No, I haven’t lost my mind. Kim Davis’ actions are foolish and against the law, and as such she has rightly come under public censure. It’s her job to grant marriage licenses. She isn’t doing it because of her religious beliefs. That is against the law, and she was sworn to uphold the law. She has broken the law and she will get the sanctions provided under the law.
We have the right to say that her actions, as a public official, are not right.
The part that bothers me is that we now know that she has been married four times and has what could be called a colorful, or troublesome, relationship history. She has been divorced three times, which, as many people gleefully pointed out, goes against Jesus’ teachings on divorce. And it is also true that Jesus said not one word about homosexuality, even though homosexuality was no secret in his day. The Romans and the Greeks were quite aware of it.
However, I have two questions. First, how did we, as a whole, find out about Kim Davis’ relationship history, and second, why are we so gleeful about it?
We found out about it because it’s a matter of public record, and public record is easy to search, especially online. Google provided the first clue, of course, and people followed up from there because a great many public records are online and easily accessible.
People laugh at Kim Davis’ “secrets” being revealed, but to paraphrase her favorite prophet, is there any one of us, really, who can presume to cast the first stone? I won’t ask for a raise of hands, but how many people reading this have been divorced? How many have had children “out of wedlock?” And how many people reading this, when it comes down to it, have had a relationship history that is spotless and contains no heartache or train wrecks?
Thing is, Kim Davis’ actions should be enough for us. She is supposed to do her job, and she’s not doing it because of her religion, which is against the law for her to do. Really, honestly, that is it.
That is enough to censure her and it will be enough for the state of Kentucky to eventually fire her from her job or otherwise make her do what she is being paid to do. That by itself is enough to get aggravated at Kim Davis for, right there.
She is in the way of progress and she is bigoted. That much she has made no secret of, and so we can judge her by those actions.
The fact that she has been married four times and has a history of bad decisions when it comes to relationships is honestly not our business.
This is the flaw with saying “The personal is political.” It takes only a little further to go before we start making politics personal, and doing the kind of dirty infighting that should not happen. Because, ladies and gentlemen and all in between, it IS dirty pool to use someone’s personal flaws to rag on them in public; you learned that in 2nd grade, I hope. That is bullying, pure and simple. And we are supposed to be above bullying. Aren’t we?
The plague of both the Right and the Left is self-righteousness. People feel that they have the right to pronounce judgment on other people’s lifestyles and personal choices, and going even further, they feel that they have the right to mock other people for those life choices and personal choices. If those of us on the liberal/progressive side of things don’t like it when the right does it to us, then what makes us justified for doing it to them?
Nobody needs to make fun of Kim Davis for being a religious fundamentalist and for making bad relationship choices. She needs to be censured for the fact that she is not doing what she is being paid to do, and because she is standing in the way of progress. Mocking her because she’s been married four times is not really part of the deal.
I would dare say that chances are, the average person reading this has been divorced at least once and has had long-term relationships that ended as total flaming ruins with heartache and anger all around, and quite possibly kids involved. Because as Americans, we are really not all that great at marriage, statistically speaking. It’s pretty well known that half of all marriages don’t make it.
So, before we talk about Kim Davis’ marriages, let’s check ourselves. You don’t have to be a church lady to be a hypocrite.
We also need to think about what gave anyone the right to know about Kim Davis’ former marriages. What actual need did we have for that information? What is it being used for? How did they get it?
Would you want someone to do the same thing to you?
No? Then why is it OK when it happens to people we don’t like?
Part of what is going on here is violation of people’s privacy.
Kim Davis is not right to do what she is doing. It’s against the law.
That’s enough. We don’t need to know anything else. But we do. Why? And why are we happy about it?
I’m asking this. What if it was us? What if our secrets were revealed? What if our pasts were made public? Are we that clean and that free of drama, trouble and “sin” that we can pick up that first stone?
Let’s keep it civil, folks.