Students Nationwide Join in Prayer at School Flagpoles for ‘See You at the Pole’ Day

Lincoln California
Students gather at Lincoln High School in California. Photo Credit: Shalene Burgans/Facebook

Christian students across the nation and around the world gathered at their school flagpoles on Wednesday for the annual ‘See You at the Pole’ day, a student-led prayer event that has been a much-observed tradition for over 20 years.

“See You at the Pole” began in the town of Burleson, Texas, a suburb of Fort Worth, and has since spread to all 50 states and 20 countries worldwide, including Canada, Australia, Japan and South Africa.

“A small group of teenagers in Burleson, Texas, came together for a DiscipleNow weekend in early 1990,” the event website explains. “On Saturday night their hearts were penetrated like never before, when they became broken before God and burdened for their friends. Compelled to pray, they drove to three different schools that night. Not knowing exactly what to do, they went to the school flagpoles and prayed for their friends, schools, and leaders. Those students had no idea how God would use their obedience.”

The gathering later was dubbed “See You at the Pole” by area youth leaders, and the concept of students praying around the flagpole was shared that summer during a large youth event. By September, over 45,000 students gathered to prayer for their friends, teachers and country.

On Wednesday, all around the globe, in every time zone, students gathered at their flagpoles to pray for their communities, just as those who have gone before did over 20 years ago.

In Fultondale, Alabama, an estimated 145 students gathered at Fultondale Elementary School before the start of the school day.

“The heart and the desire of those kids to stand out from their peers and pray, it was beautiful,” James Cato, an area director for First Priority, told Al.com.

  • Connect with Christian News

At North DeSoto Middle School in Stonewall, Louisiana, nearly 250 students gathered for a time of singing, prayer and exhortation from the Scriptures.

“God is doing some amazing things in our schools and in our community,” Zachary Almarode, youth pastor at Salem Baptist Church, told the Baptist Message. “I was extremely ecstatic. To see that many students show up early to school to pray gives me chill bumps. What an encouragement. The next great revival in this nation will come from this generation.”

An unspecified number of students also joined together to sing and pray at Edison Preparatory School in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

“They really have to take that path on their own, and make the choice on their own to follow the Lord and be a leader, and to be fishers of men,” Andrea Gamble, special education teacher at the school, told reporters. “It can be hard for them to stand up against the drugs, the alcohol and whatever else is going on in the media.”

Some cities also held rallies on Tuesday night to gear up for the event. Hundreds gathered in Springfield, Missouri for a time of praise and prayer.

“It just feels pretty powerful that we can meet up in a public place and just have a whole hour and a half of prayer,” said student Connor Reich.

“I think it’s important for us as Christians to take a stand and say we want to make a difference. We want God to take over this city. We want God to bless this city. We want God to grow this city. We want morals in this city. We want Christian influence in this city,” added resident Pam Sutterfield.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • robertzaccour

    Government should just stay out of marriage entirely. It’s a personal matter they shouldn’t be involved in.

    • So Good!

      Then, legally, what would be the reason to wed? What good would come from it?

      • robertzaccour

        It shouldn’t be a legal matter. Not with the state that is.

        • amostpolitedebate

          Why not? It’s a useful legal concept with very practical effects. If you don’t like gay marriage just don’t have gay weddings at your church. Ending marriage for everyone is just spiteful and petty.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Those practical effects are called “children” who are intrinsically part of a family. Regular sex leads naturally to this. The practical effect of “gay marriage” is ejecting principled people from office. This is indeed spiteful and petty, and the end of state sponsored marriage for everyone.

          • amostpolitedebate

            “Those practical effects are called “children” who are intrinsically part of a family.”

            I was thinking more about the ability to easily pool assets, be on your partner’s insurance plan, or make certain medical decisions on your partner’s behalf. That sort of stuff.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            You’re all heart. Who’s thinking about the children?

