Joe Summer
Footballguy
How do we know those shadows aren't gay?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Gay marriage (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Bubba
- Start date
Henry Ford
Footballguy
pollardsvision
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
It starts at the county levelYeah, this is going to keep moving fast. My parents' church in Oklahoma is discussing whether to start performing gay marriages. Not Southern Baptist, but still pretty amazing.I think the rhetoric against gay marriage will continue for a time, but I do not envision any substantial legislative resistance.If by "we" you mean the citizens of this country, it doesn't appear that we have. That's why I asked the question. We continue to do the same things (see our habits in electing officials to our federal government as a perfect example) over and over expecting a different result and it will NOT surprise me at all if some states try to go this route. It wouldn't surprise me at all
like clockwork...can't make this stuff up.
Hooper31
Footballguy
I was the best man in one of my best friend's wedding this past week. We coached basketball together for a bunch of years before she moved on up the coaching ladder. She's the head coach now at a smaller private college about 2 hours away, but we still stay in contact and golf together when we get a chance. Big wedding. Everything went great. Had all the typical moments and traditions that you would expect to see at any wedding. My friend is much more the masculine between the two. She wore a white dress suit and her bride wore the typical wedding dress. Was a bit odd when my friend came down the aisle escorted by her brother. Her bride came down the aisle with her father and everyone in the audience stood up. My buddy and I joked about it as we stood there waiting for her to come down the aisle. All in all, great experience that I was very proud to be part of.
I'm a pretty liberal (libertarian?) dude. Probably goes without saying as I'm the best man in a lesbian wedding. Anyhow, I spent the past week pondering the nature/nurture question. Was my friend born gay? Or did she choose it? We haven't talked about it, but I'm guessing she feels she was just born that way. Her bride was previously married to a dude and had kids. Again, never brought up the question. But then I started thinking about it. Does it matter in the slightest? Why should it matter to anyone if someone chooses to be gay or they are born that way? It wouldn't change my opinion either way. Would it for you?
I'm a pretty liberal (libertarian?) dude. Probably goes without saying as I'm the best man in a lesbian wedding. Anyhow, I spent the past week pondering the nature/nurture question. Was my friend born gay? Or did she choose it? We haven't talked about it, but I'm guessing she feels she was just born that way. Her bride was previously married to a dude and had kids. Again, never brought up the question. But then I started thinking about it. Does it matter in the slightest? Why should it matter to anyone if someone chooses to be gay or they are born that way? It wouldn't change my opinion either way. Would it for you?
Koya
Footballguy
People are still debating this?
Folk, the march of history has moved on. Freedom and equality have, once again, triumphed over bigotry and hate.
Like so many small minded people who stood in the dust of progress through so many instances in our nation's past, those who still desire to restrict the simply human dignity of equality and freedom will be looked at exactly as they are.
And, for those who still stand against mix-race marriage, or countless other attempted limitations of other's freedoms because of one's own selfish theology, we look at them with the scorn they have earned.
So, debate over, right? Let's talk about the tax rate or some pipeline, because history has decided who the good and moral people were in this case (FYI - not the ones trying to limit other people's freedoms and treat them without equality under law)
Folk, the march of history has moved on. Freedom and equality have, once again, triumphed over bigotry and hate.
Like so many small minded people who stood in the dust of progress through so many instances in our nation's past, those who still desire to restrict the simply human dignity of equality and freedom will be looked at exactly as they are.
And, for those who still stand against mix-race marriage, or countless other attempted limitations of other's freedoms because of one's own selfish theology, we look at them with the scorn they have earned.
So, debate over, right? Let's talk about the tax rate or some pipeline, because history has decided who the good and moral people were in this case (FYI - not the ones trying to limit other people's freedoms and treat them without equality under law)
Last edited by a moderator:
Officer Pete Malloy
Footballguy
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
BowieMercs
Footballguy
You mean the people who want to cherry pick which amendments are good & which are evil?
Koya
Footballguy
No, that is not what I mean at all.You mean the people who want to cherry pick which amendments are good & which are evil?
