Kim Davis - Unethical

The ancient Hebrew word translated "abomination" here is the same word used in the Old Testament to describe wearing an item of clothing woven from two different kinds of thread, and eating shellfish. Oh, the horrors!

Also, this same general part of the bible says that slaves should obey their masters, and that a man who has fucked a woman on her period should live outside the city gates until a priest has made a determination that he is no longer "unclean".

Christians love to ignore the Old Testament except when it suits their cultural and political purposes.

Like it or not, we have separation of church and state woven all through our Constitution, meaning that those who have accepted Jesus Christ as their personal lord and savior don't get preferential treatment under the law to atheists or those who find more wisdom for daily life in the teachings of Buddha. The Bible has no legal status here, no more than any other book.

Kim Davis is acting as if somebody has told her she has to marry a woman, or that she has to associate with gay people in her personal life and invite them into her home. Nothing could be further from the truth. She can still be the most bigoted piece of shit on the planet, when she's off the clock, if that's what she wants to do. That's religious freedom.

 

Regardless of how much you all are saying you aren't lumping all Christians in the same category, that most certainly seems to be the case.

I think Kim Davis is a stupid, judgemental ass that most certainly has no moral high ground on which to stand. Let's see...4 marriages, children out of wedlock, different baby daddies (not because a baby daddy died)...and there you go.

Being as sarcastic and demeaning as possible certainly doesn't help anyone's case IMO..but then it seems the majority of you seem to enjoy reading this...

The only reason I've responded here is because I can't stand what this ignorant ass Kim Davis is doing, and as one that has read the bible (NOT the buybull) I also wanted to state that you who continue to group all Christians in the same category are coming close to being as wrong as she is.

and my final thought is that indeed Jesus said not a word about homosexuals but instead added as his addidional commandment for us to love our fellow man as we love ourselves.

As a Christian, I couldn't care less who marries who...

 

In fact, I'm FOR people that are committed and love one another to marry, regardless if they are of the same sex!

 

I ignore the OT all the time, but then again I don't think I could be categorized as a Christian, at least not the popular conception of one.
The reason is rather plain and simple, it is no longer relevant to Christians, a fact many don't comprehend.

In a nutshell, if you believe Jesus is /was who he claimed to be then take note of his final words; "It is finished" which relates to earlier statements he made concerning the OT when he said that "not one jot or tittle shall be removed until all the law and prophets were fulfilled", which is exactly what his incarnation was meant to do and did.
when he died on the cross so did the OT law or the "Old Covenant".


when quoting from the NT it is very imperative to understand who the intended audience was because all the NT are letters between folks, never really thought of as being preserved as scripture.
When we consider the intended audience, shit makes much more sense.
for instance the church at Corinth was in the middle of a city that was devoted to the Goddess Dianna (if i remember correctly) and there were still many ancient cults/religions still in practice.
So when Paul tells the church that men shouldn't have long hair and women shouldn't have short hair, it was because the priests/priestess of these rival religions would wear their hair in that fashion. Many other admonitions to the church at Corinth are along the same lines.
so it wasn't really that these things are "bad", but rather they were measures taken so that the Christians would not be confused with these other religions as you had young converts who were dragging vestiges of their old religions/beliefs into Christianity and muddling things up.

you always need to consider the time, place and social/political/cultural climate when these letters were written.

 

I like the Kim Davis action - elementally and rationally , the govt can just quit offering that standardized civil contract ( a
marriage license ) and as well delete from law its associative special benefits . But , oh , the anxiety of that ... oh , no!

 

When someone says they get no enjoyment out of bashing narrow-minded idiots online, I think... they haven't tried it.

Exactly.

 

lol @ Karen J

 

Latest developments: https://www.yahoo.com/politics/huckabee-christie-cruz-weigh-in-on-controversial-128638521231.html

No explanation yet of why anything is changing. Apparently this whole controversy is back to square one. My understanding is that tomorrow, she can go back to work in the morning and order her employees to resume violating the law.

I really wish Mike Fuckabee would stay out of this. He's already made it very clear he thinks everyone should be required by law to live the Evangelical Christian lifestyle, regardless of their personal beliefs.

 

This is the point I try to make about Paul's admonitions against same-sex relationships. The Greeks at the time were also quite lax about two guys getting it on. In fact the system of Pederasty was established so the older man (Erastes) taught the younger (Eromenos) about EVERYTHING. Oh, and I suppose lesbians were OK too, since there is a whole island dedicated to them.

So, as per your example, it is not a leap to assume that Paul wanted his new Greek Christian boys to stop bottoming for their teachers, lest that became a tradition in the new Catholic Church.

 

Thank god that didn't happen... too much. :yikes:

 

I just made this meme after reading about that ignorant ass Mike Huckabee (Who, unbelievably is one of the uneducated candidates for POTUS) ranting about the gay marriage decision, which is perfectly within the duties of the Supreme Court and has been done almost identically half-a-century earlier.

