Kentucky clerk who refused gay couples taken into federal custody; ordered jailed

[Granite]

And yet it is impossible for two people of the same sex to marry each other without their sexual perversions entering the equations.
:thumb:

A bigot's opinion of someone else's romance is worthless. And always will be.

 

[genuineoriginal]

A bigot's opinion of someone else's romance is worthless. And always will be.

_____
Bigot
1. A person who is obstinately and unreasonably wedded to a particular religious creed, opinion, practice or ritual. The word is sometimes used in an enlarged sense, for a person who is illiberally attached to any opinion, or system of belief; as a bigot to the Mohammedan religion; a bigot to a form of government.
_____​

Since it is reasonable to be opposed to sexual perversions, my opinions are not bigoted.

 

[Granite]

_____
Bigot
1. A person who is obstinately and unreasonably wedded to a particular religious creed, opinion, practice or ritual. The word is sometimes used in an enlarged sense, for a person who is illiberally attached to any opinion, or system of belief; as a bigot to the Mohammedan religion; a bigot to a form of government.
_____​

Since it is reasonable to be opposed to sexual perversions, my opinions are not bigoted.

I might give you that. Pedantic and boring, but perhaps not a true-blue bigot.:yawn:

 

[PureX]

_____
Bigot
1. A person who is obstinately and unreasonably wedded to a particular religious creed, opinion, practice or ritual. The word is sometimes used in an enlarged sense, for a person who is illiberally attached to any opinion, or system of belief; as a bigot to the Mohammedan religion; a bigot to a form of government.
_____​

Since it is reasonable to be opposed to sexual perversions, my opinions are not bigoted.

Your bigotry is in the irrational and "illiberal" assumption that sexual acts beyond those you personally approve of are 'perverse' simply because you proclaim them to be. And because you then use this self-centered proclamation to condemn those who disagree with you.

When an irrationally held personal opinion becomes a defacto condemnation of others, it called bigotry.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Your bigotry is in the irrational and "illiberal" assumption that sexual acts beyond those you personally approve of are 'perverse' simply because you proclaim them to be. And because you then use this self-centered proclamation to condemn those who disagree with you.

When an irrationally held personal opinion becomes a defacto condemnation of others, it called bigotry.

No, I reject sexual perversions for many reasons.

Sexual perversions are destructive to society.
Rules and laws against sexual perversions are found in every large society throughout history in order to prevent the society from falling apart.
Many large societies have fallen due to immorality and sexual perversions are typically a sign that the fall of a society is near.

It is reasonable and rational to oppose sexual perversions, and unreasonable and irrational to accept them.

 

[Caledvwlch]

Many large societies have fallen due to immorality and sexual perversions are typically a sign that the fall of a society is near.

Such as...

 

[genuineoriginal]

Such as...

Is Rome big enough for you?

_____
Causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire
. . .
The major causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire are detailed in the following list:

• Antagonism between the Senate and the Emperor
• Decline in Morals
• Political Corruption and the Praetorian Guard
• Fast expansion of the Empire
• Constant Wars and Heavy Military Spending
• Barbarian Knowledge of Roman Military Tactics
• Failing Economy
• Unemployment of the Working Classes (The Plebs)
• The 'Mob' and the cost of the 'Games'
• Decline in Ethics and Values
• Slave Labor
• Natural Disasters
• Christianity
• Barbarian Invasion

. . .
Causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire - Decline in Morals
One of the main causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire was the Decline in Morals. The decline in morals, especially in the rich upper classes, nobility and the emperors, had a devastating impact on the Romans. Immoral and promiscuous sexual behaviour including adultery and orgies. Emperors such as Tiberius kept groups of young boys for his pleasure, incest by Nero who also had a male slave castrated so he could take him as his wife, Elagabalus who forced a Vestal Virgin into marriage, Commodus with his harems of concubines enraged Romans by sitting in the theatre or at the games dressed in a woman's garments. The decline in morals also effected the lower classes and slaves. Religious festivals such as Saturnalia and Bacchanalia where sacrifices, ribald songs, lewd acts and sexual promiscuity were practised. Bestiality and other lewd and sexually explicit acts were exhibited in the Colosseum arena to amuse the mob. Brothels and forced prostitution flourished. Widespread gambling on the chariot races and gladiatorial combats. Massive consumption of alcohol. The sadistic cruelty towards both man and beasts in the arena.
. . .
_____​

 

[Caledvwlch]

Is Rome big enough for you?

