Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by Tulessa, Sep 3, 2015.
Maybe. You forgot one.
Well, it wasn't established that the poster's wife wasn't working because she wanted to "keep the Sabbath holy" though, was it? TorisMom didn't call anyone specifically a hypocrite -- it was a conditional hypothetical.
And that was after he first called his wife one. I simply used the word that he did to describe his wife.
That was a response to his assertion that his (assuming male sorry) wife was a hypocrite. One who doesn't practice that which one preaches is the definition of a hypocrite. No one said the wife fit that definition but him.
Eta: we were discussing the subject of this thread.
I assume he was joking. Well, anyway, I laughed.
And the attorney in this case is a hypocrite, imo, because he either doesn't care about keeping holy the Sabbath despite his other religious convictions, or he keeps it holy himself but makes others work.
Saturday is actually the Sabbath.
I see nothing hypocritical about keeping your own religious practices, while recognizing that other people have different religious beliefs that don't require the same practices. If my religious faith required that I not work on the Sabbath, it would be ridiculous in the extreme for me to expect no one to work on the Sabbath.
OMG. Seriously? If he indeed posted this, it is obviously satire.
Let's look at the first sentence, shall we? BBM for emphasis
"The county clerk in Kentucy deserves about as much support as you would give her if she were a muslim women who insisted on covering her face and refused not only gay marriages licenses but divorce, accusations of rape and driving a car without ur mans approval..."
I will translate. She deserves about as much respect [in other words, zero] as [her defenders] would give a Muslim woman in her position who refused to issue not only gay marriage licenses, but also divorce certificates and drivers' licenses to women who didn't have express approval from their husbands.
Saturday isn't considered the Sabbath for everyone. And ridiculous or not, there's a lot of people who really don't work on Sunday nor consciously do anything that causes others to work on Sunday.
Don't believe me? Try owning a business that's open Sunday in SLC. Plenty of folks wouldn't even shop there on other days simply because it IS open Sunday.
This is a man who thinks his client has the right to refuse to do her job in order to keep others from sinning or from being involved in their sin, or whatever her excuse is, on God's authority. What's the difference? She won't sign the paper so a couple can get married, but he sends his people off to do work on Sunday.
I've known Jews and Seventh Day Adventists who observe the Sabbath on Saturday, but every Christian I've ever known has observed or referred to Sunday as the Sabbath/Day of Rest.
She doesn't preach. She may be a sinner but she ain't no hypocrite.
Not only has she refused to issue marriage licenses, she refuses to let the deputy clerks issue them either. The Judge had offered to release Davis from jail if she promised not to interfere with her deputy clerks as they issued the licenses. But Davis refused.
I don't understand why the Judge would release her if she agreed to allow the deputy clerks to issue licenses. SHE should HAVE to issue licenses too. That's her job and she gets paid handsomely to do ALL aspects of her job. If she refuses to do certain aspects of her job, she should: 1.) Quit 2.) Stay in jail.
I need to go to Pearle Vision and get my eyes check because I simply cannot see her side, nor the side of her supporters, in this matter.
What a relief.
I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT. :loveyou:
This would make a great song.
I am officially sick of Kim Davis.
I felt compelled to follow the case because of a duty to support the rule of law of our land - a system that is strong enough to be flexible and evolve over time as it examines laws in terms of the Constitution. It's exciting times with the marriage equality ruling, and some challenges were bound to happen.
But....I just can't stand to read or hear another word from or about Kim Davis.
I'm on my way to Nashville.
He's a lawyer. She's his client. His job is to represent her, and as long as he has no religious conflict in doing his job, he's not being a hypocrite.
Here's some information on "Liberty Counsel", the 'Christian' legal group that is championing Kim Davis:
"Created in 1989, Liberty Counsel is affiliated with Liberty University Law School in Lynchburg, Va., a legacy of the late conservative icon Jerry Falwell. It was founded and is still chaired by Mathew (Mat) Staver, who also serves as director of the Liberty Center for Law and Policy at Liberty University, and provides legal assistance with regard to religious liberty, abortion and the family.
The organization may be best known for its campaigns to ensure that public displays of religion are maintained during the Christmas holiday, and it has adopted broad right-wing views, including the allegation that the Obama Administration has a socialist liberal agenda. But it also has focused heavily on anti-gay activism.
In 2009, J. Matt Barber, formerly with Concerned Women for America and Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (see above for both), joined Liberty Counsel as director of cultural affairs (also becoming Liberty Universitys associate dean for career and professional development). A year earlier, Barber had argued that given medical evidence about the dangers of homosexuality, it should be considered criminally reckless for educators to teach children that homosexual conduct is a normal, safe and perfectly acceptable alternative.
The Counsel also has been active in battling same-sex marriage, saying it would destroy the bedrock of society. In 2005, the groups blog said: People who
support the radical homosexual agenda will not rest until marriage has become completely devalued. Children will suffer most from this debauchery. A 2007 blog posting said same-sex marriage would severely impact future generations.
Like other anti-gay groups, Liberty Counsel argues that hate crime laws are actually thought crimes laws that violate the right to freedom and of conscience an opinion rejected by the Supreme Court. In fact, the laws raise penalties for crimes already on the books assault, murder and so on that were motivated by hatred of people based on their sexual orientation. They do not, and could not under the Constitution, punish people for voicing opinions.
Since 2006, Liberty Counsel has also run its Change is Possible campaign with Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays to protect people who say theyve changed from gay to straight from discrimination by intolerant homosexuals."
Well, Jeri-curl and mother-of-pearl! Are these the "war on Christmas" people? Do they know American history or just care about the parts which support their ideas? SMH