I am talking clearly about people who wish to treat one segment of the population differently than others. Specifically, by limiting that segment's freedoms, rights and restricting equality.
While I know where you are going with your sad red herring (why is this the place to bring that up, rather than celebrate more freedom and equality - shouldn't we all at least agree that is a good thing?), I will give an example of say gun rights, you know, just on a "lark" - because even those who wish to restrict those freedoms are not looking to allow everyone except say, Jews or mixed-race couples from owning guns.
Now, you can start your own thread or join whichever thread pertains to your false analogy, but I will say one last thing. While I can't speak for others, I can speak for what I write and what I think. Because on the off chance that maybe you were talking about "cherry picking" say gun rights, not only is it a terribly inept analogy as described above, but I have long been a supporter of gun rights.
Of course, neither the language of the Constitution nor its amendments provides for unfettered gun rights with no oversight or government involvement at all and, most important of all, and the saddest part of those fighting to keep a status quo that literally kills thousands through policy decisions, is that they - you perhaps? - don't recognize that any right you may have - religious, gun, whatever - does not allow for you to interfere with my right to 1. LIFE, 2. Liberty and 3. Pursuit of Happiness.
So, give all the rights you want. Just recognize your right's stop at my nose.
Now, back to celebrating the march of history, as it steam rolls over red herrings and attempted distractions such as this while showing us people's real colors - and better yet, keeping them here on the internet forever, so unlike our grandparents denying the horrors they may have witnessed and even partaken in re: race, mixed-race, etc, these bigots will be remembered in their own pathetic words.
BowieMercs
Footballguy
Where AM I going? I support equal rights for ALL Americans without regard to gender/gender identity/sexual orientation/religion/political affiliation/age/disability/national origin/state of residence/level of education etc. Hell I even defend the rights of National League baseball fans. 
So paint me in the color you have already chosen for me. That's YOUR opinion and you are free to express it.
Cuz... America!
ETA: race & ethnicity go without saying... duh
So paint me in the color you have already chosen for me. That's YOUR opinion and you are free to express it.
Cuz... America!
ETA: race & ethnicity go without saying... duh
Last edited by a moderator:
pollardsvision
Footballguy
I'm pretty ignorant about the Clerk of Court position, but how do you go about firing a Clerk (or I guess any of these county elected jobs that nobody ever pays attention to when voting)?
Nice as it is to think of this ##### rotting in jail, is there a way to remove her from this position that she's clearly not suited for?
Snoopy
Footballguy
Impeachment or forced removal by a clerks committee. But the way it is set up in Kentucky, it is nearly impossible to do either method.
joffer
Footballguy
joffer
Footballguy
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/01/our_view_it_is_time_roy_moore.html#incart_river_home
How can one explain Roy Moore's latest foray into the issue of same sex marriage in Alabama and America? How can one explain why, after months of quiet, he has thrust himself and our state again to the front of the stage to be mocked and derided as a place of bigotry?
How can one explain Roy Moore?
If you felt that Alabama's Chief Justice's office had erroneously distributed a year-old press release on gay marriage yesterday, you're not alone. Alas, Moore seems hell bent on relitigating an issue that Alabama spent much time (and taxpayer money) arguing in 2015.
Demonstrating a dangerous lack of understanding of Judicial Review, Moore argues that Alabama is not bound to follow last year's Supreme Court ruling because it should only apply to the states listed in the case. Most shockingly, however, he compares compliance with the same-sex marriage ruling with complying to Plessy v. Ferguson, which infamously codified a system of "separate but equal."
Ignoring the fact that Alabama willingly, joyfully championed the segregationist ruling and that Alabama also fought against the overturn of these discriminatory laws to use an outdated ruling that has been struck down to justify current actions of discrimination is disgusting. Charitably, we could say that Moore saw an obscure Kentucky clerk get 15 more minutes of attention a few months ago, when her state removed the clerk's names from marriage licenses to assuage the thrice-divorced woman's concerns for "the sanctity of marriage." If anyone is going to be the poster child for anti-gay bigotry on this issue, Moore is determined it will be him, not her. And that it will be Alabama, not Kentucky, that is condemned by future generations.