_____
Causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire
. . .
The major causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire are detailed in the following list:

• Antagonism between the Senate and the Emperor
• Decline in Morals
• Political Corruption and the Praetorian Guard
• Fast expansion of the Empire
• Constant Wars and Heavy Military Spending
• Barbarian Knowledge of Roman Military Tactics
• Failing Economy
• Unemployment of the Working Classes (The Plebs)
• The 'Mob' and the cost of the 'Games'
• Decline in Ethics and Values
• Slave Labor
• Natural Disasters
• Christianity
• Barbarian Invasion

. . .
Causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire - Decline in Morals
One of the main causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire was the Decline in Morals. The decline in morals, especially in the rich upper classes, nobility and the emperors, had a devastating impact on the Romans. Immoral and promiscuous sexual behaviour including adultery and orgies. Emperors such as Tiberius kept groups of young boys for his pleasure, incest by Nero who also had a male slave castrated so he could take him as his wife, Elagabalus who forced a Vestal Virgin into marriage, Commodus with his harems of concubines enraged Romans by sitting in the theatre or at the games dressed in a woman's garments. The decline in morals also effected the lower classes and slaves. Religious festivals such as Saturnalia and Bacchanalia where sacrifices, ribald songs, lewd acts and sexual promiscuity were practised. Bestiality and other lewd and sexually explicit acts were exhibited in the Colosseum arena to amuse the mob. Brothels and forced prostitution flourished. Widespread gambling on the chariot races and gladiatorial combats. Massive consumption of alcohol. The sadistic cruelty towards both man and beasts in the arena.
. . .
_____​

The list of varied and complex socio-political causes for Rome's fall doesn't exactly bolster your point. Rome was a huge and unweildy thing that splintered for a lot of different reasons.

 

[Granite]

The list of varied and complex socio-political causes for Rome's fall doesn't exactly bolster your point. Rome was a huge and unweildy thing that splintered for a lot of different reasons.

Citing Nero as a sign of Rome's "declining" morals is...interesting. Considering he died in what, 68 AD?

 

[Caledvwlch]

Citing Nero as a sign of Rome's "declining" morals is...interesting. Considering he died in what, 68 AD?

He was only the 4th or 5th emperor. Or something like that.

 

[StanJ]

I have her on ignore too. It happens.

She put me on ignore because I caused to much cognitive dissonance in her life.

 

[StanJ]

Oh just stop, already.

The Nazi gambit.....all right wingers use it to vilify what they don't agree with. It's the sign of a desperate person, whom cannot defend their POV.

 

[PureX]

No, I reject sexual perversions for many reasons.

But your reasons are unfounded and subjective. They are 'self-centered', in other words.

Sexual perversions are destructive to society.

You're creating your own judgmental tautology, here. You declare what is "perverse", and you declare perversity to be "bad for everyone". So everything is being determined by you, and is then being used to condemn everyone that is not in agreement with your determination. It's a tautologically self-centered judgment which always makes you 'right' and always makes anyone who disagrees with you, 'wrong'. By definition, that's called bigotry.

Rules and laws against sexual perversions are found in every large society throughout history in order to prevent the society from falling apart.

And they all differ as much as they agree, both with you and with each other. Which renders your point irrelevant.

Many large societies have fallen due to immorality and sexual perversions are typically a sign that the fall of a society is near.

