Of hypocrites, hamsters and ho’s …
Most y’all know that I’m a religious man, but I do my very best not to wear it on my sleeve. I was taught early on not to ever be holier than thou. I’m as Catholic as I can be and I hope that it’s Catholic enough. (That’s almost certainly not enough for some. You just know that Doug Ducey probably sits in the front row at mass and eyeballs people as they walk by to get Communion.)
One of the best lessons that I learned growing up was not to be a hypocrite. Walk what you talk, and if you’re unable to do so, don’t talk in the first place. So it should be with the woman in Kentucky who refuses to grant marriage licenses to gay couples because it goes against her religion. As I write this, she has just been sent to jail for refusing to do her damn job, claiming that it’s against her religion. The contempt citation is open-ended, so she could be in there for a while.
She probably sees herself as some kind of religious martyr, which is, in and of itself, funny because she’s only been religious for about as long as Rich Rodriguez has been coaching football at the UA. Maybe God spoke to her after the Wildcats had that come-from-behind win in the New Mexico Bowl. I hope her faith is tested in jail. I know that I once had to eat Spam for three consecutive meals and I guarantee I saw Jesus.
Her hypocrisy is absolutely overwhelming. The thrice-divorced clown is on her fourth husband. Here’s the deal: If you’ve been divorced once, I really don’t care, but it’s probably best that you not initiate discussions of morality. If you’ve been divorced twice, you should probably avoid joining in any already-started discussion of morality. If you’ve been divorced three times, don’t say sh-t!
She’s an Apostolic Christian, an interesting religion full of arranged marriages and other frivolity. She claims that God’s authority supersedes her earthly duties (for which she is still collecting a hefty paycheck despite not doing her damn job). Just imagine if everybody could claim religious exemption from their jobs. One of the more extreme examples I read about wondered whether an Orthodox Jew in that Kentucky woman’s professional position could refuse to issue a marriage license if the female of the couple refused to wear a wig outside the house.
(God has got to have a sense of humor because He obviously had a hand in making up all this nonsense.)
A former basketball buddy of mine who is now a pastor in the Seventh-Day Adventist Church sent this along to me: In the Apostolic Christian Statement of Faith (isn’t it amazing what you can find on the Internet?!), Item No. 17 says, “Governmental authority is respected and obeyed.”
There, Hypocrite! I hope you start fretting over whether that orange jumpsuit is making you gay.
Harris Faulkner, one of a handful of non-blondes on Fox News, is suing the Hasbro Toy company because there’s a toy hamster that not only bears her name, but also reportedly resembles her. She says that it’s bad for her professional image.
You may have seen Faulkner on Fox. She’s the one who wears exactly 19.2 pounds of eye makeup to accentuate a pair of eyes that are already kinda extra-terrestrial freaky. If you want to see more of her, just Google some of her images. There’s a really interesting one of her wearing boxing gloves … and very little else. It does wonders for her professional image.
Some of the other toys in the line are named Pancakes Watkins, Pepper Clark, and Puffball Petrovsky. This is not good for Hasbro, because I’m pretty sure that those are also the names of the women who appear on Faulkner’s roundtable show on Fox. I’m sure you’ve seen it. They all sit around in too-short skirts and try their damnedest to keep their legs sufficiently crossed while attacking Hillary Clinton for wearing pantsuits.
In all fairness, if Faulkner doesn’t want her name on the toy, Hasbro should either take it off or come up with some money for her. However, her lawsuit goes way too far. In it, she claims that “Hasbro’s portrayal of her as a rodent is demeaning and insulting.”
Come on, lady. You’re an African-American who has voluntarily worked at Fox News for a decade. It doesn’t come any more demeaning and insulting than that.
Now for the ho. After reports came out that at least two companies that were considering relocating to Arizona said, “Uh, no” because of the criminal way that our State Legislature underfunds our schools, the chairman and CEO of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, one lightheaded Glenn Hamer, wrote an op-ed piece in a Phoenix paper lauding the state of Arizona’s schools. He wrote, ” The truth is (that) Arizona’s educational infrastructure is very strong.”
Then, after a couple hits on the crack pipe, he continued, “(Arizona) is in the midst of a revolutionary change led by Governor Ducey that is creating an educational environment defined by a commitment to excellence and expanded opportunities for all students.”