Less charitably, Moore seems determined to be remembered with other Alabama icons such as Bull Connor, Jim Clark and George Wallace when history is written about equal rights in America.
We must recognize Moore for what he is a two-bit politician wrapped in judicial robes, a grasper and attention-seeker with delusions of grandeur, a man who desperately wants to be Alabama's governor and who has seriously considered himself as qualified to be president of these United States.
Roy Moore is delusional about Roy Moore. The only bad thing that has happened since Alabama acquiesced to the ruling of America's Supreme Court is that Moore hasn't got enough attention, so once again he has "ordered" probate judges to not issue marriage licenses to gay couples. Over the past several months, meantime, hundreds of Alabamians have quietly married and continued happy lives together, assured that they will be legally recognized as spouses, not having to worry whether one could care for the other in sickness or that they could share a full, equal life in health.
Moore's latest salvo will pass quickly, as will his attempts to garner attention. Already many counties are ignoring him, as he deserves, and U.S. attorneys are rightly putting his "order" in context as irrelevant but for its mischief value.
It is time Roy Moore realized that he is wrong. He is wrong on this issue, he is wrong in thinking he might ever be governor of Alabama, he is wrong in seeing himself as of presidential timber, he is wrong in thinking that he matters.
Already, there are citizen calls for his impeachment. He will soon go into retirement and be remembered as a bigot, disrespectful of the law and of his fellow human beings. That might be the only memory he has earned in his time in public office. And, hopefully, Alabama's citizens will be remembered as the ones who showed him the door.
How can one explain Roy Moore's latest foray into the issue of same sex marriage in Alabama and America? How can one explain why, after months of quiet, he has thrust himself and our state again to the front of the stage to be mocked and derided as a place of bigotry?
How can one explain Roy Moore?
If you felt that Alabama's Chief Justice's office had erroneously distributed a year-old press release on gay marriage yesterday, you're not alone. Alas, Moore seems hell bent on relitigating an issue that Alabama spent much time (and taxpayer money) arguing in 2015.
Demonstrating a dangerous lack of understanding of Judicial Review, Moore argues that Alabama is not bound to follow last year's Supreme Court ruling because it should only apply to the states listed in the case. Most shockingly, however, he compares compliance with the same-sex marriage ruling with complying to Plessy v. Ferguson, which infamously codified a system of "separate but equal."
Ignoring the fact that Alabama willingly, joyfully championed the segregationist ruling and that Alabama also fought against the overturn of these discriminatory laws to use an outdated ruling that has been struck down to justify current actions of discrimination is disgusting. Charitably, we could say that Moore saw an obscure Kentucky clerk get 15 more minutes of attention a few months ago, when her state removed the clerk's names from marriage licenses to assuage the thrice-divorced woman's concerns for "the sanctity of marriage." If anyone is going to be the poster child for anti-gay bigotry on this issue, Moore is determined it will be him, not her. And that it will be Alabama, not Kentucky, that is condemned by future generations.
Less charitably, Moore seems determined to be remembered with other Alabama icons such as Bull Connor, Jim Clark and George Wallace when history is written about equal rights in America.
We must recognize Moore for what he is a two-bit politician wrapped in judicial robes, a grasper and attention-seeker with delusions of grandeur, a man who desperately wants to be Alabama's governor and who has seriously considered himself as qualified to be president of these United States.
Roy Moore is delusional about Roy Moore. The only bad thing that has happened since Alabama acquiesced to the ruling of America's Supreme Court is that Moore hasn't got enough attention, so once again he has "ordered" probate judges to not issue marriage licenses to gay couples. Over the past several months, meantime, hundreds of Alabamians have quietly married and continued happy lives together, assured that they will be legally recognized as spouses, not having to worry whether one could care for the other in sickness or that they could share a full, equal life in health.
Moore's latest salvo will pass quickly, as will his attempts to garner attention. Already many counties are ignoring him, as he deserves, and U.S. attorneys are rightly putting his "order" in context as irrelevant but for its mischief value.
