https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_CounselI don't, actually.
But now that you mention it, I don't know that I really want to know :/
specializes in Christian Litigation
submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of a Texas statute that criminalized homosexual sodomy
The American Civil Liberty Union's motion to again hold Kim Davis in contempt reveals that their interest is not the license but rather a marriage license bearing the name of Kim Davis. They want her scalp to hang on the wall as a trophy.
Today is Constitution Day and it is also Kim Daviss birthday!
No, in that version Kim Davis would have to be covered up.Is this that Sharia Law I keep hearing so much about?
"My husband and I had talked about it for quite a while and we came to the conclusion that the Democratic Party left us a long time ago, so why were we hanging on?" she told Reuters in an interview at a hotel in Washington, where she has traveled to be feted at a Family Research Council event later on Friday.
Good riddance. Now Fox News can't keep bringing it up.
Davis also said she did not foresee a problem with the current marriage licenses being issued by her office in Morehead, Kentucky.
This is only tangentially related, but I was watching the coverage of the Pope in Philly tonight, and I was a little disgusted by this one couple that came onto the stage. They started off rather charmingly nervous, and it just seemed to be a nice engaged couple asking for a blessing or something, but they just had to go off on a little rant on how worried they were about the menace of the legal definition of marriage changing and what dire consequences it might have for their marriage. If they are so petty to be worried about what other people are allowed to get married, I wonder if their own marriage is really based on a steady foundation.
Her husband was going to be forced to lust for the D..Did they go into any more detail about what that would be?
Sure he willHer husband was going to be forced to lust for the D..
Her husband was going to be forced to lust for the D..
I mean she already has neck to toe denim on. A burkha would only compliment the ensemble.No, in that version Kim Davis would have to be covered up.
At last week’s Values Voter Summit, Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel displayed a picture that he claimed showed a 100,000-person prayer in Peru for his client, Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis. That picture has since been identified as having been uploaded to Facebook on May 25, 2014 and portraying a massive one-of-a-kind five-day convention known as “Jesús Te Ama Y Te Cambia” (“Jesus Loves You And Changes You”.
After spending Monday defending the photo, Liberty Counsel has admitted that it is not of a Kim Davis rally. In fact, they no longer claim that any rally whatsoever took place for Davis in Peru, but merely that some people in Peru prayed for her.
Nevertheless, the organization is trying to avoid taking responsibility for the photo, tweeting to ThinkProgress Tuesday morning that Peruvian Congressman Julio Rosas was the source of the photo and that they were just parroting his claim:
Not the first time her lawyer has lied:
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/09/29/3706790/liberty-counsel-kim-davis-retraction/
For a good, Christian organization, Liberty Counsel sure lies a lot.
Yeah she joined the Republican party.Kim associating with a known hate group?
If this can be proven as a lie, could this lead to some sort of penalty, or can they just continue to make up shit?
I totally told him when I had drinks with him earlier.lols, that's hilarious. I'm totally telling Barack Obama about this when I meet up with him for drinks tomorrow.
If it's a lie, as it almost assuredly is, then potentially. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.kybar.org/resource/resmgr/SCR3/SCR_3.130_(4.1).pdfIf this can be proven as a lie, could this lead to some sort of penalty, or can they just continue to make up shit?
ruh rohIf it's a lie, as it almost assuredly is, then potentially. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.kybar.org/resource/resmgr/SCR3/SCR_3.130_(4.1).pdf
Am I the only one greatly confused by this?The meeting is a fact, and facts are the material of which reality is composed, and human beings, though they cannot, as T.S. Eliot said, bear very much reality, strive nevertheless to live in reality. And reality cannot be understood without knowledge of the facts. Of what really happened.
There is no recording of this conversation, or photographs, as far as I know. But “there is not any thing secret that shall not be made manifest, nor hidden, that shall not be known and come to light.” (Luke 8:17)
It may have happened but there's no evidence and unless the pope himself comes out and confirms it I'm gonna say no.Vatican sources have confirmed to me that this meeting did occur; the occurrence of this meeting is not in doubt.
If it's a lie, as it almost assuredly is, then potentially. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.kybar.org/resource/resmgr/SCR3/SCR_3.130_(4.1).pdf
ruh roh
For completeness sake, there's also Rule 8.4(c) which would apply:Oh my.
SCR 3.130(8.4) Misconduct
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
. . .
(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;
Was there a thread for this?Given today's Planned Parenthood hearing on Capitol Hill where the GOP member got his soul snatched out for using false data and having a shitty graph...
This is par for the course and nothing will happen.
For completeness sake, there's also Rule 8.4(c) which would apply:
Not the first time her lawyer has lied:
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/09/29/3706790/liberty-counsel-kim-davis-retraction/
For a good, Christian organization, Liberty Counsel sure lies a lot.
Terry Moran, ABC News:
Holy Father, thank you, thank you very much and thank you to the Vatican staff as well. Holy Father, you visited the Little Sisters of the Poor and we were told that you wanted to show your support for them and their case in the courts. And, Holy Father, do you also support those individuals, including government officials, who say they cannot in good conscience, their own personal conscience, abide by some laws or discharge their duties as government officials, for example in issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples. Do you support those kinds of claims of religious liberty?
Pope Francis:
I cant have in mind all cases that can exist about conscience objection. But, yes, I can say the conscientious objection is a right that is a part of every human right. It is a right. And if a person does not allow others to be a conscientious objector, he denies a right. Conscientious objection must enter into every juridical structure because it is a right, a human right. Otherwise we would end up in a situation where we select what is a right, saying 'this right that has merit, this one does not.' It (conscientious objection) is a human right. It always moved me when I read, and I read it many times, when I read the Chanson de Roland when the people were all in line and before them was the baptismal font and they had to choose between the baptismal font or the sword. They had to choose. They werent permitted conscientious objection. It is a right and if we want to make peace we have to respect all rights.
Terry Moran, ABC News:
Would that include government officials as well?
Pope Francis:
It is a human right and if a government official is a human person, he has that right. It is a human right.
I guess we'll have to wait for confirmation one way or the other that the meeting occurred, but it would be consistent with the Pope's answer to an ABC journalist's question about conscientious objections:
(Here's a WaPo article related to the above response.)
On Wednesday, the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, confirmed the meeting, but he declined to elaborate. I do not deny that the meeting took place, but I have no other comments to add, he said