Every society has fallen, sooner or later, regardless of their sexual mores or "perversions". None of them that I am aware of, however, actually fell because of their sexual practices, with the exception of a few very rare, totally celibate human collectives.

It is reasonable and rational to oppose sexual perversions, and unreasonable and irrational to accept them.

Perhaps, but you don't get to decide what is perverse for everyone else, as you falsely believe. And you don't get to condemn everyone who chooses to disagree with your opinions on the matter (except in your own bigoted mind, of course).

 

[Arthur Brain]

As much point as existence itself, fundamentally. That is, there's a context and what occurs within it. If you have gravity and mountains someone is going to have a nasty fall at some point. What's the point of that nasty fall? There isn't one, but there's a point to gravity.

Eh? You're equating the point of existence itself with a necessity for some sort of eternal inescapable consequence of some sort? Why on earth would existence be rendered any the less meaningful if there wasn't an eternal hell? Heck, even you draw the line at fiery torment but you've yet to explain the point to people existing in your idea of a "hell" really. What does it serve? What point is there to it? A supposedly loving God creates all life and then sets the parameters whereby most aren't going to get out of the 'burning building' or even realize it's on fire?

lain:

No. But maybe that should be a yes and the real answer is to stop worrying about the fall and concentrate on the mountain. Let God worry about the rest. Because here's the thing, no one here knows the fate of anyone else here or ever. That's in God's hands and if He's not worthy of that then we have larger problems than whose metaphysical mathematics sums correctly.

Then how about hoping there's actually a loving God who wouldn't consign his fallible creations to some pointless eternity of torturous existence of some sort of description...

 

[kmoney]

Yeah, 10 minutes is a real burden.

What you should mean, is that the supreme court should have also had the fore-sight to rectify the conflict in the law they created. She has rights under the constitution too.

So you think 10 minutes is acceptable. What about 30 minutes? 60 minutes? Do you have a line?


But in this case I don't think it's really about the practical burden. This isn't a private business that is turning them down and someone just has to walk down the street to another business. It's the local gov't and it is supposed to represent the people who live in the county. Like it was already mentioned, the couples being turned down pay taxes. They pay Davis' salary. They should be able to get a license in their own county.

 

[Town Heretic]

Eh? You're equating the point of existence itself with a necessity for some sort of eternal inescapable consequence of some sort?

No, I'm saying the question was off center. Some things follow others. So you could say, "What about the fall?" and the question, really, is about gravity.

Why on earth would existence be rendered any the less meaningful if there wasn't an eternal hell

I don't think I said it would. Did I? I don't know what it would be like with less gravity either. But both are moot points, really, depending on your perspective.

Heck, even you draw the line at fiery torment but you've yet to explain the point to people existing in your idea of a "hell" really.

I can, but it won't matter to you. That's one reason of two why I rarely talk about and even less often argue on the point with anyone. I've never met someone who was looking for an answer on hell, though I've met a long line of people looking to give a little of it to anyone with a different vantage.

What does it serve?

Consequence and our natures would be my short answer.

What point is there to it?

That's sort of the same question asked a different way.

A supposedly loving God creates all life and then sets the parameters whereby most aren't going to get out of the 'burning building' or even realize it's on fire?

A loving God creates a mountain you can fall off of and die just for climbing it?

Yes and no. But there's no real profit for either of us opening this particular can and it really was just a side bar for Trad on one point. I understand your position. We differ and I suppose we likely always will. Fortunately, what unites us is stronger and better than what divides.

Then how about hoping there's actually a loving God who wouldn't consign his fallible creations to some pointless eternity of torturous existence of some sort of description...

Not how I see it, of course, but you know that.

 

[Arthur Brain]

No, I'm saying the question was off center. Some things follow others. So you could say, "What about the fall?" and the question, really, is about gravity.

A scientific fact isn't the same as some doctrinal concept that can't be measured by any standard.

I don't think I said it would. Did I? I don't know what it would be like with less gravity either. But both are moot points, really, depending on your perspective.

