bigot a

People are saying that Kim Davis can have her own religious beliefs, choices, and opinions as long as she keeps them at home (and to herself) but can’t be a Christian at work. OK, let’s flip that.

What if everyone was telling homosexuals that they could have their own beliefs, choices, and opinions at home but they couldn’t bring them to work. In other words they couldn’t be homosexual at work.

Oh, but that’s who they are, you say?

Well Kim Davis is a Christian (an Apostolic Christian, so am I); that is who she is and she cannot separate from that.

Christianity is not something you put on and take off, it is a lifestyle. When you live for God, God is your LIFE.

Oh, but homosexuals are born that way, you say?

Fine. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary (the “gay gene” was debunked in 2008) lets just go with that for the sake of argument.

If that is the case then it is even more logical to conclude that Christians are born Christian.

Wait, hear me out. Humans, ALL humans are created to coexist with a spirit being God or the devil. It is how we are made. It is designed to draw us close to our creator. So if that is the case then technically everyone is born Christian, some just move away from it or are lured away from it during the course of their lives.

What? That sounds strange to you? It’s no different than saying someone is born homosexual (with absolutely NO scientific evidence, mind you) – and Christians have scripture and psychological studies that prove what I have described.

So if these situations are essential the same when you look at it from a logical standpoint without the ridiculous barrage of straw men, red herrings, and slippery slopes that the let is using the distract everyone from the real issue, it begs the question:

Why is is called “tolerance” when it’s the homosexual agenda, yet when it comes to Christians it’s “bigotry and hatred?”

Bigot: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person;especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group).

So, according to this, we could correctly classify those pushing the homosexual agenda bigots as well.

Why the double standard?

Why is it OK for a MALE who has decided he wants to be a girl to use the girl’s restroom in a high school? I don’t care what you call yourself, YOU’RE STILL A GUY.

And everyone it supposed to just jump on board with this perversion all in the name of “tolerance.” (as you may know, I have a lot to say about the dangers of tolerance)

This country was founded on Christian values. In fact, many of our laws have their roots in scripture. The men who wrote our Constitution did so with God in mind.

And, by the way, the wall of separation clause (separation of church and state) is NOT in the Constitution. In fact, it did not come until later when Thomas Jefferson included it in a letter, the purpose being to suggest that the Church of England not be allowed to rule over the colonies. It was not designed to force Christians into hiding, allowing them to practice their faith in church and at home only. That was never the intention for a nation that was built on Christian values.

But back to the issue at hand.

I see plenty of laws being changed and re-interpreted, even rewritten to promote the homosexual agenda lifestyle choice.

However, I also see plenty of laws being changed and re-interpreted, even rewritten to revoke and prohibit freedoms and rights attached to the Christian lifestyle choice.

So I will finish with this thought.

I hear people say that Kim Davis should find another job, one that does not compromise her religious beliefs and choices.

But if it were a homosexual who could not be homosexual on his or her job, would they be told that they should find another job where they don’t have to compromise their beliefs and choices?

I very much doubt it. In fact,

I will go so far as to say that they would pursue that place with a blood thirsty vengeance, slandering all involved at every opportunity, sending threats to involved parties, and publicly calling them bigots and haters (as those pushing the homosexual agenda have already demonstrated numerous times that this is their SOP). They have already threatened to kill Kim Davis and her family, burn down their home while they are sleeping, and rape her while forcing her husband to watch.

This, intelligent (I hope) readers, is the group that preaches tolerance and love yet refuses to extend to others the very thing they demand from them.

Anyone else see the discrepancy here?

So this brings me back to my original point.

People are saying that Kim Davis can have her own religious beliefs, choices, and opinions as long as she keeps them at home (and to herself) but she can’t be a Christian at work.

What if everyone was telling homosexuals that they could have their own beliefs, choices, and opinions at home but they couldn’t bring them to work. In other words they couldn’t be homosexual at work.

What exactly is the difference? And just who is the real bigot here?


5 thoughts on “Bigot

  1. The problem with Kim Davis isn’t that she is a Christian. The problem is that she is allowing her personal beliefs to not only interfere with her job, but with the law. If it were a gay man refusing to give out marriage licences to heterosexual couples it would be the same outrage. You may not agree with the law, but as it currently stands it is a crime to discriminate due to sexuality. I absolutely agree that she has the right to her opinion, even if it differs to mine (which it 100% does). But the fact is she is abusing her power for a personal vendetta, and that is unacceptable. And if she is willing to so adamantly fight for what she believes in, she should be willing to walk away from a job that obligates her to do something that goes against her values.

    • Maybe so, but the Kentucky law still maintains that marriage is between a man and a woman. Federalism may be dying a slow, agonizing death in the U.S., but it is still hanging in there and these powers still fall to the states.
      SCOTUS overstepped its bounds with its decision – then again our country is becoming increasingly dark.
      That is not the point of this post though.
      If the situation was reversed and the homosexual was required to “stop being homosexual” when they were on the job how well would that turn out?
      How much support do you think they would garner?
      How much more accepted would they and their plight be?
      It comes down to lifestyle, opinions and choices.
      She made a choice to pursue a certain lifestyle just as the homosexual did. However, she is not allowed to be true to herself and her choice of lifestyle while the homosexual is celebrated for cramming their lifestyle down our throats and forcing us to accept them – and being ENCOURAGED to do so.

      • Nobody is asking her to stop being a Christian. I agree that would be unacceptable. But there is such a thing as workplace etiquette. As a gay man, when I am in my workplace I am strictly professional and don’t let my sexuality/lifestyle interfere with my work. If it did and my job wasn’t being done and I was making the lives of everyone around me difficult that would be grounds for dismissal. She is hiding behind her religion and claiming she is being oppressed when that is not the case. Unfortunately I don’t think we will ever reach common ground. I believe that everyone should be allowed to express themselves however they want to, be they gay, christian, muslim or simply from a different culture. But when people’s actions are not only hurtful and cruel, when they go against another persons basic human rights for equality, I think that is where the problem lies.

      • All she is asking for is a reasonable accommodation that would allow her to avoid violating her beliefs.
        That is simple enough and the powers that be certainly have more than adequate options at their disposal.
        Be careful when you advocate restricting rights and freedoms, especially when they are backed by the Constitution of the U.S.
        The next rights to be revoked and restricted very well may be yours.

  2. An accommodation that includes restricting access to forms people are legally qualified to obtain can not be called “reasonable”. Aside from the fact that government can’t function in a democratic republic if a single religion dictates equal protection under law in ANY way, there’s the problem of scope of practice.

    In order to practice law, you have to have SOME sort of credential, otherwise everyone from your grocery store cashier to your garbageman to your fast food server to your pastor would have an equal say in what laws we do or don’t have to follow. That’s not how it works. There IS a hierarchy. Folks at the top of the three branches of government make law through a system of checks and balances. Everyone below them in job rank only enforces and/or acts in accordance. A County Clerk with a high school education doesn’t get to weigh in on whether a law is just or unjust! They swear an oath to act to fulfill whatever laws are in place, period, not to give their opinion on whether any should or shouldn’t be followed. And laws change all the time. Nothing new about that.

    Like the rest of us working stiffs, there are only two clear moral options for Kim Davis if a boss, a business or a governmental superior asks her to do something she objects to – submit, or quit. Instead, she opted for the “Pontius Pilate” strategy, which is to suggest that by allowing deputies to do the actual deed, she has no involvement (or religious culpability) herself. Basically, when a same sex couple requests a license, she hides in her office behind drawn shades, rocks back and forth and murmurs, “It’s not happening.” She wants that $80 grand salary. We KNOW which master she serves.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s