Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you."

-Joseph Heller

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean anyone is out to get you...


~BB4

Anyone trying to defend this idiot just baffles me. It's a government employee refusing to do their job because of personal ideology. You absolutely under no circumstances ever allow government employees to arbitrarily pick what law they will enforce and what laws they won't based on a personally held belief system. Why is that so hard to understand? Forget it's about a religious person or a gay couple it's about the precedent can state employers pick which laws to enforce at will? That's a terribly dangerous precedent to set!

I must have been a little late to the party, but this is the same lady who has been divorced 3 times correct?  I wonder how she would have felt if where she lived the judge didn't believe in divorces and made her stay married?  

Eric, I agree with everything you wrote here however I think putting this lady in jail was way over the top.

Here are just a few examples of others not following the law and no action has been taken:

 

When President Obama and AG Holder decided they no longer agreed with DOMA they simply quit enforcing that law.

 

There are federal laws against the distribution, sale and use of marijuana but those laws are certainly not being enforced in Colorado or Oregon.

 

Sanctuary cities are breaking or not enforcing immigration laws and no one seems to care. One lady in San Francisco was murdered by an illegal that was released from custody because San Fran is a sanctuary city.

 

I'm not an attorney and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night so maybe someone can explain how some clerk in Kentucky can receive all this attention and be jailed (with no bail) and others are free to not enforce the law. Honest question.

Quote:Eric, I agree with everything you wrote here however I think putting this lady in jail was way over the top.

Here are just a few examples of others not following the law and no action has been taken:

 

When President Obama and AG Holder decided they no longer agreed with DOMA they simply quit enforcing that law.

 

There are federal laws against the distribution, sale and use of marijuana but those laws are certainly not being enforced in Colorado or Oregon.

 

Sanctuary cities are breaking or not enforcing immigration laws and no one seems to care. One lady in San Francisco was murdered by an illegal that was released from custody because San Fran is a sanctuary city.

 

I'm not an attorney and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night so maybe someone can explain how some clerk in Kentucky can receive all this attention and be jailed (with no bail) and others are free to not enforce the law. Honest question.

 

I think she was put in jail for defying a court order.   A judge ordered her to do her job according to the law, she refused.   You cannot defy a judge and get away with it. 

 

So, if you want to get someone thrown in jail in the examples you cite?   Get someone to defy a court order.   They'll go to jail.  Count on it.  

Quote:LOL.  RJ, you never cease to amaze me.  This actually made my afternoon/evening after a long day at work.  You would make a very good computer programmer.

 

I did just that, for nearly 20 years.

Marty,

So laws are only enforceable with a court order?.

There are millions of people that go to jail without a court order.

The laws I mentioned are laws just like the gay marriage law.

I guess my point/question is shouldn't all laws be enforced equally?

Now Protesters supporting Davis are calling for her Deputies to be fired.  




 

Quote:I'm not an attorney and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night so maybe someone can explain how some clerk in Kentucky can receive all this attention and be jailed (with no bail) and others are free to not enforce the law. Honest question.

There's a difference between not enforcing a law and actively breaking it. The Seventh Amendment hasn't been consistently enforced since its passage, and would never be enforced today. Reason why? It specifies that all civil cases with a value of $20 or higher must be tried in front of a jury. Not enforcing this court ruling would mean that the courts simply chose to ignore the lawsuits against the clerk, and that is actually within the power of a judge to do by simply declining to hear a case. The clerk herself actively broke the law by preventing marriage licenses from being issued.

 

The clerk wasn't jailed because she broke the law herself. She was jailed only after telling a judge that she would prevent her deputy clerks from carrying out the lawful duties of her office. She was given every last inch of rope that she would up hanging herself with, and had she simply agreed not to interfere in her deputy clerks' carrying out of the lawful duties of her office without actually performing those duties herself, she would never have seen the inside of a jail cell (or met Mike Huckaclown, so there's that).

 

Quote:Now Protesters supporting Davis are calling for her Deputies to be fired.  

I hope she does fire her deputy clerks. The resulting lawsuits would all but put Rowan County out of business.

Thanks Bender that clears it up for me.

Quote:Now Protesters supporting Davis are calling for her Deputies to be fired.  




 

Some people are just awful hateful people with a persecution complex. This event has shown me that Huckabee has become the Al Sharpton of this "movement". Cruz tried to jump on board. 

Quote:Some people are just awful hateful people with a persecution complex. This event has shown me that Huckabee has become the Al Sharpton of this "movement". Cruz tried to jump on board. 

 

They are fringe candidates barely registering a blip on the presidential radar. They have to appeal to the rightest of the right to try and get enough primary/caucus votes to stay alive.

Quote:They are fringe candidates barely registering a blip on the presidential radar. They have to appeal to the rightest of the right to try and get enough primary/caucus votes to stay alive.

While true they still have followers and a lot of them some on this here board for the exact reason I alluded to. I think it's reasonable to point it out.

Quote:Anyone trying to defend this idiot just baffles me. It's a government employee refusing to do their job because of personal ideology. You absolutely under no circumstances ever allow government employees to arbitrarily pick what law they will enforce and what laws they won't based on a personally held belief system. Why is that so hard to understand? Forget it's about a religious person or a gay couple it's about the precedent can state employers pick which laws to enforce at will? That's a terribly dangerous precedent to set!

 

That's what I was trying to point out, your whole quote, not just the part in bold.

Quote:I must have been a little late to the party, but this is the same lady who has been divorced 3 times correct?  I wonder how she would have felt if where she lived the judge didn't believe in divorces and made her stay married?  

 

This is relevant to the discussion... why?

Quote:Eric, I agree with everything you wrote here however I think putting this lady in jail was way over the top.

Here are just a few examples of others not following the law and no action has been taken:

 

When President Obama and AG Holder decided they no longer agreed with DOMA they simply quit enforcing that law.

 

There are federal laws against the distribution, sale and use of marijuana but those laws are certainly not being enforced in Colorado or Oregon.

 

Sanctuary cities are breaking or not enforcing immigration laws and no one seems to care. One lady in San Francisco was murdered by an illegal that was released from custody because San Fran is a sanctuary city.

 

I'm not an attorney and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night so maybe someone can explain how some clerk in Kentucky can receive all this attention and be jailed (with no bail) and others are free to not enforce the law. Honest question.

 

Very much a valid point, though it's not brought up in the media.  You know, PC, protecting this current administration and all that.

Quote:This is relevant to the discussion... why?

It's on the fringes of relevant. While it has no actual bearing on the circumstances of the case, it is interesting to take note of how hypocritical her position is, and how she defends it by pointing out that she didn't...well, you know...until after her third divorce.

Quote:This is relevant to the discussion... why?

Points out the hypocrisy and cherry picking?

Quote:Very much a valid point, though it's not brought up in the media.  You know, PC, protecting this current administration and all that.

I am no expert but I am not so sure they are the same thing. I believe the supreme court ruled the anti-gay marriage laws are unconstitutional. 

 

None of the other examples are in the same boat. Now I don't disagree with the statement in general but thought I would bring it up since you are all about relevancy. 

Quote:I am no expert but I am not so sure they are the same thing. I believe the supreme court ruled the anti-gay marriage laws are unconstitutional. 

 

None of the other examples are in the same boat. Now I don't disagree with the statement in general but thought I would bring it up since you are all about relevancy. 

 

And the people of Kentucky, through their elected official, are telling the Court to get bent. Sometimes you have to take a stand against federal encroachment on state issues, otherwise you end up subjugated to the bureaucracy.