KY Court Clerk

Right & Wrong
Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by Singalphile » Sun Sep 06, 2015 5:42 pm

I agree, t.

For what it's worth, I doubt that the governments' intentions are good, although some individuals therein surely think they're doing good. The cynical side of me just thinks it's a matter of providing jobs for lawyers and law-makers (as we've previously mentioned) and collecting taxes and votes of course.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

thrombomodulin
Posts: 431
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:59 am

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by thrombomodulin » Sun Sep 06, 2015 7:44 pm

You may be right for special interests often prevail and in politics, and politicians follow self serving interests like any other person. I was thinking of the common situation where the means employed do not accomplish the ends said to be sought after (someone might claim a good intention even if not sincere). Minimum wage laws are a great example. Here there is a professed intention to help the poor but the actual outcome harms them. There are many other such examples and I would not be suprised if the same applies in the case of marriage related legislation - but the whether it is so depends on the implementation.

I have read that marriage licensing in the USA began as a means of preventing blacks and whites from marrying - not a good intention, although it may have seemed to be a good intention to themselves in their own time (popular opinion the. Was in a much different place than now)

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by Paidion » Sun Sep 06, 2015 7:57 pm

While I agree, Throm, that governments should keep their hands off God-ordained marriages, I think that they could maintain present tax advantages and other ways of providing monetary advantages to couples, by requiring co-habitation in order to receive these benefits. "Cohabitation" could be defined as 'any two people who live together in a single residence in a mutually supportive way." Later on, if the government wanted to change it to more than two, I see no reason for anyone to object.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by Homer » Sun Sep 06, 2015 9:01 pm

Some good may come from the stance she has taken:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... /71772980/

thrombomodulin
Posts: 431
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:59 am

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by thrombomodulin » Mon Sep 07, 2015 7:52 am

Paidion,
I think such a proposal would have the unintended consequence that people would choose to begin cohabitation who would not otherwise have done so in the absence of a tax incentive. Money is a factor in their decision. This results in more marriages than otherwise would have been, but I do not see a reason to believe that these cases, at the margin, are better or more enduring.
Peter

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by Paidion » Mon Sep 07, 2015 11:35 am

Paidion
I think such a proposal would have the unintended consequence that people would choose to begin cohabitation who would not otherwise have done so in the absence of a tax incentive.
Yes, that is correct. For example, two sisters or two brothers, or any two people might cohabit in order to gain such an advantage. But even now, those living "common law" can do so. Also any two people could get "married" and make the claim even though there were no sexual relationship. However, under this proposal such hypocrisy would be unnecessary in order to secure the tax advantages. If the tax advantages to any two cohabiting people were universal then the tax system could be adjusted accordingly in order to accomodate a greater number of applicants . Of course, one could then argue that then there would be tax discrimination against those who did not have a cohabitation arrangement.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

thrombomodulin
Posts: 431
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:59 am

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by thrombomodulin » Mon Sep 07, 2015 9:52 pm

Paidipn

I thought the intention for such subsidies would be to promote one man and one women (parents) remaining together for the benefit of their children. The prospoal above deviates considerably from that objective. I would be among those that would be concerned about an unfair apportionment of taxation (but I also am coming at this topic with the idea that the best tax rate is zero).

Pete

PR
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:11 am

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by PR » Tue Sep 08, 2015 8:35 am

This article makes some good points on the issue:

Six Bible Defenses for Kim Davis Defying Supreme Court

"America's attention right now is focused on Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue same-sex marriage licenses and was jailed for her stance. Should she have obeyed the law, stood her ground or just resigned?

When President Obama defied the Defense of Marriage Act that was passed into law by Congress in 1996 and vowed not to defend it in court, he was applauded for his courage. But when an unknown county clerk defies a law because of her religious beliefs, she is condemned and mocked. Talk about double standards.

If every Christian in America resigned from their jobs instead of standing for their religious beliefs, what would happen to our nation? As Edmund Burk famously said, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

When man's laws violate God's laws, Christ-followers have a moral obligation to obey the higher law. Peter and John declared in Acts 4:19, "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge." There is a long history of people who disobeyed man's laws because they answered to a higher law.

Should Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego have obeyed the law of the land and worshipped the image?

Should Daniel have obeyed the law and not prayed to God?

Should Esther have kept silent about a Persian law that had been passed to kill all the Jews?

Should John the Baptist have been silent about Herod's immorality?

Should Jochebed have obeyed the king's law and allowed Moses to be killed?

Should Rosa Parks have obeyed the law and given up her seat on the bus to a white person?


We shouldn't be surprised by the increase of persecution against Bible-believing Christians. In Matthew 24:9-13, Jesus foretold what is happening today: "Then they will hand you over to be persecuted and will kill you. And you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake. Then many will fall away, and betray one another, and hate one another. And many false prophets will rise and will deceive many. Because iniquity will abound, the love of many will grow cold. But he who endures to the end shall be saved."

The Bible teaches that true Christians will be persecuted, whereas lukewarm Christians won't be persecuted because they don't live any different than the world. You can't be both the friend of God and a friend of this world (James 4:4). We must continue preaching the gospel of Christ in a spirit of love and compassion, but at the same time, stand firm for our biblical convictions. If we don't stand for something, we will fall for anything."

Brian Alarid is the lead pastor of Passion Church in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and is the New Mexico Field Representative for the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association/My Hope.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by Paidion » Tue Sep 08, 2015 12:45 pm

Image
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: KY Court Clerk

Post by Paidion » Tue Sep 08, 2015 12:49 pm

I thought the intention for such subsidies would be to promote one man and one women (parents) remaining together for the benefit of their children.


I doubt that that was the intention.

Also, now in view of U.S. federal law permitting homosexual marriage, the tax breaks will include two men or two women. In the future they may include polygamy, polyandry, and group marriages.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

Post Reply

Return to “Ethics”