General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Rude Pundit - If You Support the County Clerk in Kentucky, You Support Shariah Law
The Rude Pundit is trying to get his head around the thinking of County Clerk Kim Davis of Rowan County, Kentucky. See, he can't imagine a situation where he's asked to do something lawful for his job, for the people who, you know, pay him, and he doesn't do it. Now, between the asking and the doing, there might be a hell of a rigamarole. For instance, recently at this here professorin' gig, some top-down changes to curriculum were instituted. After a protracted battle, where the Rude Pundit spoke out publicly against things, where he joined protests and signed mighty petitions of many signatures, his side lost.
It didn't even occur to him to declare, "I will not teach because this curriculum violates my deeply-held pedagogical beliefs." No, his options would be to either quit or do his job and live to fight another day. And since, at the end of the current day, no children were being bombed or rivers being polluted, he went to work like usual. Because that's what you do. Because that's the choice you face. If you have a job, you do the job. If you don't want to do the job, leave the job.
But what he can't even begin to comprehend is the conviction that if he does a job that violates his beliefs, an invisible sky wizard will angrily condemn him to an eternity of fire and demon rape. To take that further, it's not in his realm of thinking to understand that one might think that it's one's job to keep the angry sky wizard, fire, and raping demons away from others.
That's exactly where we are with on-her-fourth-marriage Kim Davis and the other county clerks in Kentucky who are refusing to issue any marriage licenses because they don't want to allow same sex couples to marry. The twisted reasoning in not issuing licenses to opposite sex couples is so the clerks don't appear to be prejudiced against gay couples. Ahh, they're subtle, these Christian soldiers.
Davis wasn't so subtle with the all-male and all-female couples who showed up today to get their perfectly legal marriage licenses. Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court said, "Shut the fuck up and do your goddamned job" to Davis. Then a federal court said, "What Kagan said, and start now." Davis remained totally, almost admirably, but definitely dumbly defiant.
When one unlucky groom asked under whose authority she was acting out, Davis proclaimed, "Under God's authority." The next question should have been "Does God sign your motherfucking paycheck?" followed by "No? Then get a job where he does."
Instead, Davis faced down the angry group and announced, "I'm willing to face my consequences and you all will face your consequences when it comes time for judgment." That's adorable, Davis pretending as if she wasn't judging them already. She'll get more time to make her holy case when she appears Thursday before a U.S. district judge for a possible contempt citation and fine (no one's asking her to be put in jail. Let's not make this nutzoid evangelical more of a martyr to the Jesus fellaters bobbing on the bearded knob for her cause).
If you don't get it, let's make it clear: This is an attempt to enact fundamentalist Christianity as law. It is an attempt to make religious doctrine take the place of secular legal decisions. It is, in theory and operation, no different than the Shariah law that cowardly conservatives fear will overtake the nation, with Muslim Obama as chief mullah or some such shit. You can say you prefer your flavor, but it's still motherfuckin' ice cream. (Note: The Rude Pundit really wants some ice cream.)
Oh, we'll have the usual parade of suspects, of craven politicians leaping to Davis's defense, of talk radio dogs woofing away to their anus-sniffing audience. You know, though, the Rude Pundit may not understand the desire to avoid the stink eye of God, but he knows where inspiration for such fuckery comes from.
The Republican Party is made up of fundamentalists of one type or another now. If your only stance on any issue is "My way or not at all," if you're going to threaten to shut down the working of the government because you don't like Planned Parenthood or you need answers on Benghazi or you need to represent for your state's dead president, then why wouldn't someone think it's fine to stop the gears of local government to please their angry gods.
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2015/09/if-you-support-county-clerk-in-kentucky.html
malaise
(268,670 posts)You nailed it!!!
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Some day, somebody will have to make an official legal decision about priorities: In a legal fight, who would win?
The Bible or the Constitution?
The Bible or other beliefs?
This belief or that belief?
Belief or law?
Right now, anybody can claim to believe anything and demand special treatment for his supposed beliefs.
Some day, the Supreme Court will have to explicitly sort it out, what legal standings religious and other beliefs have when it comes to US law.
svpadgham
(670 posts)Where they can freely practice their religion while oppressing others without a hint of irony. We can call it "Dumbfuckistan."
tblue37
(65,215 posts)CORPRATIONS the right to hold religion over law in birth control concerns.
mnhtnbb
(31,372 posts)and how people like Kim Davis and her fellow evangelicals can be so oblivious.
