“I don’t think that I should have to choose between practicing my religion properly or earning a living. I shouldn’t have to choose between one or the other because they’re both important.”
That quote is not from Kim Davis. That quote is from Charee Stanley, a flight attendant who converted to Islam a month before taking the job where she was aware duties included serving alcohol. She refused to do her duties and serve the alcohol to passengers. She’s now suing the airline. Where’s the public lynch mob telling her she should not have accepted that position to begin with, if the duties violated her beliefs? Why isn’t she being told to just find another job? She’s not being thrown in jail. Actually, she will likely get a nice fat pay-day from all this.
To be fair, the stories aren’t completely identical. Being a public employee doesn’t give you the same freedom as it would – or should – working in the public sector. But ask yourself this…would there be the same outrage had the religions been reversed? Or would one not be in jail, while the other’s former employer was being boycotted?
I think the answer there is clear.
10 comments:
It's an Obamanation!
Her obvious mental instability, evidenced by her conversion into Islam right before she started work there, should have been enough to keep her off the plane to begin with.
One is a gov employee
One is a pvt employee.
Religion is used for a lot of excuses by phony people.My parents raised us Methodist and there is no such word in the Bible.I come to work everyday and listen to co-workers boast about the holidays and they are phony.America is built on lies and most sensible people know it but continue to practice phony.Grown-ups have peer pressure to.These to women are just a product of phony America.
8:03 Huh? Go back to sleep in your Methodist church.
The difference is clearly that Kim Davis is a government employee. She is paid by taxpayers so she must follow U.S. laws. If she doesn't agree with the new laws then she needs to find another job in the private sector. Working for the government has many benefits but also means you have to follow certain policies and procedures. She knew that when she took the position. If she is no longer willing to perform the mandated duties, she should be fired. The government is not paying her to pick and choose the duties she wishes to uphold and refuse others. She needs to do her damn job. She can have her "faith" and beliefs on her own time, but not on the dime of taxpayers.
There are major differences between the two examples. Kim Davis is an elected government official. She is sworn to do a job that she refused to do. She defied a court order and was appropriately jailed. Charee Stanely is an employee for a private business, who was suspended for not doing the job she is paid to do. Of course she can sue, and she will lose. Kim Davis can probably sue also and she would probably also lose. Once again trying to compare religions for the sake of hate. It is sad that this kind of stupidity is passed off as journalism.
Kim Davis is being used for a fund raising and political tool.
is there not a SC ruling that states a circumstance such as these are equal because the law covers both private and public employees equally not public one way and private another. There needs to be better knowledge before you comment and want others to believe your opinion is "gospel"
Kim ran for and won a job to issue marriage licenses to M/F couples, then a judge made an unconstitutional "Ruling" that she refused to change her original spots.
Kim is right, and the judge is wrong, period!
Post a Comment