          • DNelson

            “Regular sex leads naturally to this”

            Not if the woman is infertile, the man sterile, or the couple is using birth control. So, no, regular sex does NOT lead naturally to having children. Only in certain circumstances.

            “The practical effect of “gay marriage” is ejecting principled people from office.”

            No. The practical effect of two citizens of the same gender entering into civil marriage is that two citizens of the same gender are legally married. If a person doesn’t want to do their job, they are free to quit – as with any job. Christians aren’t privileged nor above the law.

            If she were “principled”, she would fulfill her duties based upon her oath of office, or resign. Instead, she seeks the unprincipled route of being able to decide who she is willing to serve and who she is not.

          • robertzaccour

            I didn’t say anything about gay marriage, you just decided to inject that into your response. I also said nothing about ending marriage. Why would I want to get involved in personal matters? And the state doing so is even worse because that’s government, they should stay out of personal matters that should have nothing to do with them.

  • DNelson

    Unfortunate some residents of the county, who contribute to paying the salary of this person, are not being served as they should be. But, it’s just a matter of time.

    • Elle Whitescreen

      A matter of time for what? To force people to do what they do not want , is that what it is a matter of time for? For a bully people to force others to comply with their own beliefs.

      • Becky

        You’re exactly right. Their idea of justice is to destroy the religious rights of Christians and then fine/sue the daylights out of ’em.

        • The Skeptical Chymist

          Christians do not have the right to refuse to perform the duties of the office. Neither do Jews, atheists, Muslims, or Wiccans. Would you object if a Catholic refused to issue marriage licenses to couples who were previously divorced, and ordered everyone in her office to similarly refuse? I somehow doubt that you’d be rushing to defend the religious rights of the Catholic clerk then.

        • amostpolitedebate

          Actually their idea of justice is for someone to be able to go to the courthouse and get married without a fuss just like everyone else. Stop thinking it’s all about YOU guys.

        • DNelson

          What “right” does anyone have – Christian or otherwise – to refuse to perform the requirements of a job based upon religious beliefs?

          How does a set of duties for a job – a job that a person is free to either not take or resign from – “destroy the religious rights of Christians”?

          • Becky

            Christians serve God first. There is no other way to look at it.

            Oh, c’mon. This ungodly homosexual marriage law is relatively new, so the duty to partake in the “marriage” of homosexuals isn’t written in anyone’s job duties. Had it been, no Christian would ever take the job. Now that it has fallen upon us, Christians are forced to choose between their livelihood or God. If they choose their job, they will have to serve in some form or another in a homosexual “marriage”. No freedoms there. Do it or else.

            The USC doesn’t say that we cannot practice our religious liberties on the job and it certainly doesn’t say that we will have to relinquish our religious liberty at certain times.

          • DNelson

            “Christians serve God first. There is no other way to look at it.”

            Then God should be paying her salary. But he’s not. The residents of the county are paying her salary. As such, she is required to serve all the residents of the county. She does not get to pick and choose who she will serve and who she will not.

            “so the duty to partake in the “marriage” of homosexuals isn’t written in anyone’s job duties.”

            Correct. With that said, what IS written into her job description is to perform duties for ALL citizens of the county in accordance with the law. If she doesn’t like the changes in the law, she is free to resign and find another job – just as all employees are free to do at any job.

            “If they choose their job, they will have to serve in some form or another in a homosexual “marriage”. No freedom there.”

            The fact that it is a choice shows that freedom is involved.

            “The USC doesn’t say that we cannot practice our religious liberties on the job and it certainly doesn’t say that we will have to relinquish our religious liberty at certain times.”

            Correct. Nor does it say that people are free to refuse to perform their job based upon their religious beliefs and still expect to be paid and maintain their employment. Religious liberty does not encompass the right to be paid for a job but refuse to do portions of it based upon religious belief.