They seem to have a special capacity for ignoring reality and logic. But, maybe that
explains their dedication to a mythical sky daddy.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)IOKIYARWFCK (It's OK if you're a right wing unbending fundamentalist christian kook)
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)if some business in some town in the US decided that because of their Islamic beliefs, they would not serve women not dressed in burkas, you can bet the laws would be changed pretty damn quick to disallow that.
jmowreader
(50,528 posts)LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)jmowreader
(50,528 posts)I was thinking "it's okay if you're a right-wing fundamentalist unbending Christian kook," or IOKIYARYFUCK.
LuvNewcastle
(16,834 posts)We're talking about people who think their Bible is as good as my biology book written by a world famous professor. Really, they think their Bible is better, because it's the LITERAL word of the one true God. So they've got some issues already about what constitutes reality. It's amazing how many people do.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)LuvNewcastle
(16,834 posts)by not issuing those licenses. That should be a serious charge. I hope the judge scares the shit out of her. If this isn't stopped now, it's going to keep happening in every little shithole town with a fundy clerk. Please, please, make an example of this shrew.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Sexist overtones, dating back to at least Shakespeare. I prefer the gender-neutral 'scalawag.'
hueymahl
(2,447 posts)"Jesus fellater bobbing on the bearded knob"
That is a bit of a mouthful, I must admit.
mdbl
(4,973 posts)She's a prehistoric religious wing nut who has no place in a secular government positions. Shrew is fine.
PatrickforO
(14,558 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)this is the local equivalent of a government shut-down. Thanks for pointing that out.
spanone
(135,781 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)northoftheborder
(7,569 posts)CanonRay
(14,080 posts)JonLP24
(29,322 posts)Thanks
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)IronLionZion
(45,380 posts)I can't imagine who benefits from this. Unless some people just want to play the oppressed martyr card, why not just find a new job that doesn't violate her beliefs?
Oh right, that would rule out these jobs ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bible-believing-kentucky-county-clerk-should-probably-not-apply-for-any-of-these-13-jobs_55e5b11ce4b0b7a9633a2d94?cps=gravity_5059_5732701937833073144
Deli clerk
clothing sales clerk
church leader
school teacher
hair stylist
jeweler
tattoo artist
she can't a county clerk anyway because of divorces!
muahahahaha!
safeinOhio
(32,633 posts)She is going by Mosaic Law. Only difference is under Shariah law you can eat camel and work on the Sabbath.
Fairgo
(1,571 posts)Sign me up
svpadgham
(670 posts)It doesn't count because she's white and Christian.
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)this woman's employer, The Commonwealth of Kentucky is bound by the rule of law?
Why not dodge the bullets by changing hiring practice to exclude those who think that their job is to enforce religious beliefs? Another option is to offer these existing employees a position in another area. imo
IDemo
(16,926 posts)I'd like to think that a person running for such a position would make it plain how their beliefs may affect their willingness to perform the job, but that's obviously never going to happen.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)AuntPatsy
(9,904 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)talk LGBT persons. While almost none of them admit to agreement with their favorite cleric's bigotry, almost all will defend their man's right to denigrate others and make excuses for his extremely corrupt attacks upon good people.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024184513
Cake and eat it too.
Raster
(20,998 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)The United States is run by the rule of law. She has to live under that law. It includes her right to practice her religion. But she has no right to the government to establish her religion and run by its rules. It may be shocking to some of these people. But even religious people should understand it.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)tried to sue god in federal court.
The case was dismissed, IIRC on the grounds that god could not be served with process and notice as s/he could not be found in the pertinent jurisdiction.
God has a way of dodging service of process!
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)can't find you, you truly must not exist.
Raster
(20,998 posts)passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Davis and her supporters would like to see the "rule of law" replaced with "the rule of your imaginary friends." The trouble with that, of course, is that people have very different ideas about who their imaginary friends are and what their imaginary friends think is sick, sinful, or icky.
I have no problem with people believing in an imaginary God, if it makes like easier for them to deal with. But when they start trying to force other people to live by their "imaginary" rules, that's going too far.
