RE: Clerk Defies Supreme Court, Refuses Gay Marriage Licenses
September 15, 2015 at 3:16 am
(This post was last modified: September 15, 2015 at 3:18 am by TheRocketSurgeon.)
(September 14, 2015 at 7:25 pm)Losty Wrote: Is she a Democrat or a Dixiecrat?
Perhaps neither, at least, not in the sense you would use the terms. Once upon a time, she might have been a Dixiecrat, but the category really doesn't exist anymore; they've all gone Republican.
However, since we have the two-party system here in the USA, but in places like southeast Missouri where I live, there are literally so few Democrats that registering to vote as one (in local elections, anyway) is just a way to get two names on the ballot, and it comes down to which one gets the most support. In other words, a New Madrid County (my home) Democrat running for a local office like the clerk is indistinguishable from the Republican on the next line of the ballot. I suspect the same is true for Crazy Kim.
There are many counties around here that have large populations of registered democrats, but they would never vote for someone like President Obama. They might, might, support a centrist Democrat at the Senate level, e.g. Claire McCaskill. But the "reality on the ground" for local politics is that they're just labels that allow for popularity contests between elite families in these small towns, and this type of smalltown "Democrat" has about as much relationship to the DNC as the average Christian does to the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.
Addendum: The reason there even are elite families here associated with the name "Democratic Party" has to do with the Dixiecrats, yes, but there haven't been real Dixiecrats since the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act changed everything.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