      • SFBruce

        But it’s Kim Davis who’s being the bully here. She was elected to be the County Clerk, not the County Minister. As such, part of her job is to issue marriage licenses to those who are legally eligible. Regardless of whether couple is same sex or not, she probably doesn’t know many of the applicants. How can the mere issuance of a marriage license be an acknowledgement of anything on her part except that the couple before her meet the legal requirements?

        • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

          It sounds like you disagree with her election. Perhaps you should move to the county and participate in choosing someone you prefer.

          • amostpolitedebate

            Being an elected official doesn’t mean you’re free from legal consequences for your actions.

      • Chrissy Vee

        A matter of time before judgment falls on this nation. These people will not have time to blink when it comes. The Bible warns against causing a Christian to fall.
        Let their supporters mock, ridicule, wallow in their political correctness and snarky remarks… none of that will save them. Truly the blind leading the blind.

        • amostpolitedebate

          “A matter of time before judgment falls on this nation.”

          I’ve been hearing this every time Christians loose in politics for decades and still nothing has happened. I’m STARTING to think you guys may not actually know when the world is going to end.

          • KenS

            We don’t know when it is going to end, only God, the father knows.

          • Chrissy Vee

            I don’t recall mentioning the world was going to end. And judgment has already begun. Too bad you’re too blind to notice.

          • amostpolitedebate

            Ah! I see. Please explain which hurricanes and whatnot are God’s judgement and why you think they’re of supernatural origin rather than coincidence.

          • Chrissy Vee

            I would but you would never understand. I am not giving you the soap box to spread your lack of wisdom and understanding to the trolls. Go to atheist, pro- homo, or whatever sites you stand behind to do your father the devil’s bidding. You are only making a fool of yourself here.

          • amostpolitedebate

            Would I not understand because you just pick any random bad thing that happens to occur after that day’s bad news and decide that it’s divine retribution based on some nebulous “gut feeling”?

          • Chrissy Vee

            And the jester continues… go away fool. You haven’t a clue about what I think and frankly, I couldn’t care less about what you think of me. You’re a lost soul living in ignorant bliss. I pity you.

          • amostpolitedebate

            You’re the one telling people to radically change the way they live lest they meet the bad end of some poorly defined biblical judgement. Why is it unreasonable to ask for the logic behind this request?

          • Chrissy Vee

            Where and when did I ever ask people to radically change the way they live? Do you hear voices in your head? Oh and if you actually READ the articles you so mock… it is the CHRISTIANS being forced to radically change THEIR way of living. I was going to ask what is wrong with you, but the answer is quite evident, with every comment you post. You are lost. You have been duped. Repent!

          • Terrapin1234

            How, exactly, are Christians being forced to change? If you have a job in a public service office, you don’t get to bring your religious beliefs in to change the laws. Keep in mind, those employees receive tax payer money as their salary. THat means they don’t get to pick and choose which laws to follow, no matter what religion they are.

          • Chrissy Vee

            If you even have to ask how Christians are being forced to change, you have been living under a rock. Being forced to do something against your conscience is wrong. Gay marriage was never an issue until now. Just because the establishment has been cowed by the LGBT gestopo and its wicked agenda, Christians who always peacefully lived and worked, walking in their faith are being forced to comply to demands that go against God and their faith, or leave, and in some cases pay dearly. This goes way beyond this article, this situation and it is global as well. Read the headlines, watch the news, use your search engine, get informed. I am rather weary of people with no spiritual understanding asking why I say things I do about what is evidently going on around us. I suppose it is only evident to those who it is relevant to.

          • Terrapin1234

            can you please tell me what gives someone the right to take a public service office, receive tax payer money as a slary, yet use their own personal religious beliefs to arbitrarily change the law as they see fit?

