CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
KIM DAVIS
NY Times Tags Kim Davis As a Republican, Blames 'Editing Error'
At the New York Times, a Thursday report by Alan Blinder and Tamar Lewin, with assistance credited to two others, originally identified Rowan County clerk Kim Davis, the center of national attention who has been jailed over her refusal to issue marriage licenses containing her name to homosexual couples, as a Republican. (The press has been mighty quiet about acknowledging that Ms. Davis would be okay with licenses being issued as long as they do not contain her name.) Obviously, the "editors" must have thought, she has to be a Republican to be such a stubborn dinosaur. Problem is, she's a Democrat and was elected as a Democrat, facts that that have been widely known — including (not kidding) by the Times itself on September 1, in a write up which Blinder co-authored, and in Rowan County election records available online since last November. The Times has added the following "correction" at the conclusion of the pair's report: Correction: September 3, 2015
Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this article misstated Kim Davis’s political affiliation. She is a Democrat, not a Republican.
LMMFAO ! Leftist don't mind putting THEIR own in jail for their 1st Amendment Right !
Misrepresentation is not unique to liberal media, nor is Davis' political party particularly relevant despite its inclusion for discussion in the papers. Far more significant are her views and practices, which a court has held as standing in violation of the law (just as with any other criminal trial). Davis did not only refuse to sign the licenses but did so under the belief (possibly correct) that without her signature the licenses would not be valid, and she also discouraged or even actively ordered that none of her subordinates could sign them either.
I sincerely doubt that those who defend Davis' actions would be equally supportive of a conservative Muslim man refusing to issue drivers' licenses to women in the name of his religious conscious, yet the scenario would be identical. This is quite simply another instance of an unfounded Christian persecution complex.
Since the Kentucky Constitution defines marriage as one man and one woman, and the US Supreme Court has legislated that abusers of their bodies with the same gendered partner must be granted legal marriage against the Constitution of Kentucky, Individual states no longer have to issue marriage licenses at all. The Supreme Court has legislated a new definition of marriage and cannot force states to issue marriage licenses....or can they? They can simply imprison anybody who will not issue the licenses and who will not abandon the job they were elected to do.
Since the Kentucky Constitution defines marriage as one man and one woman, and the US Supreme Court has legislated that abusers of their bodies with the same gendered partner must be granted legal marriage against the Constitution of Kentucky, Individual states no longer have to issue marriage licenses at all. The Supreme Court has legislated a new definition of marriage and cannot force states to issue marriage licenses....or can they? They can simply imprison anybody who will not issue the licenses and who will not abandon the job they were elected to do.
Christians can live their lives in prison or shut up and do what they are told. It's the American way.
Aww, you cowardly downvoted me because you have no argument to present. So sad. You are fine with religious freedom for Christians, but not for other religions. Which part of the first amendment is your least favorite? I only ask because you clearly hate the first amendment.
I just get a kick out of watching you whine over a vote point, and I pray it reminds you that God can give you the final and conclusive vote down at any moment....He loves you and wants you to believe on Jesus in His resurrection and ask Him to save you from Hell so you can quit crying about a teeny weeny down vote.
I just get a kick out of watching you whine over a vote point
If I am whining about a vote count then you are whining about people not believing in the imaginary Hell. I am not whining, I am pointing out that you are having the exact opposite effect then what you are hoping for. Keep downvoting me, it shows you lost the argument.
and I pray it reminds you that God can give you the final and conclusive vote down at any moment
Wow, so loving. I think it is hilarious that you must resort to threatening me with your sky wizard instead of making a real argument.
He loves you
Hahahahaha.
and wants you to believe on Jesus in His resurrection and ask Him to save you from Hell so you can quit crying about a teeny weeny down vote.
Wow, God wants me to change my ways and believe in Jesus so that I stop complaining about downvoting. And, to do that he sends you to downvote me. Why can't I ever avoid a punishment that God didn't inflict on me?
I don't read your posts any more, I simply know it bugs you if I give you a down vote and I don't care about my points, so you get another down vote. HAHAHAHA
If you think you have enough power to upset anyone here, then you might need to ask God to grant you some clarity.
Oh, and "The debate is valid, I have offered validations of the fact that God loves you and I invite you to explain why you believe God does not love you. If this is too much of a challenge to be considered acceptable for this site, I would have to say it's a small-minded site, with all due respect.".
My death has been accomplished for me by God Himself who took my place on the cross because He loved me while I was, like you, still His enemy. My sins have been paid for by God's own blood, He gave His life for me......and for you, but you want to pay for yourself I guess, and what can I say? Enjoy, I guess, is the best I can say for you.
She must either deny her convictions and condone perversion, or she must quit her job, or she must be imprisoned at least until the time of her elected office expires and she must be re-elected and kept in jail or lose the election and then she can be released from jail and keep her convictions after she is removed from office. She can run her campaign from her jail cell and try to get re-elected, and if she wins re-election then she can stay in jail...maybe until she rots and dies. We will force her to act and think right or put her away. That's the American way.