It is time Roy Moore realized that he is wrong. He is wrong on this issue, he is wrong in thinking he might ever be governor of Alabama, he is wrong in seeing himself as of presidential timber, he is wrong in thinking that he matters.
Already, there are citizen calls for his impeachment. He will soon go into retirement and be remembered as a bigot, disrespectful of the law and of his fellow human beings. That might be the only memory he has earned in his time in public office. And, hopefully, Alabama's citizens will be remembered as the ones who showed him the door.
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion
Footballguy
Steve Silberman
ICYMI: Alabama judge who refused to marry gay couples suspended for bombarding young woman with nude selfies.
http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2016/08/alabama-judge-wouldnt-marry-gays-suspended-sexual-messages/
whoknew
Footballguy
Some good news -
The chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, Roy S. Moore, was suspended on Friday for the remainder of his term in office for ordering the state’s probate judges to defy federal court orders on same-sex marriage.
The suspension was imposed by the state’s Court of the Judiciary, a nine-member body made up of selected judges, lawyers and others. While the court did not remove Chief Justice Moore from the bench entirely, as it did in 2003 after he defied orders to remove a giant monument of the Ten Commandments from the state judicial building, it effectively ended his career as a Supreme Court justice. His term ends in 2019, and Chief Justice Moore, 69, will be barred by law from running again at that time because of his age.
---
No one expects Chief Justice Moore, a major figure in the culture wars since before he entered statewide office, to depart quietly from the political scene. In the years after his first removal, he ran for governor twice, though he finished far behind in the Republican primaries. He considered running for president in 2012 but decided instead to run, again, for chief justice. His victory without a runoff in the 2012 Republican primary rattled the state’s political establishment, and many high-profile Republicans openly supported the Democrat in the general election. He won with a slim majority.
squistion
Footballguy
This is classic, Roy Moore's attorney calls his suspension for refusing to marry gay couples a "miscarriage of justice"
http://www.wtvm.com/story/33288955/moores-attorney-slams-decision-to-suspend-chief-justice?utm_content=sf37522518&utm_medium=spredfast&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=WTVM&sf37522518=1
Moore's attorney slams decision to suspend chief justice
MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) -
Mat Staver, the attorney representing now-suspended Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, slammed as a "miscarriage of justice" a decision Friday by the Alabama Court of the Judiciary to suspend his client for the rest of his term. That term does not expire until 2019.
Moore was found guilty on six counts of violating canons of judicial ethics. The ACJ ruled Friday after hearing testimony earlier in the week in the case surrounding allegations that Moore misused his office by trying to block gay couples from marrying in the state, in conflict with federal court orders.
Staver, who is the founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, promised to appeal the ruling to the Alabama Supreme Court. "This case is far from over," he said.
"The rule of law should trump political agendas," Staver stated. "Sadly, today that is not the case. What this decision tells us today is that Montgomery has a long way to go to weed out abuse of political power and restore the rule of law."
http://www.wtvm.com/story/33288955/moores-attorney-slams-decision-to-suspend-chief-justice?utm_content=sf37522518&utm_medium=spredfast&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=WTVM&sf37522518=1
Moore's attorney slams decision to suspend chief justice
MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) -
Mat Staver, the attorney representing now-suspended Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, slammed as a "miscarriage of justice" a decision Friday by the Alabama Court of the Judiciary to suspend his client for the rest of his term. That term does not expire until 2019.
Moore was found guilty on six counts of violating canons of judicial ethics. The ACJ ruled Friday after hearing testimony earlier in the week in the case surrounding allegations that Moore misused his office by trying to block gay couples from marrying in the state, in conflict with federal court orders.
Staver, who is the founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, promised to appeal the ruling to the Alabama Supreme Court. "This case is far from over," he said.
"The rule of law should trump political agendas," Staver stated. "Sadly, today that is not the case. What this decision tells us today is that Montgomery has a long way to go to weed out abuse of political power and restore the rule of law."