          • Chrissy Vee

            I understand what you are saying. What I am saying is that this gay marriage issue is new. I am sure when taking the public service office position, there was no red flag that she would be taking part in helping homosexuals get married. I am POSITIVE that no Christian today will ever go for a job/career that pressures them to go against their own conscience. Now, Christian photographers, bakers, wedding venues, county clerks…etc. who have been established for years, must bow to the homosexual demands or pay! Because the LGBT bullying their way into taking over America and demanding acceptance, or else, now Bible believing Christians are being forced to either comply or quit where they are already established. Bullying is bad thing, but perfectly okay if you belong to the LGBT community. It is unfair whether you think so or not.
            Deleted the rest… went beyond your question. Peace.

          • scuffles

            Chrissy, you make very valid points. God bless you. However, like you stated before, his comments clearly reflect a total lack of respect for acknowledgement of God and His ways. Blinded indeed and getting into discussions with people like this is fruitless, goes nowhere because he is using intellect and articulation to explain something spiritual.. it doesn’t make sense to him because he is living in spiritual darkness.

          • Chrissy Vee

            Thank you scuffles. God bless you too! 🙂
            I really try not to take the bait these people dangle in these forums, or I at least try to use Scripture. But there are some times when I lose my witness and when I reflect, I repent. Thanks for the reminder. I always appreciate admonishment.

          • DNelson

            “I would but you would never understand.”

            Try him. Or is that just a convenient excuse to blame the other person for your inability?

          • Chrissy Vee

            The truth is, he will never understand. Pretty clear. Getting into a debate with you guys is like hitting my head against the wall repeatedly. No thanks. I get a headache just reading all of your comments. But, nice try.

          • DNelson

            “The truth is, he will never understand.”

            If you haven’t tried, what is the basis for your conclusion? I thought Christians were called to explain to non-believers. Is that not the case?

            “Getting into a debate with you guys”

            Who is “you guys”?

            “I get a headache just reading all of your comments.”

            Then why do you read them?

          • Chrissy Vee

            Non-believers and mockers are two different species. Mockers are found all over these articles. Also, I have no duty to explain myself to any of “you guys” and I am sorry if that hurts you. You’ll be okay though. There is plenty to occupy your time here. Say what you will and move on.

          • DNelson

            If you can’t back up your claim, then you can’t. It is, however, pretty cowardly to blame someone else for your lackings.

      • amostpolitedebate

        A matter of time before they’re forced to do their dang job or face legal consequences because Jim Crow style segregation is illegal.

      • DNelson

        “A matter of time for what?”

        Until she either performs the requirement of her job or resigns and someone else takes over and performs the requirement of the job.

        “To force people to do what they do not want”

        Since she has the choice to resign, she cannot be “forced” to do anything she does not want to do, just as with every employee at any job.

        “For a bully people to force others to comply with their own beliefs.”

        What “bully people” are you referring to? Citizens of the county who contribute to her salary and thus expect her to do her job? Citizens of the county who expect her to provide services to every citizen of the county and not decide which citizens she wants to serve and which she does not?

        What “belief” is she forced to comply with? The belief that as a public employee she must provide services according to the law and is not empowered to decide which citizens she will serve and which she will not?

      • scuffles

        These liberal minded people are touting.. but but but it’s the law now, you have to consent to us shoving all this perversion down your throats. Doesn’t matter if our we have a moral compass and can’t comply for religious reasons. What happens in our society if we don’t stop here and every group starts demanding laws to be changed for let’s say, allowing incest to be lawful, applying sharia law when a husband kills his wife for dishonoring the family, lowering the age of sexual consent to oh let’s say 5 maybe? allowing full term abortions???? It’s only a matter of time before these perverts get into office and start to change all our laws to fit their sadistic and perverted needs. Are christians then required to “obey the law”????? I, for one, am sick of hearing its the law. Where are the rights of people who don’t agree with these laws of perversion?

    • Chrissy Vee

      It’s just a matter of time indeed.