YES, I TAKE IT PERSONALLY



by Shale
September 8, 2015

The recent Marriage Equality decision in June 2015 by the U.S. Supreme Court that so many Christians seem to have a problem with and some ignorant, Bible thumping preachers like Mike Huckabee are grandstanding against and scheming to overthrow, is the same decision that was made in June 1967.

The Loving vs Virginia case was even mentioned as a precedent for the current case, and that unbelievable HYPOCRITE, Clarence (Uncle) Thomas, married to a white woman, voted against it. WTF!

I am sure there was outrage in all the backwater Southern states when this legal remnant of segregation was ruled unconstitutional - there may have been Court Clerks who balked at issuing marriage licenses to interracial couples, but the ruling stayed.

And even into the 21st Century there are bigots opposed to interracial marriage, just as they are opposed to same-gender marriage. But, they will eventually die out and hopefully in future neither marriage will be unusual.

 

But...anyone can get married...interracial, same sex...they all can, have and do regularly.


So hard to drive a few miles to another county to get a license in order to avoid the negative energy of a woman who has her own beliefs about it. Much easier to make a big stink. Anytime you involve yourself with negative petty shit (and yes, since they could go a few miles to achieve what they wanted, I find it petty) and negative, petty people( like Ms Davis)...it attaches itself to you. And there it goes...on and on and on....negative energy, back and forth in and out and all about.

So many more important things to worry one self with.

 

until it comes to effect you or someone close to you, right?

Having a hard time understanding your position on this.
Sure they could have driven elsewhere, BUT it was/is the law and that clerk had/has ABSOLUTELY no right to discriminate against anyone and her doing so is a violation of law.
so if we apply your logic then any crime should/could be justifiable if it is committed against a minority group for religious beliefs?
cool, lets bring back the lynch mobs then and have real good ole' boy party.


It is discrimination that is the issue here, not gay marriage.

 

"so many Christians seem to have a problem with and some ignorant, Bible thumping preachers like Mike Huckabee"


How many is "so many"? Are there "so many" gay men that are promiscuous to the point going to sex clubs? Or are there gay men who love one another enough to make a lifetime commitment?

Is he Ignorant? Ignorant of what? His beliefs? Are gays ignorant? or are they all the most evolved intelligent people on the planet?

c'mon now...

 

Ya might get my point if you'd try Noxious Gas...you have totally missed it. And stop assuming things about people...you've no idea about me, my life or religious believes or how any of this has affected my life at any point. Maybe I have learned to not get involved with or push people when it's easier to avoid them.


my nap time...I'm old...check ya later

 

In all three of the small towns I grew up in, at least 85% of the people would have agreed with everything Mike Fuckabee has to say about any moral issue. Tolerance made them very angry. It's a wonder I don't have PTSD from it. Lucky for me that my parents were normal.

That press conference was so nauseating. They played the intro from "Eye of the Tiger" when Davis walked out of the jail.

 

This is where the argument breaks down though

You might be far nicer than someone like Davis. But logically it is still the same, you are picking and choosing which parts of both books suit you

You'd have to be there working under her to see what is really going on, which applications get her angrier, when its two girls getting married or two guys. Despite all the media attention, that difference will remain implicit. So whats really going on will remain hidden.

Combined with the swapping and changing of 4 husbands thing, she sounds like a complete tart. Probably isnt accepted herself in most of those religious circles, every other wife not wanting her anywhere near their husbands

So what is the root cause of, not hate but pissiness?, picking on a sexual minority thats an easy target becuase there arent that many of them as a way to try convince everyone around her and herself thag she is not unable to keep her legs closed. Or is it trying to suppress female homosexuality so all those dumbass husbands stop trying. Or from my experience, what is far more likely from older commitment challenged woman, it is actually about trying to suppress public knowledge of male homosexuality. ..because it wasnt until recently she started to work out what she had been competing with the whole time.

So you say you are all for those that are committed....

Logically that is also the same thing. It sounds a lot nicer, will get a lot more 'likes' from most people. But it is still a mantra, committed people good, non committed bad

My team, parts of my team anyway, have plenty of experience with those that act nice, go along with what everyone says...but act completely opposite when they think no one is is watching or listening. And it is usually the sneakiest ones that are the most dangerous

What people say publically, doesnt really mean anything

 

Lynn, I'm an ex-catholic athiest. Before I joined hf, I considered myself open minded and non judgemental. Many times since I joined hf, I've found out just how closed minded I still am, and I try to adjust.

I have said more than my share about Christians on hf, and in real life. I'm glad that your post reminded me that groups are made up of individuals...before I started on my rant.

Sometimes it's hard to remember others' feelings when you are expressing your own.

 

I think I have a handle on what your saying.
So I guess Rosa Parks should have just been an obedient little ****** and relinquished her seat to the superior white women, right?

 

Yeah, but groups are still fair game. If somebody can't see themselves as anything more than their group affiliations, they have a big problem.