I didn’t want to start a Twitter fight with the guy who posted this, but I did feel it was necessary to call it out, just to clarify.
Disclaimer: NO, I am NOT defending this woman in any way, shape or form.
The picture is of the Kentucky clerk who refused to provide marriage licenses to same-sex couples (as well as some “traditional” ones, as the above image would have it). She did so due to her religious belief that same-sex marriage is against God.
The above image calls her out as being a hypocrite; while she so adamantly fights for “traditional” marriage in the name of Christ, she’s actually been divorced and remarried several times, thus [apparently] going against what Christianity and the Bible define as “traditional” marriage.
HOWEVER, the image is wrong.
As much as I hate to say it, Kim Davis is not a hypocrite regarding traditional, Christian marriages.
Kim Davis is a Protestant. In Protestantism, divorce is perfectly acceptable, even encouraged. It is said that if you are with your God-given soulmate, then there will never be anything severely wrong in the relationship. But if you are experiencing issues, then you are not with your God-given soulmate and thus should separate. Said separation is perfectly okay because if you aren’t with God’s match for you, then the matrimony isn’t even that holy to begin with. So break apart and go find your soulmate! We’re only human, after all; we may not know our perfect match when we first see him or her and thus may make a mistake. So fix the mistake. That’s what God would want.
The only way that Kim Davis would be a hypocrite in the sense of “traditional” marriage is if she was Catholic, for Catholicism is the branch of Christianity in which no divorces are allowed. But she isn’t. She would also be a hypocrite if those said marriages were to wives instead of husbands. But they weren’t.
So, yeah. The graphic is wrong.
Once again, though, DON’T THINK I’M DEFENDING HER. I’m not. Not by a long shot…
What she did was unconstitutional. It would be different if she was working at a church and the government was trying to make the church marry same-sex couples, but she was working for a public, government entity. So she had no right to hold back the licenses, whether she liked it or not.
If she didn’t want to give them out, then she should have just quit. However, she chose to keep her job, which means that she also chose to still give out the licenses. So the situation is entirely her fault.
And even with governmental duty aside, as an apparent Christian, she should well know that unfair treatment of anyone is never in the name of God. He loves us all, from the Pope in Rome to the gay couple down the street to the drug dealer in the hood to the murderer sitting in jail. What He hates is those sins we’ve chosen to do. He doesn’t hate us, though, which in turn makes Him expect us to not hate each other for anything, either.
So as a Christian, she technically should have given those marriage licenses, if only out of love; we’re all humans, all brothers and sisters united under one Father, and so we should support each other to the best of our abilities (just as long as no one is physically getting hurt, of course). She should have signed those licenses and handed them over with a smile, not discriminating against them for a sin but instead loving them despite it, as God does. As God wants us to do.
So if we want to talk about her being a hypocrite regarding the Christian religion, we shouldn’t be focusing on her various marriages. Rather, we should be focusing on her physical act, for it’s the most un-Christian thing she could have ever done.
Don’t believe everything you read on the internet, kids.