    • shawn

      Dont worry your convoluted mind and abstinine thinking was foretold about so long ago……….personally i am glad it;s happening..Means God’s coming back soon….. for all of the AntiChrists out there Please step it up… Bring HIm Back soon….. i am waiting for my joy in watching all who mock him perish…

  • Jade

    I wonder if Kim Davis’s deeply held religious belief also include the fact that the Bible clearly states that none of her loved ones are currently in Heaven (no person who has died is currently in Heaven or Hell) or does she “pick and choose” what parts of the Bible she wants to believe in.

    • Becky

      Her beliefs do not change God’s laws.

  • SFBruce

    Bunning never says that Davis must check her faith at the door of the courthouse, as this article suggests, although we can all draw our own conclusions. He does say, “As the Court has already pointed out, Davis is simply being asked to signify that couples meet the legal requirements to marry. The State is not asking her to condone same-sex unions on moral or religious grounds, nor is it restricting her from engaging in a variety of religious activities.” He goes on to state that Davis herself, has arguably violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by trying to impose her religious values on others, while acting as a representative of the government. She’s requested a stay of this injunction while she appeals this decision, but so far none has been granted. She could face serious legal problems if she continues to defy a court order.

    I wonder if she’s ever turned down another couple based on her religious beliefs? I assume Apostolic Christians are like many conservative sects, and reject divorce except for very narrow circumstances. Does Ms. Davis issue marriage licenses to those who’ve been divorced?

    • Becky

      Divorce, per se, isn’t a sin.

      • SFBruce

        I agree with that, but most conservative Christians wouldn’t.

        • Becky

          Conservative Christian? Redundant. A Christian is a Christian or…they’re not Christian at all.

    • Lexical Cannibal

      Or heck, let’s not even restrict it to Christians. Let’s imagine a world in which a…let’s go with Hindu clerk denies a Christian couple, because a non-Hindu marriage ceremony isn’t recognized within his or her faith, using the very same “religious freedom” line this woman is using. Let’s imagine someone whose religion strongly discourages or even forbids interfaith marriage.

      Let’s imagine a whole office of people with these objections, creating a situation where even though the office establishment recognizes your right to be married, none of the individuals who could sign the paper fulfilling that right do.

      Yeah, that sounds fun.

      • amostpolitedebate

        The second any of these people experienced even the mildest form of real discrimination they would loose their freaking minds. They would NOT put up with this sort of treatment for themselves.

      • shawn

        Nah most Christians would just drive 20 miles and not make you have to choose…… And yeah God’s law comes 1st. When God destroy these Gay demons……I will rejoice in his Perfect Judgement.

    • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

      A man and another man do not meet legal requirements to marry. They don’t. They cannot. The supreme court and armies of men demanding sex at your door do not make this non-thing a thing. Lawyers can be as clever as they like, but their legal fictions remain fiction. (Based on religious beliefs, I’m sure she would gladly turn away a brother and sister wishing to marry, but somehow that’s no problem…)

      • DNelson

        “A man and another man do not meet legal requirements to marry. They don’t. ”

        As long as both are consenting, non-closely-related, unmarried adults, they in fact do meet the legal requirements of marriage. Have you not been keeping up?

        “Based on religious beliefs, I’m sure she would gladly turn away a brother and sister wishing to marry, but somehow that’s no problem.”

        Because that is not legal.

        • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

          Why should men that “marry” not be closely related? There is no reason for this. It’s not like they are going to have children. This is because two men cannot constitute a marriage. There is valid reason that a man should not marry his sister though. Even if it becomes “legal”, it remains stupid.

          • DNelson

            That’s certainly a valid question, considering the basis that is used for disallowing marriages between closely-related individuals. To date, the prohibition has been across the board. For example, an infertile woman or a sterile man would not be allowed to marry a close sibling, even though there is no danger associated with offspring in those situations. It is difficult in law to all exceptions. But, like all laws, there is a possibility of legal challenge.

            “This is because two men cannot constitute a marriage.”