This woman needs to be jailed, not just fined. She needs to resign, and let someone else have the job. I know they can't fire her, but isn't there any other way to get rid of an elected official? What would they do if she was convicted of a crime and sent to prison? There must be a way to deal with that.
d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)This is an attempt to enact fundamentalist Christianity as law. It is an attempt to make religious doctrine take the place of secular legal decisions. It is, in theory and operation, no different than the Shariah law that cowardly conservatives fear will overtake the nation, with Muslim Obama as chief mullah or some such shit.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... in the corporate world, so if a company wants to force you to eat lunch offsite during the months of Ramadan, they now can! So maybe Kim Davis feels she would like to enable it to happen within local governments too! Why not enable shariah law every place! Or for that matter devil worship if certain communities want it! Would make for some great Halloween celebrations in some areas.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)JonLP24
(29,322 posts)so it is unnecessary for humans to try to create a "god's law" regulating on things he wants or doesn't want but he is aware of all that you do so he is aware of whatever case that might be, the "judgment". I always saw an irony with that.
A lot of times depending on the actual laws implement based on so-called religious beliefs are just using beliefs as vehicle to implement whatever oppressive law & a lot of those times are during periods of hate or far right fascism so whatever the laws is police state by another name. The anti-Sharia law bans and the ridiculous fear over that is based on in bigotry I'd say for the most part or perception is a big part of it. The law has so many variations but deals mostly with civil law like divorce or lending but for whatever reason a Muslim population would prefer to face that than "man made" that wouldn't affect them which is implemented like that in a lot places. Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Afghanistan, UAE, etc are the worst forms of any law (Saudi probably being the most fascist dictatorship, I see them as actually worse than the notable fascist dictators throughout history) but the campaign for a preemptive anti-Sharia law is a waste of time, distracting them from what directly affects them or others, and based on nonsense like a Muslim majority population in a jurisdiction would want old school punishments well best to go straight to the source.
Saudi Arabia's War on Witchcraft
A special unit of the religious police pursues magical crime aggressively, and the convicted face death sentences.
The sight of her bare flesh startled the prudish officers of Saudi Arabia's infamous religious police, the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (CPVPV), which had barged into her room in what was supposed to be a routine raid of a magical hideout in the western desert city of Madinah's Al-Seeh neighborhood. They paused in shock, and to let her dress.
The woman -- still unclothed -- managed to slip out of the window of her apartment and flee. According to the 2006 account of the Saudi Okaz newspaper, which has been described as the Arabic equivalent of the New York Post, she "flew like a bird." A frantic pursuit ensued. The unit found their suspect after she had fallen through the unsturdy roof of an adjacent house and onto the ground next to a bed of dozing children.
They covered her body, arrested her, and claimed to uncover key evidence indicating that witchcraft had indeed been practiced, including incense, talismans, and videos about magic. In the Al Arabiya report, a senior Islamic cleric lamented that the incident had occurred in a city of such sacred history. The prophet Muhammad is buried there, and it is considered the second most holy location in Islam, second to Mecca. The cleric didn't doubt the details of the incident. "Some magicians may ride a broom and fly in the air with the help of the jinn [supernatural beings]," he said.
The fate of this sorceress is not readily apparent, but her plight is common. Judging from the punishments of others accused of practicing witchcraft in Saudi Arabia before and since, the consequences were almost certainly severe.
In 2007, Egyptian pharmacist Mustafa Ibrahim was beheaded in Riyadh after his conviction on charges of "practicing magic and sorcery as well as adultery and desecration of the Holy Quran." The charges of "magic and sorcery" are not euphemisms for some other kind of egregious crime he committed; they alone were enough to qualify him for a death sentence. He first came to the attention of the religious authorities when members of a mosque in the northern town of Arar voiced concerns over the placement of the holy book in the restroom. After being accused of disrupting a man's marriage through spellwork, and the discovery of "books on black magic, a candle with an incantation 'to summon devils,' and 'foul-smelling herbs,'" the case -- and eventually his life -- were swallowed by the black hole of the discretionary Saudi court system.
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/saudi-arabias-war-on-witchcraft/278701/
If I were for a moment to take them seriously that they believe that they believe that (they'll certainly fool many of the intended targets into believing that) meaning not ruling out the possibility of being able to do this such as "summon devils" but rather believe that those who they caught committing the offense committed the offense. Such as how would you prove or "recognize" this or who summoned the devils which more than likely was the House of Saud or they are actually themselves the devils that were summoned hypothetically if "witchcraft" is real. Again though, the sky wizard has that covered so its unnecessary.
