Rand Paul should join Huckabee in supporting Kim Davis

dillo said:
I guess the AstroTurf firm pays you by post eh?
Click to expand...

See, dillo, here's the dillio. You asked a question. RPG&R answered it at least twice. And then you asked pretty much the same thing again. And then when he posted something smart allecky that was I guess his way of mocking your repeated asking of an already answered question, you, instead of realizing your mistake acted like he was avoiding the question that he had already answered at least twice.
 
Hoax said:
That verse is a warning against hypocrisy. It is not a blanket "you can't judge people" or invitation for eye for an eye style retribution.
Click to expand...

Agreed! Scroll back and read Mello's first post that I responded to, it will put that quote in context. He was calling Davis a hypocrite.
 
Deborah K said:
You are trying to tie in and equate Mark's verse with the Leviticus verse. Disingenuous at best. Especially given that the Bible gives at least two examples of when divorce is acceptable. Moses issued certificates of divorce, and when Joseph found out that Mary was pregnant, he was going to privately divorce her. And then there's this:

Deuteronomy 24:1-4

1 If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the LORD. Do not bring sin upon the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance.

No stoning there....

And, unless you know Davis personally, you can't possibly know her reasons for divorce. The Bible also states: Judge not, lest ye be judged.
Click to expand...

So, one part of the bible demands death and a different part of the bible says that it's totally cool. This is just another reason not to follow the teachings of the bible. Anyone can find a 180-degree position on an issue. Bigots used the bible to justify their bigotry when it came to integrating schools in the south & interracial marriage decades ago. This is just the new PC-version of bigotry disguised as "Religious Freedom".

Gays & lesbians pay their taxes and can enlist & die protecting our freedoms and yet until recently were not equal under the law. I don't think it was right. I don't think it was fair. Especially forcing one group's religious beliefs on everyone else, regardless of their beliefs.

I'm an Atheist but I don't force my non-beliefs on people. It should be a two-way street. I'm also a straight guy & I don't care who consenting adults want to fall in love with & marry. I am a big believer in fair play though.
 
Last edited:
mello said:
Another reason not to follow the teachings of the bible. Anyone can find a 180-degree position on an issue. Bigots used the bible to justify their bigotry when it came to integrating schools in the south & interracial marriage decades ago. This is just the new PC-version of bigotry disguised as "Religious Freedom".

Gays & lesbians pay their taxes and can enlist & die protecting our freedoms and yet until recently were not equal under the law. I don't think it was right. I don't think it was fair. Especially forcing one group's religious beliefs on everyone else, irregardless of their beliefs.

I'm an Atheist but I don't force my non-beliefs on people. It should be a two-way street. I'm also a straight guy & I don't care who consenting adults want to fall in love with & marry. I am a big believer in fair play though.
Click to expand...

Take your own advice then, and don't use the Bible to make your argument. You started off claiming she would be stoned to death for 4 marriages according to the Bible.

However, I agree with you that using the Bible to make an argument is a double-edged sword because it naturally contradicts itself due to the fact that it combines many authors over a 1500 year span. Not to mention, people interpret it in ways that fit their agendas. But I don't think dismissing its teachings out of hand is wise. There are many timeless messages, lessons, and advice that are beneficial to us if we wish to live in love.

I agree that people should love whomever they desire to love, and be left alone, and treated equally under the law. By the same token, I believe people have the right to protest laws they don't agree with, which is what she did. She engaged in civil disobedience and she is protected under the first amendment to do so, despite the fact that there are those here who believe she gave up her rights when she became a public servant - ridiculous.
 
erowe1 said:
I 100% agree. Rand should have beaten Huckabee to the punch. This is a golden opportunity for Rand. It's the biggest news of the day and it's all on his turf geographically and politically. He doesn't need to make it personal about Kim Davis the woman. It's a states versus feds issue. And that should be precisely where Rand runs circles around all the others.
Click to expand...

If I hear Rand actively support her decision to refuse to issue marriage licenses, it will be the last straw, and I will officially decide to not vote for Rand.
 
Brett85 said:
I guess you would be better of supporting an authoritarian like Chris Christie who believes in using force against people and throwing them in prison for following their religious beliefs.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/8/chris-christie-get-kim-davis-another-government-jo/
Click to expand...

I agree 100% with what Christie said should be done in that article. It's complicated by the fact that she's an elected official, but if she was just a government employee she should 100% be removed from her position. Just like she would be in the private sector.
 
Sam I am said:
I agree 100% with what Christie said should be done in that article. It's complicated by the fact that she's an elected official, but if she was just a government employee she should 100% be removed from her position. Just like she would be in the private sector.
Click to expand...

Since most KY people and the local government support her, it's not clear she would be removed. Whether or not she should be removed from her position should be the call of the LOCAL people who elected her, or local government who hired her, or private firm that hired her. It's not the call of a federal judge to discipline rural clerks. While her duties as a public official are clearly a big consideration, that does not prove her exercise of her religious beliefs MUST be set aside.
 
Hoax said:
That verse is a warning against hypocrisy. It is not a blanket "you can't judge people" or invitation for eye for an eye style retribution.
Click to expand...

Im no biblical scholar, but the passage seems like its pointing out that all people are flawed. So if youre perfect and without sin than you can judge people.
 
dillo said:
Im no biblical scholar, but the passage seems like its pointing out that all people are flawed. So if youre perfect and without sin than you can judge people.
Click to expand...

No, it's saying that if you commit a particular sin, then don't judge someone else who also commits that sin. If you go out and get drunk on the weekends, then don't judge someone and think negatively of someone who goes out and gets drunk on the weekends. If you don't go out and get drunk on the weekends, then you have the right to judge someone who does that.
 
Sam I am said:
I agree 100% with what Christie said should be done in that article. It's complicated by the fact that she's an elected official, but if she was just a government employee she should 100% be removed from her position. Just like she would be in the private sector.
Click to expand...

Why should she be removed from her position, and why do you think she would be in the private sector?
 
The reason Rand didn't support her first is simple; he's afraid to. He wants to be all things to all people across demographics, and in the process he's alienating his support base. It's a sad state of affairs.
 
erowe1 said:
Why should she be removed from her position, and why do you think she would be in the private sector?
Click to expand...

She would be fired because she's not doing her job.

If you worked as a fry cook in McDonalds, but you refused to cook hamburgers because you were Hindi, don't you think you would get fired?
 
Brett85 said:
No, it's saying that if you commit a particular sin, then don't judge someone else who also commits that sin. If you go out and get drunk on the weekends, then don't judge someone and think negatively of someone who goes out and gets drunk on the weekends. If you don't go out and get drunk on the weekends, then you have the right to judge someone who does that.
Click to expand...

" You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye."

how do you interpret that part then?
 
dillo said:
" You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye."

how do you interpret that part then?
Click to expand...

Doesn't that support exactly what he said?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jmdrake
Rand Paul introduces "REINS" act to rein in the administrative state
Replies
13
Views
2K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Matt Collins
Rand Joins Efforts to Retake Legislative Authority from Unaccountable Administrative State
Replies
0
Views
1K
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
Rand and Rep. Kat Cammack Introduce REINS Act to Put Power Back in the People's Hands
Replies
0
Views
1K
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
Rand to Force U.S. Vote on War Powers Resolution Concerning U.S. Troops in Syria
Replies
0
Views
1K
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
Rand and Others Reaffirm Congress’ Constitutional Authority to Declare War
Replies
0
Views
593
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
Back
Top