Is it fun to argue a case before SCOTUS?

[stevec]

I would think so, considering the hours of preparation and cost for advocating a cause that appears to be settled and dead in the water. The only other reason I would consider is - resume building, political/professional. I guess winning the case may not be the point.


Colorado Traditional Marriage Law Overturned Pending Appeal

www.christianheadlines.com/blog/colorado-traditional-marriage-law-overturned-pending-appeal.html

[ken]

But another judge in Boulder County ruled today a clerk who's so far issued about 100 marriage licenses to same-sex couples can continue authorizing the unions, in violation of federal rulings. 

It is interesting that laws can be violated.  How long can a country last where laws are not respected?

[stevec]

Jul 20, 2014 8:48:51 GMT -6 ken said:

But another judge in Boulder County ruled today a clerk who's so far issued about 100 marriage licenses to same-sex couples can continue authorizing the unions, in violation of federal rulings. 

It is interesting that laws can be violated.  How long can a country last where laws are not respected?

Ironically, one could claim this country was built by lawbreakers and lawbreaking. Respect is a relative term, one has to look at the results to determine what is respectable.

[ken]

Jul 20, 2014 11:08:59 GMT -6 stevec said:

Jul 20, 2014 8:48:51 GMT -6 ken said:

It is interesting that laws can be violated.  How long can a country last where laws are not respected?

Ironically, one could claim this country was built by lawbreakers and lawbreaking. Respect is a relative term, one has to look at the results to determine what is respectable.

Are you suggesting another revolution?

[stevec]

Jul 20, 2014 13:31:27 GMT -6 ken said:

Jul 20, 2014 11:08:59 GMT -6 stevec said:

Ironically, one could claim this country was built by lawbreakers and lawbreaking. Respect is a relative term, one has to look at the results to determine what is respectable.

Are you suggesting another revolution?

No, what I'm saying is that breaking laws can have beneficial effects. We'd be saying "god save the queen", if it weren't for lawbreakers, and equal rights wouldn't be as prevalent in our society if it weren't for lawbreaking and lawbreakers. Like I always say - look at the results.

Your respect for the law claim is laughable, considering how often evangelicals ignore laws. It's funny how losing all the time on so called family values issues skews your perspective.

[ken]

Jul 20, 2014 16:29:08 GMT -6 stevec said:

Jul 20, 2014 13:31:27 GMT -6 ken said:

Are you suggesting another revolution?

No, what I'm saying is that breaking laws can have beneficial effects. We'd be saying "god save the queen", if it weren't for lawbreakers, and equal rights wouldn't be as prevalent in our society if it weren't for lawbreaking and lawbreakers. Like I always say - look at the results.

Your respect for the law claim is laughable, considering how often evangelicals ignore laws. It's funny how losing all the time on so called family values issues skews your perspective.

I think one of the problems with the forums ability to grow is the lack of intelligent, non-insulting dialogue.

Not that it bothers me, but if I were looking into the forum I would wonder why in the world I would join it.

[stevec]

Ken,

I suppose you don't consider the following statement insulting,
"It is interesting that laws can be violated.  How long can a country last where laws are not respected?"

[ken]

Jul 20, 2014 17:16:55 GMT -6 stevec said:

Ken,

I suppose you don't consider the following statement insulting,
"It is interesting that laws can be violated.  How long can a country last where laws are not respected?"

How is it that at one moment you can say we must respect the laws and then turn around and say we don't have to?

If no one respects the laws, don't we have chaos?

So, I don't see that insulting but rather logical progression.

[stevec]

Jul 21, 2014 9:29:00 GMT -6 ken said:

Jul 20, 2014 17:16:55 GMT -6 stevec said:

Ken,

I suppose you don't consider the following statement insulting,
"It is interesting that laws can be violated.  How long can a country last where laws are not respected?"

How is it that at one moment you can say we must respect the laws and then turn around and say we don't have to?

If no one respects the laws, don't we have chaos?

So, I don't see that insulting but rather logical progression.

What are you talking about?

[showmedot]

Jul 21, 2014 10:13:17 GMT -6 stevec said:

Jul 21, 2014 9:29:00 GMT -6 ken said:

How is it that at one moment you can say we must respect the laws and then turn around and say we don't have to?

If no one respects the laws, don't we have chaos?

So, I don't see that insulting but rather logical progression.

What are you talking about?

I hope Ken can explain this somehow, because I sure as hell don't know either.

[ken]

I guess I got the wires crossed somewhere along these ridiculous posted lines.

My apologies.