We’ll leave the theological interpretations to the experts, thanks. You’re free to continue reading her mind and knowing what her beliefs are though.
I think there is a bit of overlap among the relevant groups and their view of the world. Find one passage in the Bible or in the Constitution or in some arcane statute, that out of context fits how you think things should be, and then hammer the rest of the document and its derivative treatises to be all about supporting that one notion.
However, it does seem to me it may be that in the theology of her new church, the proscription against divorce and remarriage is if you were in a True Christian Marriage to begin with. Unequal yokes and all that. And then, it’s only after we have ourselves the reborn in the Spirit, New And Improved, Kim Davis, that NOW she will be in a True Christian Marriage. Everything “wrong” that she did before no longer counts, period.
But as has been mentioned, disagreement on this aspect of theology, her marital background, the sincerity of the New Improved Kim persona… should be irrelevant. The problem here is that the New Improved Kim is engaging in misconduct in public office and offering her religion as an excuse, and serving as a tool for the enemies of equal civil rights and for those who’d privilege Mob Rule over Rule of Law. It would be just as much of a problem if she had been a model Fundamentalist from the day she was born or her religious background were of an observant hardline Roman Catholic or Orthodox Jewish or if she had led a marital life without reproach or a life of celibacy or even if she had lived her life in a Free Love cult commune or self-published homophobic porn on the side. Her shirking of duties would be the same.
I imagine many, if not all, people of faith, take their spiritual advice from those with no expertise in the Bible whatsoever, combined with a healthy hatred for Christians.
The frothing and endless hatred of the overemotional hyenas on the left isn’t reality, I’m afraid.
Bless your heart.
I can’t even keep up anymore. Apparently she also filed an emergency motion today asking Bunning to order the governor to take her name off of marriage licenses. Bunning denied it on the basis of states rights.
“Under the Eleventh Amendment, as interpreted by Pennhurst, the Court simply does not have the authority to order Governor Beshear or Commissioner Onkst to alter the marriage license form or amend KRS §402.100 based on alleged violations of Davis’ rights under the Kentucky Constitution and Ky. RFRA. Davis’ claims brought under state law should therefore be brought in Kentucky state court.”
Do you know you’re stupid, or do you just walk around confused and angry all the time?
I’m curious, do you pay someone to tie your shoes for you or do you just wander around barefoot?
But I am a theological interpretation expert, and I’m able to read minds. I know, for example, that you chose your user name by having your cat walk across your keyboard.
Well you got the first part right anyway.
It keeps getting worse . . .
Lawyers for Davis have filed an appeal against the injunction, asking that Davis be allowed once again to refuse to issue marriage licenses.
The argument seems to be this: The original lawsuit had four named plaintiffs (four couples) who were suing for marriage licenses. Three of those have gotten their licenses (and the fourth apparently has not pursued getting one). The lawyers claim that the injunction, requiring Davis to issue licenses, applies only to these four named plaintiffs. So there is nothing left for Davis to do under the terms of the injunction. So when more couples start asking for marriage licenses, Davis is no longer under any injunction to provide them.
But Bunning’s injunction requires Davis to issue marriage licenses to any couple that comes in asking, including future couples. The lawyers are claiming that this condition of the injunction is improper for some reason.
How many layers of stupid is that ?
I have to be honest here, I really don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.
Is divorce less of a sin than same sex marriage, in the religion of Kim? I mean, it must be, because she has had no problem with issuing licenses to divorced people since she converted 4 years ago.
How does she decide which sins she should take a stand against? Is there like a chart or something?
It’s whatever causes the most liberals to have a stroke. 
Fortunately, we don’t think masturbation is a sin.
It’s the new kind of stupid that the religious have invented, the one where civil rights cases only apply to the plaintiffs of the case, and not to anyone else.
Which book of the bible is that in?
Well I think we should leave that to the theologians, hmm?
Hateronomy?
You misspelled “lawyers.”