            While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, from a legal standpoint they most certainly can.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            ‘When we use a word,’ the supreme court said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose
            it to mean — neither more nor less.’
            (And infertile women married to infertile men do bear children. It’s documented.)

          • DNelson

            “‘When we use a word,’ the supreme court said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I chooseit to mean — neither more nor less.'”

            Actually, that was a quote from Humpty Dumpty – not the SCOTUS.

            “(And infertile women married to infertile men do bear children. It’s documented.)

            Wow. Amazing. Documentation?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Are you a superficial kind of person, or are you just pretending to be a superficial kind of person? I think you’re pretending, just to see how much stupid stuff you can get people to say. It’s a great technique – a great pretense of not understanding to tie up your adversary in endless repetition.

          • DNelson

            So then you have no documentation that shows that infertile women married to infertile men do bear children. Got it. Thanks.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            You’re a joker. I understand now.

          • DNelson

            Why would your inability to provide documentation that you say exists mean that I’m a joker?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Yes, I loved your performance in Batman, and how you stay in character when impersonating “DNelson”. You’re not a monster. You’re just ahead of the curve.

          • DNelson

            So you can’t explain how your inability to provide documentation that you say exists mean that I’m a joker. Got it. Thanks.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            So you’re confirming that you are impersonating DNelson. (Two can play at this game.)

          • DNelson

            “So you’re confirming that you are impersonating Dnelson.”

            No, I’m not. What did I say that would lead you to that conclusion?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            You omitted a rebuttal of an important point. Clearly you are a poopy head.

          • DNelson

            Oh, how adorable! You think you made a point that was important.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Now you are admitting that you are a poopy head. You can’t prove that you’re not a poopy head.

          • DNelson

            “Now you are admitting that you are a poopy head.”

            Please cite where I admitted that.

            “You can’t prove that you’re not a poopy head.”

            Being considered a “poopy head” is a matter of opinion. You are certainly entitled to yours.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Poopy head.

          • DNelson

            LOL

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Oh wait, maybe you need help. Here you go: Hebrews 11:11. Also, you might have heard of the term “fertility clinic”. These establishments actually exist – it’s not a scam.

          • DNelson

            I have heard the term “fertility clinic” and am aware they exist.

            How are you coming on that documentation you said existed?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Here you go (again): Hebrews 11:11. It’s a document.

          • DNelson

            You are suggesting that Hebrews 11:11 is documentation that infertile women married to infertile men do bear children? Oh my. You actually think that a fable in the Bible is documentation? Anything more recent?

            I suppose that we can say that the existence of magic is documented by pointing to the Harry Potter books.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Now you have standards of documentation? Why don’t you go and apply these to the high minded myths according to which you label everything true as fiction.

          • DNelson

            “Now you have standards of documentation? ”

            I’ve always had standards of documentation. Fables are not included.

            “Why don’t you go and apply these to the high minded myths according to which you label everything true as fiction.”

            What myths are you referring to?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Now you’ve always had standards. You must have been an amazing toddler. I can imagine you in the womb – insisting on checking the facts before you could read. And in the dark, at that. You want to exclude that part of history that you call “fables”? On what basis? You will not even name your authority, and assert that it is not a myth. Your confident assertions are founded on the sound of your loud voice, and nothing more. You shout loudly and demand documentation, and have no documentation of your own. Next you are going to ask for “proof”.

          • DNelson

            ” You must have been an amazing toddler.”

            Yes, I was.

            “I can imagine you in the womb – insisting on checking the facts before you could read.”

            Nothing was presented to me in the womb.

            “You want to exclude that part of history that you call “fables”? On what basis?”

            Because there is no proof.

            “Your confident assertions are founded on the sound of your loud voice”

            How would you have any knowledge of how loud my voice is?

            “You shout loudly and demand documentation”

            I have only been typing – and quietly so. I have not demanded anything. I have asked you to provide documentation. So far, you haven’t. No worries.

            “Next you are going to ask for “proof”.”

