So we've got this American, what is she, a clerk? Who is refusing to marry homosexual couples in her courthouse in the states. I believe it's in the state of Kentucky, famous for fried chicken and the derby.
Usually this would be me having a rant about why the whole of the UK is showing double standards because it doesn't want to go to war with the states over their religious extremism but we do when Muslims do it. It's the pork thing, isn't it? Pork makes all the difference.
So yeah basically she's a devout Christian and because of that she feels she can't encourage the act of love between same sex couples. Nothing wrong with that, it's an opinion and remember people just because someone's opinion offends someone else doesn't mean they're not entitled to that opinion.
I wasn't sure what was totally going on here, I mean I wasn't sure if she was employed by the American government, even at local level, or if she was somehow freelance. I used to work for the Ministry of Justice in the UK. In that court I think we sometimes had judges who were in some way outsourced to us and sometimes judges could "pick and choose" which cases they heard, in fact I think even our permanent judges did that.
It was family law so I'd be interested to know if we ever had a judge that had a similar view to our little homophobic friend, Kim Davis (I think it's time to introduce her name in the article) and if that judge decided that they didn't want to rubber stamp the adoption of a child by a gay couple. Judges never gave a reason why they wanted to not hear a case.
So yeah basically I wasn't sure what was happening so I decided to do a bit of research/ask someone on Facebook. I got some good responses that gave me the details.
Basically she is an elected official, by refusing to do this she can be impeached. If the equivalent of this were happening in the UK and the Tories weren't quick enough to cover it up with another comical story about Jeremy Clarkson helping disabled kids then she'd lose her job and they'd get her a seat in the House of Lords. Sadly there is no such house in the US, everyone has to be elected through some silly outdated system called "democracy".
This reminded me, as I'm sure it did you too, of two similar cases in the last few years in the UK.
One was a bed and breakfast and the other was a bakery. In both cases they were small business owners and they refused to serve homosexual people due to their prehistoric religious beliefs.
The issue wasn't so much the fact that the customers were homosexual, more to do with the fact that, in the case of the B&B the couple wanted to stay in the same bed, (I mean, the shame) and by allowing them to do this under their roof the B&B owner would be betraying the word of God by endorsing the act of sodomy.
In a similar vein with the bakers, the homosexual couple, I believe wanted a cake showing and endorsing their love for each other. Disgusting, two people who love each other wanting to share that love with others, what is the world coming to!?
I reckon if one person from each of the two couples went to the respective businesses to use their services and the businesses knew that each of them was gay I doubt they would have been refused service, their view was just that they didn't want to be seen endorsing that view. Other people doing something with another person that doesn't effect you in anyway can be hard, I admit.
Someone on Facebook made an excellent point that this is exactly the same as if they didn't want to serve Irish or Chinese people and I agree, this is no different than saying you don't want to serve Chinese or Irish people but I really do believe if that's the person's stance, they don't want to serve Irish, Chinese or gay people in their own company then that's up to them, seriously.
They do not share my views, I love everyone, I want to travel everywhere and experience as many different cultures as I can. I'd happily live six months to a couple of years with Berbers in Morocco, Buddhists monks in Tibet, a Muslim household in Iran and I'd live the way they live, got no issue with that.
By the same token if someone wanted to come to "my country" to live and didn't want to integrate with the culture of "my country" that's okay too. I'm happy to let people just do what they want.
Let's let people be judged by their opinions. The shit will sink to the bottom and the good will raise. Those who endorse equal opportunities to everyone will become pillars of the community and those that hold secular opinions won't get anywhere and will begin to wonder if they're the ones in the wrong.
In the Kim Davis case she is required by law to carry out her orders to serve the public, community, society.... She doesn't have the right to say "but my opinion is this..." That's cute, now do your job.
She should have to face legal proceedings if she continues with this stance and then she'll lose her job and unfortunately for her due to the publicity this story has received she'll find it difficult to get another one. Sadly not impossible but difficult.
At the root of this is obviously religious beliefs. The words of Gods, ie religious scriptures, were written thousands of years ago*. It could have been that the words of God were misinterpreted?
*In the case of Jedi those words were written a long time ago in a galaxy far far way. We're not sure how long nor how far but I think one can assume that they're even more to interpretation.
Please share this post - http://stucking-fupid.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-ugly-subject-of-two-people-wanting.html
No comments:
Post a Comment