What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

unofan said:
And there are very few tattoos that don't cause me to judge the person getting them.
Click to expand...

I am 100% with you on this. Tattoos are something I can't rise above. There are only two sets: ugly and stupid. The intersection is large. There are some true works of art out there -- really beautiful work -- but it's still stupid, in effect telling the world, "Hi. I have no ability to think long-term. You probably shouldn't marry me or loan me money."

In general long hair looks dumb on guys because in general guys look dumb -- we are not one of Mother Nature's better efforts. However, some men's long hair is awesome. If I could do that sh-t I'd wear it to board meetings. Don't screw with me, Ted from Corporate. I have magic spirit animal hair and I will f-ck you up.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

I went through a phase in college where I didn't cut my hair for almost a year. Then I saw myself in photos and realized the giant furball on my head looked really dumb, so that was the end of that.
 
5mn_Major said:
Not me. I think its cool and admirable more often than not to have someone creating a personal style.
Click to expand...

Assuming you're talking about tattoos and not long hair, when I see a tattoo I see someone who doesn't think about the long term consequences of their actions.

About the only tattoos that don't cause me to question the person's judgement are military unit insignias, or something that places a person in the .1% of the population like 140.6 for finishing an ironman, the Olympic rings for being an Olympic athlete, etc.

Medical ones are ok, too - I had a high school teacher who was hairless, his eyebrows were tattoos.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

5mn_Major said:
Not me. I think its cool and admirable more often than not to have someone creating a personal style.
Click to expand...
The problem is, there are only like 5 people in the entire country who truly are creating a personal style. The rest are just sheep. Some are at the front of the flock and some are at the back, but they are following along nonetheless. I mean seriously, are there still 10 guys under 35 in this country who don't have a beard?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

SJHovey said:
I mean seriously, are there still 10 guys under 35 in this country who don't have a beard?
Click to expand...

While technically true. That's better than wearing a basic tee shirt and tennis shoes...or alternatively an old button up that doesn't fit at all. Middle America doesn't even try.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

Clerk found in contempt, remanded to custody.

Gentlemen, START YOUR GOFUNDMES!
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

She fought the law and the law won.

I hope her GOFUNDERS raise millions. The money goes to the state which as both a red state and a southern state is likely a third world sh-thole, there is that much less wingnut money in circulation to devote to political causes, Davis gets to play Saint Joan and will soak up enough Professional Grievance exposure she could get a radio show and a fifth husband out of this, and the office can issue licenses again. Absolutely everybody wins.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

If you go against your duties in any profession, expect to be out of a job. She deserves her punishment. As someone with a desire for change, there are many great avenues available...just not that one.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

I don't see anything about the judge blocking her from profiting from this. That's not good.

ETA: Judge specifically declined to fine her citing that he knew others would chip in for her. Civil contempt, she is in jail without bail until she agrees to sign the licenses or resigns her position. Kind of a no-win for the judge: fine her and it's GoFundMe city, jail her and she becomes an instant right wing rockstar.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

Twitch Boy said:
I don't see anything about the judge blocking her from profiting from this. That's not good.
Click to expand...

Why not? Her position is popular and she will be able to clean up in the Echo Chamber. She can no longer do any damage to the citizens of KY. Live long and prosper.


Kind of a no-win for the judge: fine her and it's GoFundMe city, jail her and she becomes an instant right wing rockstar.
Click to expand...

I don't see how this factors into it. She was always going to be a rock star anyway -- civil disobedience on an emotionally charged issue ought to raise a high profile: it's part of how even one individual can make an effective protest and perhaps change enough minds that real change comes about. The judge's job was to restore the working of the government. He did that. The only way to ensure that the proper functioning continues is to (1) have her change her actions and start issuing licenses, or (2) have her removed from the position, either by resignation or DQ. So she stays in the clink until she quits or says "uncle" or until the state figures out how to kick her out with due process.