            Funny how that works, huh? Asking for proof of things people say are true.

          • shawn

            hah.. Proof in the pudding…………….Fools shall ask for PROOF and none shall be given except Christ came and was risen……………………….yo i love it when people fit his exact definitions made 2 thousand years ago..makes em easy to spot.

          • shawn

            Jesus was verry clear… He who has an ear let them hear…. this man clearly doesn’t… How cant the clay say to the Potter why has thou thus made me??? as many are made to damnation as well as those made to salvation….. Martin i will be standing there beside you on that glorious day Enjoying the view of gods wrath on theese fools.

          • shawn

            the Reason they Can is simple God’s own words talk about how Fools will bring damnation on us all……….. here is a perfect example of one.

          • amostpolitedebate

            While I find it kind of gross I personally don’t have a huge objection to it as long as we can somehow make sure that some sort of creepy exploitation situation isn’t occurring.

            *shrugs*

            It’s worth noting though that banning sibling marriage doesn’t prevent the people affected from ever finding happiness since the people involved could still potentially get married to other people they’re attracted to. Banning gay marriage on the other hand prevents a person from getting married to literally everyone they could find attractive.

        • shawn

          Actually they don’t meet the requirements… they may meet what our pitiful society has recently decided is ok…God’s law comes first… when he destroyed Cities for Gayness and now they want to bring that here…. What people act like Sin doesn’t feel good…lol… Your NOT GAY YOU simply LIKE it.. well i no people who like CRACK TO but maybe we should legalize that as well eh… When God’s Law wrote our constitution as that is what we were founded on those guys never thought of such Disgusting lifestyles or they would have addressed it themselves……………………………………………BTW several countries just kill gays….. Wish we got rid of this demon in some way ourselves,

      • SFBruce

        You’re entitled to your beliefs about what constitutes a proper marriage, but you’re out of touch with reality if you don’t recognize the fact that same sex marriage is legal, while marriage between a brother and sister is not. They should be denied because they’re not eligible, not because of someones religious views.

      • amostpolitedebate

        “A man and another man do not meet legal requirements to marry. They don’t. They cannot.The supreme court and armies of men demanding sex at your door do not make this non-thing a thing”

        I don’t think you understand how the law works. Deciding this sort of thing is the supreme court’s entire job.

        Also: Another Christian that forgets lesbians exist spotted! Take a shot!

        • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

          I don’t think you understand how the law works. Writing law is congress’s entire job. Who anticipated that the supreme court would take it upon themselves to write law, especially law that impedes the free exercise of religion? (This article mentioned men turned away as ineligible to marry. You may want to parade the sins of women, but this does you no credit.)

          • DNelson

            “Writing law is congress’s entire job.”

            So you believe that the Congress is going to write a law that would make same-gender marriage illegal, when the SCOTUS has already determined that such laws are unconstitutional?

            “Who anticipated that the supreme court would take it upon themselves to write law”

            The SCOTUS has not written law. Please cite one law that is on the books that was written by SCOTUS.

            “especially law that impedes the free exercise of religion?”

            What law are you referring to that impedes the free exercise of religion? Do you think that the Constitution provides protection regarding impeding the free exercise of religion?

          • amostpolitedebate

            The SC does not write law. However they do often look at laws through the prism of the constitution, which can have a similar effect. They are given huge leeway to do this and rulings like the SSM one are far from uncommon. This has been the case since this country’s founding and the SC has always been somewhat controversial as a result.

            In short: Just because you don’t like a ruling doesn’t make it illegal.

      • Blaylock

        sure they can. the supreme court’s verdict confirms it. you dont have to accept it but it is what it is

  • Michael C

    As marriage is concerned, a county clerk’s job is to provide a piece of paperwork that attests that the couple meets the legal requirements for marriage. That’s all. Nobody is asking for Davis’ personal approval, blessing, or solemnization.

    Not only is she refusing to issue licenses, she is also forbidding the deputy clerks from obeying the law.