I don't know exactly what it is you believe. Only that an eternal unending "hell" of some sort informs part of it. Am I wrong?

I can, but it won't matter to you. That's one reason of two why I rarely talk about and even less often argue on the point with anyone. I've never met someone who was looking for an answer on hell, though I've met a long line of people looking to give a little of it to anyone with a different vantage.

Just define its point and purpose from your perspective, and why it's supposedly necessary to be eternal for other folk. How about that?

Consequence and our natures would be my short answer.

Consequence designed by who? The supposedly loving God that created fallible life knowing full well that most wouldn't get it right in seventy years or so?

That's sort of the same question asked a different way.

Pretty much, so why did you parse it?

A loving God creates a mountain you can fall off of and die just for climbing it?

A loving God creates people who die whether they fall off a mountain or die in their bed at 98. If it was a loving God it would take its creations fallibility into account wouldn't it?

Yes and no. But there's no real profit for either of us opening this particular can and it really was just a side bar for Trad on one point. I understand your position. We differ and I suppose we likely always will. Fortunately, what unites us is stronger and better than what divides.

What's the point of your understanding of 'hell' exactly? Why does it need to be the case that other people are eternally cut off in your opinion?

Not how I see it, of course, but you know that.

As above

 

[bybee]

That's exactly what does NOT make sense to those who are not overly-simplistic, binary extremists.

I can understand that sin harms the sinner as well as others. But the consequence of sin is collective, not absolute. Every time I sin, it becomes a little easier for me to do it the next time. Until it eventually becomes my default nature, and I am 'lost'. And the more heinous the harm my sins do to others, the more sickly and complete my acceptance of it will become, unless I repent. And I can repent at any point, and every point, repeatedly, and be forgiven.

There is nothing in this process that advances an "in or out/all or nothing" understanding of sin, except in the minds of those who don't like to think, but instead want everything laid out for them in overly simplistic extremes.
Right. You mean those who are not frightened of complexity, or of nuance, and who dare to use their minds to explore those aspects and depths of reality that the frightened simpletons of the world dare not recognize.

Apparently you do not consider me to be a thinking human being? I disagree with you at almost every turn yet I have not insinuated that you haven't got a brain!
Maybe I shall head off to the Emerald City and see what the great Wizard of Oz might do for me?
And, I may be a "simpleton", but believe me I am not afraid!

 

[Granite]

So you think 10 minutes is acceptable. What about 30 minutes? 60 minutes? Do you have a line?


But in this case I don't think it's really about the practical burden. This isn't a private business that is turning them down and someone just has to walk down the street to another business. It's the local gov't and it is supposed to represent the people who live in the county. Like it was already mentioned, the couples being turned down pay taxes. They pay Davis' salary. They should be able to get a license in their own county.

In a way, they're being cheated out of a service they already paid for.

Literally nothing about this situation holds up or is defensible.

 

[PureX]

Apparently you do not consider me to be a thinking human being? I disagree with you at almost every turn yet I have not insinuated that you haven't got a brain!
Maybe I shall head off to the Emerald City and see what the great Wizard of Oz might do for me?
And, I may be a "simpleton", but believe me I am not afraid!

Everyone has a brain. Not everyone uses their brain to contemplate the depth and complexity of reality, however. There are a lot of people who prefer to imagine that reality is very simple; "black and white" simple. And because somewhere inside themselves they know that doing this is a form of laziness, dishonesty, and/or avoidance, they disparage and insult those who choose to contemplate the more complex and inexplicable aspects of reality. This is especially true of modern American "conservatives", because the paid propagandists promoting the ideology now labeled "modern American conservatism" strongly promotes willful ignorance as a virtue, and often sings the mantra of the binary extremist: that life is "black and white", and that those who look at it otherwise are just "silly intellectuals counting the angels dancing on the heads of a pins".

Are you one of these willfully ignorant "modern American conservatives"? I don't know. That's not for me to decide. I only point out the phenomena.