102 And they followed what the devils taught during the reign of Solomon. It was not Solomon who disbelieved, but it was the devils who disbelieved. They taught the people witchcraft and what was revealed in Babylon to the two angels Harut and Marut. They did not teach anybody until they had said, "We are a test, so do not lose faith." But they learned from them the means to cause separation between man and his wife. But they cannot harm anyone except with God's permission. And they learned what would harm them and not benefit them. Yet they knew that whoever deals in it will have no share in the Hereafter. Miserable is what they sold their souls for, if they only knew.
Saudi legal system
The legal system of Saudi Arabia is based on Sharia, Islamic law derived from the Qu'ran and the Sunnah (the traditions) of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. The sources of Sharia also include Islamic scholarly consensus developed after Muhammad's death. Its interpretation by judges in Saudi Arabia is influenced by the medieval texts of the literalist Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence. Uniquely in the Muslim world, Sharia has been adopted by Saudi Arabia in an uncodified form. This, and the lack of judicial precedent, has resulted in considerable uncertainty in the scope and content of the country's laws. The government therefore announced its intention to codify Sharia in 2010, but this is yet to be implemented. Sharia has also been supplemented by regulations issued by royal decree covering modern issues such as intellectual property and corporate law. Nevertheless, Sharia remains the primary source of law, especially in areas such as criminal, family, commercial and contract law, and the Qu'ran and the Sunnah are declared to be the country's constitution. In the areas of land and energy law the extensive proprietorial rights of the Saudi state (in effect, the Saudi royal family) constitute a significant feature.
The current Saudi court system was created by King Abdul Aziz, who founded the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932, and was introduced to the country in stages between 1927 and 1960. It comprises general and summary Sharia courts, with some administrative tribunals to deal with disputes on specific modern regulations. Trials in Saudi Arabia are bench trials. Courts in Saudi Arabia observe few formalities and the country's first criminal procedure code, issued in 2001, has been largely ignored. King Abdullah, in 2007, introduced a number of significant judicial reforms, although they are yet to be fully implemented.
Criminal law punishments in Saudi Arabia include public beheading, stoning, amputation and lashing. Serious criminal offences include not only internationally recognized crimes such as murder, rape, theft and robbery, but also apostasy, adultery, witchcraft and sorcery. In addition to the regular police force, Saudi Arabia has a secret police, the Mabahith, and "religious police", the Mutawa. The latter enforces Islamic social and moral norms. Western-based human rights organizations, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have criticized the activities of both the Mabahith and the Mutawa, as well as a number of other aspects of human rights in Saudi Arabia. These include the number of executions, the range of offences which are subject to the death penalty, the lack of safeguards for the accused in the criminal justice system, the treatment of homosexuals, the use of torture, the lack of religious freedom, and the highly disadvantaged position of women. The Albert Shanker Institute and Freedom House have also reported that "Saudi Arabia's practices diverge from the concept of the rule of law."[1]
The lack of codification of Sharia leads to considerable variation in its interpretation and application.[24] Furthermore, there is no system of judicial precedent,[25] as Wahhabism rejects the imitation of past scholarship (taqlid) in favor of independent reasoning (ijtihad).[26] However Saudi judges are expected to consult six medieval texts from the Hanbali school of jurisprudence before reaching a decision.[27] The Hanbali school is noted for its literalist interpretation of the Qu'ran and hadith.[28] If the answer is not found in the six Hanbali texts, the judge may then consult the jurisprudence of the other three main Sunni schools or apply his independent judgment and legal reasoning, referred to as ijtihad.[27]
Nevertheless, because the judge is empowered to disregard previous judgments (either his own or of other judges) and can apply his personal interpretation of Sharia to any particular case through ijtihad, divergent judgements arise even in apparently identical cases.[25] There is a presumption against overturning a decision when it is based on ijtihad.[29] This principle is crucial in two respects.[29] Firstly, it concentrates the substance of the law in the hands of judges as, in consequence, there is a presumption that only a judge exercising ijtihad, rather than a king or a parliament, can determine God's law.[29] Secondly, it renders a judge's decision practically immune to reversal on appeal.[29] The role of ijtihad has led to calls for the Sharia to be codified to give clarity and remove uncertainty.[30] As a result, in 2010, the Minister of Justice announced plans to implement a codification of Sharia law, although resistance from the religious establishment is reportedly delaying its implementation.[30]
Royal decrees (nizam) are the other main source of law but are referred to as regulations rather than laws to indicate that they are subordinate to the Sharia.[2][31] Royal decrees supplement Sharia in areas such as labor, commercial and corporate law.[32] Additionally, other forms of regulations (lai'hah) include Royal Orders, Council of Ministers Resolutions, Ministerial Resolutions and, Ministerial Circulars,[33] and are similarly subordinate to Sharia.[33] Any Western commercial laws or institutions are adapted and interpreted from the standpoint of Shariah law.[34][35]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_system_of_Saudi_Arabia
On the last part I'm curious on what those decrees say in those areas as I'm well aware of slave imported labor, the owners of the commercial entity reap all the rewards, and corporate is soliciting bribes for contracts or well effectively what it is and it would be interesting to call that Sharia or anything like that and say "god's law" or "moral".