Not permitting someone to deny legal services, the provision of which is incumbent to their legal office, is not the same as forcing someone to alter their personal beliefs. Our rights end where the rights of others begin, and in this case Davis' religious freedom does not extend to denying the rights to others.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Kentucky Constitution violates the Federal Constitution which has legal preference. The Federal Constitution is not against the Kentucky Constitution, but the reverse. While individual districts and states can opt not to provide any marriage licenses at all rather than issue them to same-sex couples, that is not the decision which was made in the relevant jurisdiction wherein Davis holds her office.
When you violate Constitutional law and fail to uphold the legal obligations of your public position you absolutely can be punished for it, just as with any other activity deemed criminal under the law. Davis was not elected to violate the Constitutional rights of her constituents, but is instead legally obligated to uphold those rights which she has expressly refused to do.
I reiterate, would you be as upset by a Muslim man denying driving licenses to women under the same rationale?
I used to think you were intelligent, but now I'm thinking you are nothing but diabolical. You are standing for fascism. The State of Kentucky has every right to cease issuing marriage licenses and to refer all requests for marriage license to the federal govt. since the Supreme Court has federalized the issue. If people don't resist fascism, it will surely rise and another Hitler or Stalin will be your ruler....and you deserve it for supporting it.
Your comparison of a marriage license being granted to people who are not husband and wife which is the definition of marriage no matter what idiots say, comparing that with a driver's license is worst than comparing apples to oranges....it's more like comparing a family farm to a patch of poison ivy. Do you have GRID?
I never said that Kentucky could not cease issuing marriage licenses and/or refer them all to the federal government. In fact, I have no issue with that whatsoever. My point of contention is when there is an unequal application of the law on the basis of religious or other prejudice against a particular demographic, which actually is fascist and in clear violation of the federal constitution and basic precepts of democratic society. There is no objective difference between the marriage case and the license case, and merely dismissing it is not actually a counter argument to the analysis which accompanied my original comparison of the two.
Your argument blatantly relies upon ad hominem attacks and the strawman you've created, and is therefore not only invalid but demonstrates your inability to make a legitimate counter argument.
You Nazi supporting murder minded liar.....Kim Davis stopped issuing marriage licenses entirely as she was elected to uphold the constitution of the state of Kentucky which clearly defines marriage correctly and not the perverted sodomite way. When you say she must issue licenses to Homos if she will not resign her job, or she much be punished, you are saying Kentucky cannot cease to issue marriage licenses.
People like you are the reason the USA has lost it's concept of right and wrong, and the Constitution is pretty much meaningless now, and the United States of America has indeed been fundamentally changed as Obama said it would be and is NOT the country founded by the US Constitution. You better kiss a lot of Nazi butt to keep yourself from being on the receiving end of their broomstick.
Kim Davis stopped issuing marriage licenses entirely
Kim Davis is not the state of Kentucky. Kentucky as a state can decide on what to do, but representatives of the state still need to do what the state has decided.
You don't know what you are talking about. The State of Kentucky decided to put marriage in it's Constitution as being a man and woman. That's what it was not a Kentucky court which harassed Davis. The US Supreme Court is ignoring the constitution, denying state's rights. We are NOT the country founded on the Constitution, we are NOT the same USA, it is a different country with an invalidated Constitution.
Kim Davis was doing her job nd breaking no law. She was elected by the people of Kentucky to uphold the laws of Kentucky. Since the Supreme Court changed the definition of Marriage, Kim Davis nor the State of Kentucky have any obligation to issue marriage licenses. People are caving in fear of harassment from federal courts and that is FACISM on the rise. We are not a free country any more...lost it a long time ago...the country was set in a vice and the vice has been slowly tightening, squeezing out freedom, for decades...now it's fast getting to the crush point and public educated idiots have little clue what is happening.
Hilarious. You didn't address my argument at all and you are going to say I don't know what I am talking about. It is you who doesn't know what I am talking about.
The State of Kentucky decided to put marriage in it's Constitution as being a man and woman.
And, the Supreme Court ruled that is not allowed.
That's what it was not a Kentucky court which harassed Davis.
This is just wrong. It was absolutely a Kentucky court that harassed her.
The US Supreme Court is ignoring the constitution, denying state's rights
False, the Supreme Court denied the right for the states to deny individual rights.
We are NOT the country founded on the Constitution, we are NOT the same USA, it is a different country with an invalidated Constitution
False. Kentucky and other states were violating the constitution. The Supreme court fixed that.
Kim Davis was doing her job
No, she was not. What part of not giving out licenses to anyone is get doing the job?
nd breaking no law.