    The Rowan County Clerk’s Office is refusing to serve the taxpaying citizens of Rowan County. The next closest County Clerk’s Office is over twenty miles away.

    • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

      They don’t want her blessing, just her signature? It sounds like they want her blessing. Twenty miles? Do these people not have a horse and cart that can carry them this vast distance, in their fruitless pursuit of false happiness? How sad they must be.

      • DNelson

        “It sounds like they want her blessing.”

        What would indicate that they want her “blessing”?

        How is the distance relevant? They are residents of that county. The county clerk is charged with provided services to all the residents of the county. What possible rationale is there for this woman to decide who she will and will not serve as an employee of the county?

      • Michael C

        “…in their fruitless pursuit of false happiness?”

        The Rowan County Clerk’s Office is not issuing marriage licenses to anyone.

        It is beyond the scope of the office of the county clerk to make the determination of whether the local government will cease to serve a particular governmental function.

        One low level government employee doesn’t have the power to say “this county doesn’t do marriage anymore.”

      • amostpolitedebate

        Why do you think their happiness is false?

        • DNelson

          Perhaps because his last gay relationship wasn’t happy.

        • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

          Have you never experienced false happiness?

          • amostpolitedebate

            I honestly have not. If you’re willing to explain it to me I’m all ears.

      • Joe Soap

        They shouldn’t have to travel 20 feet if heterosexual people don’t have to.

        • shawn

          God says they should….. he didnt make them walk … he turned them to Salt and i cant wait till he does it AGAIN.

    • scuffles

      The Bible tells us to obey the law of the land, UNLESS it conflicts with God’s law. Then we have the right to protest. God’s law always trumps man’s law(lessness).

  • So Good!

    Good! Now her 4 times married skanky self can be fired.

  • Elle Whitescreen

    Yeah right , how sorry do I feel for Christian midwives who may end up in position where they are forced to commit murderous abortions, because hey you leave your belief at the door. This is not how it works and really it is abuse of the person, putting them in position where they cannot practice their profession with a clear conscience – so unbelievably Evil. It is better for her to leave the job then be forced to go against her beliefs.

    • Chrissy Vee

      Amen!

    • amostpolitedebate

      And in what situation would this come up exactly? I can’t imagine many Christian midwives moonlighting at Planned Parenthood.

  • Nidalap

    Well now! The music’s played, the cymbals have clashed, and someone didn’t bow down! Now the furnace is being heated. Good luck to you, Kim Davis! 🙂

    • BarkingDawg

      Furnace, naw, they’ll just put real bees in her beehive hairdo.

  • BarkingDawg

    The judge will reject her motion for a stay, and she will have no choice but to comply with the court order or go to jail.

  • BarkingDawg

    it’s a purely ministerial function. There is no “endorsement” by the clerk.

  • FoJC_Forever

    Only the power of God can transform people, forgive their Sin, and prepare them for the world to come. Man-made religious tradition will not lead people to Jesus, it will only draw attention to the religious tradition itself. Jesus isn’t trying to build His Kingdom in the earth as it presently exists. He is saving people out of the world to live eternally in the New Heavens and New Earth. This is the goal and all manner of evil, apparent and subtle, is thrown in the way to distract those who are following Jesus (the) Christ.

    Follow Jesus, find Salvation.

  • Taylor the Sturdy

    Matthew 6:1-34 ESV / 218 helpful votes

    “Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. “Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. …

  • Longbowgun

    That’s not bravery. That’s not testing the limits of the law, or “standing up for faith”. There is no law that states a student or parent cannot put a prayer group together. The law says the school cannot initiate it or require it.
    That’s just praying in public… which Christ specifically said not to do.

  • Peter Leh

    so what is up with all the county clerk comments on the national day of prayer story?

  • bowie1

    Thumbs up to the students who attest to their faith around the pole.

  • bowie1

    Good for these students praying around the pole.