This alone suggests they are doing what they shouldn't be doing in those areas specifically
177 Righteousness does not consist of turning your faces towards the East and the West. But righteous is he who believes in God, and the Last Day, and the angels, and the Scripture, and the prophets. Who gives money, though dear, to near relatives, and orphans, and the needy, and the homeless, and the beggars, and for the freeing of slaves; those who perform the prayers, and pay the obligatory charity, and fulfill their promise when they promise, and patiently persevere in the face of persecution, hardship, and in the time of conflict. These are the sincere; these are the pious.
It makes a lot of sense of the concept & rise of charity fronts to fund the Wahabbi terror groups though using that for this. One of the five pillars - the practice of charitable giving based on accumulated wealth.
As far as them supporting a god's law based on the Gospel's is Sharia law according to the Sharia law "god's law"
546 And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)even deserves to survive.
People - at least enough of them - seem to have a bottomless capacity for swallowing quadruple-refined horsehit if the invisible skywizard "said" it and acting on their imbecile beliefs.
"Religion began when the first con man met the first fool." - Mark Twain
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)I find scripture but mainly religious metaphors interesting, particularly sacrifices which feels like a sociopath wrote that part in whatever books that have it well because say for instance a group of people committed a crime but they won't wrong parties to find out about but there may be someone who 'knows too much' so he's "sacrificed". Outside what does God need for fuel occasional bodies here or there or the associations with that but things like selling your soul as making agreements with the wrong sorts of crowd rather than maintaining your principles. Bernie Sanders could have potentially "sold his soul" to you know, Wall Street.
I look things from both rational and quadruple vision ways but not completely quadruple to a given event or completely rational for something unknown unknown unlike known knowns unknown knowns or something like that. Not taking things seriously but searching like myths, certain things would get passed down over time and variations like 'telephone' but things that are specifically like skywizards or vampires, werewolves trace from something from a long time ago that people with understanding and the perceptions to things they saw and their rational explations or thoughts related like possibly werewolves or vampires could trace from Neanderthals living in caves and the outside world saw those, there was a photo of a neanderthal female skull with huge rock inside her mouth suggesting that is seen as a way to combat the cave people whenever they appeared and they would paint or draw images inside the caves of how they saw things based on their perspectives & understanding.
The only thing I believe in for sure on Abrahamic religions is possibly Moses, Jesus Muhammad, and/or Joseph Smith may have had Temporal lobe epilepsy
Temporal lobe epilepsy has been suggested as a physical explanation for the revelatory experiences of prominent religious figures such as Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Saint Paul, and Joseph Smith. These experiences are described as complex interactions with their visions, but lacking the stereotypy, amnestic periods, and automatisms or generalized motor events, which are characteristic of TLE. Psychiatric conditions with psychotic spectrum symptoms are a more plausible physical explanation of these experiences.[60] Pope Pius IX's doctrine of the immaculate conception is thought to have been influenced by his forensically diagnosed partial epilepsy.[61] It has also been suggested that the visions of Joan of Arc were probably an expression of partial epilepsy.[62]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_lobe_epilepsy
Just from God's law or writing laws which are man made either way, particularly with all the variations but saw as unnecessary or always saw a lot of irony in that because based their own scriptures he's already aware and whatever case comes up that will appear on his docket so seemed strange to me because I thought he already had that part covered.
