Homosexuality US Constitution US Court US Court Ruling

MADONNA’S BROTHER DEFENDS KIM DAVIS BUT IS HALF RIGHT, INVOKES FALSE COMPARISON TO MUSLIM DOING THE SAME AND MORE…….

He’s half right, but still more right than most commentators have been.

Madonna’s brother deserves some kudos for daring to stick his head above the parapet, for surely there are those on his side of the aisle wanting to lobb it off for daring to speak his mind. But he’s only half right, this brave woman sticking up for her religious beliefs cannot be compared to a Muslim woman working in a similar position, dressed in a full veil refusing the public on a whole array of islamic based reasons.

The always impressive J.E.Dyer addresses just that in a piece from a few days ago, available under the headlines article in the NY Daily News.

Madonna’s openly gay brother defends Kentucky clerk Kim Davis, calls gay community ‘sore winners’

Madonna's openly gay brother Christopher Ciccone defended jailed Kentucky clerk Kim Davis in a Facebook post.

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Monday, September 7, 2015, 10:00 AM
[…]

Christopher Ciccone defended Kim Davis in a Saturday Facebook post, arguing that she should not be persecuted for her religious beliefs and calling the gay community “sore winners.”

“The county clerk in Kentucy (sic) deserves about as much support as you would give her if she were a muslim women who insisted on covering her face and refused not only gay marriages licenses, but divorce, accusations of rape and driving a car without ur mans (sic) approval,” he wrote.

NYDAILYNEWS H/T: Weasel Zippers

I defer to J.E. Dyer, she offers the best understanding of the Kim Davis affair that I’ve come across:

The response from such critics has been, “Just do your job or resign!”

That’s understandable, and some commentators have advanced the (partially) valid point that we would rightly expect a Muslim to not interpose religious objections when asked to perform her duties as a public servant.

One example offered is issuing business licenses for companies that sell liquor or pork.  This argument is only partially valid, however, because the expectations of official behavior typically follow first the preferences of a majority of the people.  If America were somehow to be a Muslim-majority polity with the same structure of public offices and duties, there would be little objection to public officials refusing to issue licenses to sell liquor and pork.  In fact, the law would probably say they shouldn’t.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *