How can you say one was standing on moral ground and one wasn't? Hell, the people against interracial marriage were standing on moral ground as well.

 

People don't care about religion near as much as they used to. Using the Bible as defense to be against gay marriage is a lame excuse. Those against gay marriage still have no real argument. "The Bible says" isn't an argument.

 

Historically? How much did you pay your wife's father when you married her? How is your property holding up? Need to trade her in for a younger model? I assume no romance was involved, correct, because that would be disgraceful. Hell, Christianity didn't even start marriages, they joined the game after they had already been around for a while.

 

Times change. Views change. If you were a business that openly advocated against interracial marriage today, how do you think that would go? If you're social ideals are outdated you either adapt or die out.

 

EveryoneThatDisagreesWithMeIsHitler.jpg

 

Hahaha, I can handle opposing viewpoints just fine. You just take any post that oppose your opinion as an insult. Any post that posts sources and facts showing why you're wrong as a personal insult. I haven't personally attacked you once since that reset, so you're manufacturing insults and playing the victim so you can go back to insulting me. I knew it was just a matter of time. Go for it.

 

 

You astound me sometimes. Your last sentence in that post describes you perfectly, but you're using it to describe me. It is amazing.

[LogicIsForSquares]

Cal, the judge was taking a moral stand. Logic

*********************************************

ah. Lemme think about that for a sec.... I think the judge was taking a hateful stand.

 

Davis rejected, on moral and religious grounds, the redefinition of Real Marriage.

 

The judge rejected Real Marriage, because it hadn't been redefined yet, and that made

the judge spiteful..... ?

Having a moral code is only tied to religion?