I think another thread with the recent John Oliver focus on Televangelists and that they are tax-exempt that I made a comment that Kevin Trudeau was selling the wrong snake oil (incarcerated right now) so he should have got on that circuit and write books tilted "What God doesn't want you to know".
niyad
(113,030 posts)When one unlucky groom asked under whose authority she was acting out, Davis proclaimed, "Under God's authority." The next question should have been "Does God sign your motherfucking paycheck?" followed by "No? Then get a job where he does."
underpants
(182,589 posts)Lars39
(26,106 posts)Marriage licenses is the easy stuff...they didn't want to just jump in and not accept property tax money from people on their shit list. Can you imagine the legal tangle that would ensue if that were to happen? your property would be sold by the time it was all straightened out.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)county? If she was hired she should be fired. I don't know what they can do if she was elected but she should no longer have a job. She is refusing to do it.
jmowreader
(50,528 posts)They can impeach her but two-thirds of the Senate needs to have had enough of her shit to get rid of her.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)doing much good in her state either.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)And it's in federal court, so being in her state doesn't matter as much.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Perfect!
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)being 100% correct 100% of the time.
He, Krugman and Charlie Pierce have perfect batting averages.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)as long as its their version. Is this news to anyone?
They mean to enforce it by any and all means too. If a damned republican gets elected POTUS in 16 with a voting majority in Congress we will all see sharia religious imposed here.
EEO
(1,620 posts)If she can pick the laws she wants to follow, especially as a government employ required to follow the law, then all of us can. And that would result in chaos.
Kentucky Clerk "Just Wants to Choose What Laws to Follow, Is All"
http://www.theniladmirari.com/2015/09/kentucky-clerk-just-wants-to-choose.html
ion_theory
(235 posts)BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)Love you, dude.
orange you glad
(50 posts)It exists in Islam, Judaism, Christianity, and every other religion.
csziggy
(34,131 posts)2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
Matthew 7:1-5 KJV
She has been married four times and had children fathered by one man while married to another, then married yet another man who was willing to raise those children - she has no right at all to criticize other people's choices involving marriage.
She is the definition of hypocrite.
bulloney
(4,113 posts)How can some people get in your face and preach about the sanctity of marriage when you're working on your fourth?
csziggy
(34,131 posts)She apparently slept with another man while married to her first husband, got pregnant, divorced, then married a third man who adopted the twins conceived in her affair. Then she divorced her second husband - the one who was generous enough to adopt her children - and married the guy she'd had the affair with during her first marriage. Then she divorced that third husband and married again.
It seems that it was the fourth husband - or her new mother in law - who converted her to a rabid Christian, according to at least one of the many articles about Kim Davis over the last couple of weeks. (So I don't have a link, but the information is out there.)
This is the kind of serial monogamy we need score cards to track!
bulloney
(4,113 posts)judged by God?
This is actually a typical mindset of almost every uber-religious person I know. They can recite their cherry-picked passages of the Bible to condemn persons with different lifestyles, relationships, etc. From my observations, they actually do it to conform to their politics more than their religion. I see that with the self-proclaimed "pro-lifers." They're in your face all the time telling you that Obama is a baby-killer. They'll turn around and tell you why the Republican candidate believes in the sanctity of life, even though they support capital punishment and George Bush's lie-based wars and oppose any attempt by a Democrat to reform our nation's health care system.
csziggy
(34,131 posts)Apparently when she had her bolt of enlightenment or whateverthehell she wants to call it, that erased all her previous sins and she is now a new born lamb. And she could go back out there, dio the same stupid things all over again, get forgiven all over again and all would be good again.
It's people like this that made me give up on religion and make me detest fundamentalism.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)I work in flight simulation- business jets, to be exact. It is a great job- always a new challenge. Sometimes the problem is electrics, sometimes electronics, software, mechanical, cockpit systems, etc. Extremely complex, and it keeps you on your own toes. Two of our customers are Enbridge and Archer Daniels Midland. I oppose the actions of these companies, but they pay the bills. Maybe I'm a hypocrite, but I have mouths to feed, and it isn't easy to find jobs paying $34 an hour.
C Moon
(12,208 posts)Probably not all nice, but I find it hilarious!
Even her coworker who is sitting next to her in the photo (that was published this morning), has a Twitter account named after her:
https://twitter.com/nexttokimdavis