You are partially correct here. Initially she was breaking no laws when she didn't grant licenses. But, it is against the law to violate a court order. When the court decided she was wrong, she did violate the law.
She was elected by the people of Kentucky to uphold the laws of Kentucky
She was elected to uphold the laws even if they change. She was not elected to only uphold the laws that existed when she was elected.
Since the Supreme Court changed the definition of Marriage, Kim Davis nor the State of Kentucky have any obligation to issue marriage licenses
False. Kentucky has no obligation to issue marriage licenses. If Kentucky decides not to end marriages as a whole, the individual clerks do not have the power to go against the state.
People are caving in fear of harassment from federal courts and that is FACISM on the rise
Well sort of. Kim Davis was acting very much like a fascist. Kim Davis using her government powers to ignore the laws of the land is fascism.
We are not a free country any more
Losing the freedom to strip people of freedom is not making the country unfree.
it's fast getting to the crush point and public educated idiots have little clue what is happening.
That's because publicly educated people ate taught facts.
If I call somebody by a name, the name is accurate in accordance to their own words. I do not call people names when there is no reason to call them those names. That's why I call you a liar.
I suppose you could be so dumb you don't realize what you are doing and saying...but I don't think you are dumb. I think you are just a bold faced liar. If you get right with God, get saved from Hell, He'll change you and you won't act the way you have with me. You can have a new life, eternal life. God loves you and wants you to be saved from Hell.
Admit you have sinned against God and He has the right to leave you in Hell forever.
Believe He died for your sins as the Son of God, paid your price, and rose from the dead and is alive forever and is God the Savior Jesus Christ.
Call on God in prayer in the name of Jesus to save you from Hell and He will save you and give you eternal life.
What are you waiting for? Do you have to see with your eyes that Hell is real and sinners can't get out of it once their death is finalized?
If I call somebody by a name, the name is accurate in accordance to their own words.
Nothing he said indicated that he was brainwashed.
I do not call people names when there is no reason to call them those names. That's why I call you a liar.
Yes you do, which is evidenced by what you just did.
I suppose you could be so dumb you don't realize what you are doing and saying...but I don't think you are dumb. I think you are just a bold faced liar.
Further proving my point.
Coming to a debate website so you can call people names really is pretty pitiful.
Apparently you are brainwashed as well. This is what the public schools are doing...perverting history, perverting freedom, perverting right and wrong, perverting the US Constitution so people are so dumb they don't care what it says anymore, and the officers established by the Constitution ignore the Constitution which gave them an office.
Then provide specific examples to prove that they are "perverting history, perverting freedom, perverting right and wrong, perverting the US Constitution".
I should not have to. The fact that you ask me to do it shows you were taught in a fashion of systematic brainwashing, and programming so you talk like a public school parrot who doesn't have the brains to investigate the truth of matters for yourself.
Ok, try this. Can you feel God's presence? Can you see Him? Are you with Him? Is He your friend? No, of course not. You are a sinner, God is holy, and your sin separates you from Him in death.
There's your evidence. You need to be saved from Hell before it's too late to believe God loves you.
Ok, try this. Can you feel God's presence? Can you see Him? Are you with Him? Is He your friend? No, of course not. You are a sinner, God is holy, and your sin separates you from Him in death.
We are all sinners, so your logic doesn't follow.
There's your evidence. You need to be saved from Hell before it's too late to believe God loves you.
That isn't evidence.
God loves you, sir.
I have previously argued that, if he does exist, he does not love humanity. I'd be happy to argue that again if you would bother actually responding to what I say.
I am a forgiven sinner, God paid for my sins with His own blood, He is risen from the dead and will take me to Heaven where I will enjoy eternal life by, with, for, and through Him
. You are the same old sinner you have always been, unforgiven because you insist you need no forgiveness from God so you wont' have it, will you? The evidence you are demanding is to be imprisoned in Hell forever, and then you will wish you had not asked for it. You are being a fool, and I don't mean that as in insult...I'm telling you the truth so maybe you will see it for yourself and seek God's mercy before He loses patience with you and your time is over.
I am a forgiven sinner, God paid for my sins with His own blood, He is risen from the dead and will take me to Heaven where I will enjoy eternal life by, with, for, and through Him
Except according to the Bible, you don't know God's judgement until the end. Your assumption is claiming God's power for yourself, which would mean you are guilty of pride, something which you do not seem to be seeking atonement for.
You are the same old sinner you have always been, unforgiven because you insist you need no forgiveness from God so you wont' have it, will you
I have never insisted I need no forgiveness from God, and you have no means of proving otherwise. I have disagreed with some of the things you said and you, in your arrogance, assume that means that I am disagreeing with God. You have taken God's place for yourself. Quite sinful, if I do say.
The evidence you are demanding is to be imprisoned in Hell forever, and then you will wish you had not asked for it.