I swear that’s what he wrote. If they ever do an all-male remake of Pretty Woman, he’s a shoo-in for the Julia Roberts part.
This article appears in Sep 10-16, 2015.
Welcome to the hate fest.
Gosh, Dan Hyde, project much?
It seems to me that all jobs, sooner or later, will eventually make you compromise your principles, religious or other. It’s up to the worker to decide just how much. For that Kentucky woman, it was about bigotry against gays. Fine, she should quit her job and go hang out with that pastry guy who won’t make wedding cakes for gays but will for dogs. Instead, she refused to keep her oath about upholding the laws and regulations, and refused to quit her job. Well, she can’t do both. People with strong convictions about such things shouldn’t take jobs that force them to go against their convictions. In the case of the Kentucky woman, the rules changed on her while she was fulfilling her duties, so, she simply should have quit instead of refusing to do her job. People make these choices at their jobs all the time. Her solution was the stupidest choice she could have made.
“Kentucky woman
She get to judge you
She gonna own you
Kentucky woman”
Too bad, in an otherwise well written opinion, you had to throw in all the misogyny. Makeup? Short skirts? What do these have to do with the issues? But, the article is about a woman, so of course, you had to throw these visuals in. Pity.
Just FYI, the statement of faith you quoted is from a church that is completely unrelated to Davis. It comes from the Apostolic Christian Church of America, however, Davis is from a Pentecostal Apostolic Church.
The similarities in name and Google’s ranking (which put the ACCA at the top of searches for Apostolic Christian) created a lot of confusion and the mistake is understandable.
Search Kim Davis on Wikipedia, there are links to her church on her Wikipedia page.
…and not a word about the four men that she has had to divorce? Who is being judgmental Tom?
Of course, since this article was written, new Right Wing heroine Wendy Davis has been released from jail. She has now attracted the attention of Republican bottom-feeder presidential hopefuls Mike Huckabee and Ted Cruz who clambered to get on the stage with her. This produced the spectacle of Ted Cruz being denied admittance by one of Huckabee’s aides… http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/09/1…
This would be funny, if it wasn’t so pathetically indicative of the sorry state of the American presidential follies…
Obviously, I had the wrong name for the Kentucky County Clerk… it’s Kim Davis, NOT Wendy Davis… still, the rest of my comment stands!
I hate to break it to all you well wishers, but I just heard that she is opposed to murder also. Where will this end? I’m still dazed that there is a big market in KY for licenses.
“Her hypocrisy is absolutely overwhelming. The thrice-divorced clown is on her fourth husband. Here’s the deal: If you’ve been divorced once, I really don’t care, but it’s probably best that you not initiate discussions of morality. If you’ve been divorced twice, you should probably avoid joining in any already-started discussion of morality. If you’ve been divorced three times, don’t say sh-t!”
So, going through the pain of a divorce pretty much negates anything you have to say on subjects of morality Pope Tom pontificates. Multiple divorces? Excommunication from any and all such discussions. Can’t speak for others but I have a large number of friends and family who’ve been through this emotional horror show – none that I consider immoral or amoral.
Funny thing about religionists, they are quick to judge others and others’ faiths without taking a good hard look at their own. And come to think of it, one person’s divorce is another’s “annulment.” Slippery slope there.
If I read this correctly, divorce negates freedom of religion and free speech. Would that be for the rest of your life or is there a time limit when rights are restored?
Should former drug addicts be allowed to become drug counselors?
Should molesting priests been allowed to stay in the Catholic Church?
Should politicians be allowed to spend our money?
Should lawyers be allowed to claim they are “searching for the truth?”
Mary Ker, pointing out misogyny on Fox does not, in itself constitute misogyny.
Tom,
It seems rather curious to measure one’s morality by the number of divorces one has experienced. Success in marriage depends on many things, but one’s morality may well have nothing to do with it. Outside the Catholic Church in the civilized world divorce is not considered an immoral, unforgivable sin. Morality should be judged on how one treats all people.
Tommy boy you sound more and more like Trump every day = all pomp and full of yourself when the only thing you’re good at is hurling insults = and your face, my god, you’d never get elected.
Does nobody (anybody complaining that divorce is unrelated here) understand that there is an argument for the ‘sanctity’ of marriage? If one believes that allowing gays to marry violates this, then how do you justify a divorce, which does the same thing in a different way? If we are talking about biblical morality, then this surely fits.