I actually think what this lady did was in its own way heroic. Yeah, she's an idiot and her cause is repugnant, but that's utterly beside the point. She performed a personal political protest -- more than anybody on this Forum will ever do. She played her part in a vibrant democracy. May many others, with bigger hearts, better functioning brains, and more constructive causes, do the same.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

Plus if she wasn't going to resign or do her job, was there any guarantee she would pay the fine? Going to jail, though, is a punishment she can't ignore her way out of.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

Rover said:
Somewhere in Arizona, someone is martyring himself on a cross in her honor....;)
Click to expand...
You missed the part where I don't agree with what she is doing. But, I appreciate you're thinking of me. ;)
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

Kepler said:
I actually think what this lady did was in its own way heroic. Yeah, she's an idiot and her cause is repugnant, but that's utterly beside the point. She performed a personal political protest -- more than anybody on this Forum will ever do. She played her part in a vibrant democracy. May many others, with bigger hearts, better functioning brains, and more constructive causes, do the same.
Click to expand...

Lets step back and look at a big picture of what she was protesting.

Basically, she says that what her government job is asking her to do is against her religion, so therefore is not doing that job, and telling her people to not do that job.

As a government representative, she is basically saying that the government is taking a side on religion- hers. And by the First Amendment, it is clearly instructed not to do that.

So she's protesting the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

That's one heck of a heroic political protest.

I think if she, alone, did the protest- that would be one thing. But going out of your way to impose your protest onto others? Dunno if that's heroic or dictatorial.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

alfablue said:
Lets step back and look at a big picture of what she was protesting.

Basically, she says that what her government job is asking her to do is against her religion, so therefore is not doing that job, and telling her people to not do that job.

As a government representative, she is basically saying that the government is taking a side on religion- hers. And by the First Amendment, it is clearly instructed not to do that.

So she's protesting the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

That's one heck of a heroic political protest.

I think if she, alone, did the protest- that would be one thing. But going out of your way to impose your protest onto others? Dunno if that's heroic or dictatorial.
Click to expand...

The content of her protest does not matter. She could be protesting that we should gas all Bulgarians -- her protest constitutes an "x." The question is, do I support the way she went about x-ing? She essentially did what strikers do when they lie down and force the Pinkertons to clear their bodies away so that the scabs can get into the factory. That's OK with me. Civil disobedience means breaking the law.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

You're both right. Protest and using tools to advance your position is what this country is all about. Its the essence of free speech. And if ultimately she profits from it (or further advances her cause), all the power to her.

Having said that, you can't go outside of the bounds of your job and expect to stay there. She should have been fired immediately.

Both aspects are as they should be...and are strengths of our society.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

Kepler said:
The content of her protest does not matter. She could be protesting that we should gas all Bulgarians -- her protest constitutes an "x." The question is, do I support the way she went about x-ing? She essentially did what strikers do when they lie down and force the Pinkertons to clear their bodies away so that the scabs can get into the factory. That's OK with me. Civil disobedience means breaking the law.
Click to expand...

Ok, I get that part, but I'm not sure if I go along with the idea of imposing your protest onto others like that. Maybe one of the other clerks was ok with doing the job, but she did not let them.

Again, having an individual protesting on their behalf is one thing- using others to do the "protesting" for you (moreso if you are forcing them)- that I don't think it all that heroic. Quite the opposite.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!

SJHovey said:
I mean seriously, are there still 10 guys under 35 in this country who don't have a beard?
Click to expand...
*raises hand*
Kepler said:
She fought the law and the law won.

I hope her GOFUNDERS raise millions. The money goes to the state which as both a red state and a southern state is likely a third world sh-thole, there is that much less wingnut money in circulation to devote to political causes, Davis gets to play Saint Joan and will soak up enough Professional Grievance exposure she could get a radio show and a fifth husband out of this, and the office can issue licenses again. Absolutely everybody wins.
Click to expand...

She's getting exactly what she wanted. She's going to be forced to resign or stay in jail, and she gets to claim she (in her mind) is being persecuted for her religious beliefs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top