Except you have no means of knowing if I would go to Hell or not. You, again, are claiming the power of God for yourself, further demonstrating my previous point.
You are being a fool, and I don't mean that as in insult...I'm telling you the truth so maybe you will see it for yourself and seek God's mercy before He loses patience with you and your time is over.
And you are being an ass. I don't mean that as an insult, I am telling you the truth so maybe you will see it for yourself and stop acting like an ass.
Do you care about what you think is right and wrong, or do you care what the constitution says? Those 2 things conflict, and it is you that does not care what the constitution actually says.
You have shown no indication of remorse for the way you lied so many times, and I don't think you are so dumb that you were unaware you were lying, so I offer no apology for calling you a bold faced liar. I would not trust you for anything.
I'm still calling you a bold faced liar, and maybe so mentally deranged that you are incapable of admitting it. I went over this enough with you a long time ago.
I'm trying to get you to see that God loves you even though He knows the truth about you. That's the only reason I bother trying to talk to you. I really don't care what you say about me. It's normal for lost people to hate Christians. God loves you. I want you to know God loves you. I can't speak less than the truth and then expect you to believe God loves you just the way you are.
"The debate is valid, I have offered validations of the fact that God loves you and I invite you to explain why you believe God does not love you. If this is too much of a challenge to be considered acceptable for this site, I would have to say it's a small-minded site, with all due respect."
you had your own twisted version of my words, chopped and edited bits and pieces which by themselves would have different meaning than how I used those words in sentences. It was in your version which you lied, and I think you know that...if you don't know it, then you are seriously mentally deranged or just plain dumb, and I don't think you are dumb....that leaves only seriously mentally deranged (which I am beginning to lean toward...the Bible refers to such mental derangement as "God gave them over to a reprobate mind") or a bold faced liar.
""The debate is valid, I have offered validations of the fact that God loves you and I invite you to explain why you believe God does not love you. If this is too much of a challenge to be considered acceptable for this site, I would have to say it's a small-minded site, with all due respect.""
The names I use are accurate and appropriate. When a person repeats things that are harmful to themselves, they are being an idiot. When they say there is no God, they are being a fool. I use these names appropriately for people who repeatedly show that they are idiots or fools. The purpose of this is for their good, in hope that they will pause and think to themselves, "it's true, I have been an idiot and I have been a fool and I'm not going to be an idiot or a fool any more".
When I use a name, it's accurate and appropriate. Jesus did the same and they hated Him for it. Jesus said I should not be surprised when people hate me the same as they hated Him....and I'm not. People in general hate the truth, they don't want to concede that they do not have the right to exist outside of Hell as sinners and they are quickly losing that privilege as they are sliding down into the fire of Hell.
John 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?
10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?
11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.
24 For John was not yet cast into prison.
25 Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying.
26 And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.
27 John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.
28 Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him.
29 He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.
30 He must increase, but I must decrease.
31 He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.
32 And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth; and no man receiveth his testimony.
33 He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true.
34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.
35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
It is ok. He just made me realize how stupid the term brainwash is. Think about it. When you wash your hands they get clean. What would be the best way to clean a brain? Wouldn't facts be the best way? Clearly he thinks that since I only listed facts.
Nobody is going to force her to think any way, and she is only being forced to do her job. If she doesn't want to do that job, she doesn't have to. If she refuses to do her job and abide by the law, then she will be punished.
Liars like you will try to twist my words. You will try to put spin on my words to imply I said things I did not say. You are nothing but a small minded liar, and nothing you say is worth listening to until you admit you deserve to burn in Hell and need to be saved from it so you are willing to trust the Savior.
IF you want to lie about me and chop a phrase out of a sentence of mine to make it into a new and separate sentence with different meaning than my words which were framed in an exact sentence with exact meaning, go ahead...because that's what you like to do, because you are a liar and don't know how to do anything other than lie, and you can't admit it, and that is why I pay pretty much no attention to you any more....I don't read your stuff, maybe I glance at a couple words but I am not interested in anything you say because I have seen enough of what you are....a liar...and I don't want any of your ways rubbing off on me so I stay away...isn't that what you want, for Christians to ignore you? I'm ignoring you pretty well.....see?
"The debate is valid, I have offered validations of the fact that God loves you and I invite you to explain why you believe God does not love you. If this is too much of a challenge to be considered acceptable for this site, I would have to say it's a small-minded site, with all due respect."
So, you agree that the left is the better ideology. It is obviously better to look past someone's political ideology when determining if they did something wrong.
This isn't the first time a southern Democrat went against the general policies and feelings of REAL Democrats. I'm sure that, after the generous hugs and tears of Huckabee and Cruz, her party affiliation will change. That is one vote Democrats will not miss.
The liberal media is notorious for half-truths, omission of facts and outright lies and this is just another example of that fact by the leader in lieology, the NYT.
