Is it appropriate for progressives to mock Kim Davis's weight and fashion sense?

[Nye Bevan]

65 votes, 5 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes.
	11 (17%)
	No.
	54 (83%)
	5 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[CBGLuthier]

1. Nope, nor her religion.

The only thing she should be condemned for is failure to do her job.

[Psephos]

9. this n/t

[davidpdx]

16. I disagree...I think mocking her religion is within bounds since she is hiding behind it

so she doesn't have to do her job. I also think the multiple marriages, divorces, and children out of wedlock is fair game. Both show how much of a hypocrite she is.

[CBGLuthier]

19. Not really. She had those divorces and out of wedlock children before she became a christian

We can not say that religion does not matter, that this case is about someone refusing to do their job, and then turn around and condemn her for her religion.

That is just stupid and, oh what's that word, oh yeah, hypocritical.

I 100% support her right to believe whatever nonsense she cares to believe even if it is homophobic. I do not support her right to take taxpayer money and not follow the law.

[merrily]

32. Please don't make this about Christianity. It's HER personal religious beliefs.

I know many beautiful Christians, including clergy, who are NOT homophobic, who themselves may be GLBT and who, hetero or not, are not haters or punitive as to any group because of how members of that group were born.

That her personal beliefs lead her to think she can be a holier than thou, punitive POS in a secular job after the way she CHOSE to live her own life is not on Christianity or on all Christians--even assuming she is a Christian.

[Lordquinton]

92. I know many bigoted christians

Religion has a habit of fostering fear and hatred of the "other"

That your friends personal beliefs don't include hatred of gays in perticular is not a representative of the masses.

[merrily]

93. And? I know bigoted and good people of all faiths and philosophies. That woman can issue licenses

consistent with Christianity. She is choosing not to.

[Lordquinton]

129. Maybe wi your friend interpretation

But clearly not hers. Which one is the right one?

[840high]

180. I know many Christians that are not bigoted.

[cwydro]

100. I agree with you.

She may call herself Christian, but I think she worships at the altar of the Teabag.

I don't personally even care if she's bigoted; it's a free country, but she needs to do her JOB.

It does sicken me that she is an elected Democrat ffs.

[dsc]

117. that is absurd

but forget about her own life for a second, she is the clerk of courts which means she files divorce decrees and thus can find out who among those who are getting marriage licenses are divorcees. Yet she apparently makes no effort at all to determine this so she can apply the Bible which clearly and unambiguously condemns divorce and remarriage.

[Rob H.]

175. "She had those divorces and out of wedlock children before she became a christian"

No, she didn't. Turns out that Davis, in the midst of marrying, cheating, divorcing, getting remarried (once to someone to whom she'd already been married) wasn't some sort of godless, baby-eating heathen. Excerpt follows; full article, "The Federalist: Baptists Aren't Christians," is here.

And here's Mollie Hemingway writing at The Federalist in a piece titled "Kentucky Clerk Didn’t Follow Christianity Before Converting To It":

Now, if you disagree with journalists on the marriage topic, you should be prepared for them to go after you. They are still taking their time investigating almost any angle associated with Planned Parenthood’s harvesting of organs from aborted children, mind you, but they wasted no time doing a deep dive into Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis’ past. Perhaps the most interesting thing about her past, given that she’s waging a (losing) religious liberty battle, is that she is apparently a recent convert to Christianity—her conversion took place “about four years ago,” according to her legal counsel. Keep that in mind. She converted to Christianity about four years ago.

Yes, Davis has been divorced three times and is on her fourth marriage, Hemingway concedes, but not one {of} Davis' divorces "{took} place within the time period she was Christian." It's a miracle: Davis hasn't divorced anyone since becoming a Christian. So it's not fair and totally uncool for people to bring up Davis' own not-the-least-bit-biblical marital history. Davis isn't one of those "screw as I say, not as I screw" conservatives—she's not this guy or this guy or this guy—because she wasn't a Christian back when she was marrying and cheating and divorcing and marrying and divorcing and cheating and marrying and divorcing.

So what was Kim Davis back then? Was she a Zoroastrian? Was she a Rastafarian? Was she a Rosicrucian?

Kim Davis was a fucking Baptist.

Maybe I'm confused, it's possible I missed a memo, and Mollie Hemingway may know something I don't. But I was under the impression that Baptists are Christians.

And what do Baptists believe? They believe that marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman, that adultery is a sin, that gay people are gross, and that the Bible is the divinely inspired word of God and that it is without error and that we must take it literally....

Edited to add article name.

[RedCappedBandit]

25. HER "religion" dictates that she discriminate against people. seems mock-worthy.

[merrily]

33. Or so she claims. Please see Reply 32.

[RedCappedBandit]

186. Which is why I said HER "religion", and emphasized her.

[AlbertCat]

105. seems mock-worthy.

It is.

If Christianity allows such baloney to be so important, Christianity deserves mocking as well. She's not making up her holier-than-thou baloney out of whole cloth, y'know. She derives her "authority" from the same books every other Christian does.

Besides, she's playing Christian Martyr to the hilt.


Yes, truly mock worthy.

[mnhtnbb]

174. Many other Christian denominations (more main stream than hers) DO support marriage equality

There is no agreement among Christian denominations about marriage equality. Lots of
gay couples are able to be married by Christian ministers or priests.

So, where does she get off playing "God" and claiming to be the only person who can determine
what the hell God's authority is?

She has no business not following the law: it's her job.
The judge did the right thing sending her to jail.





Source: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/02/where-christian-churches-stand-on-gay-marriage/

[yeoman6987]

38. True. I haven't seen any bashing done on looks at least on DU

Religion is another matter. Lots of opinions on religions. But most just want her to do her job. Her case is weak because she is not a pastor or any religious leader and just gives out licenses which is an administrative function not religious.

[Ms. Toad]

56. Try this thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7137616

[yeoman6987]

60. I missed that luckily

I did read some of the comments. Kinda disappointing for progressives to say things like that.

[Tipperary]

68. I wanted to thank you for your responses in that thread but I did not want to bump that thread any

further. I have trashed it now so I can not see any more of those disappointing comments. But thank you.

[Ms. Toad]

70. You're welcome.

I often comment when DUers are attacking people because of their appearance on general principle. This is the first time it is not only general principle, but a personal emotional smack-up-side the head because of the similarity in our hair, weight, and at least one of the outfits she wears.

[Tipperary]

84. I do not care for her positions on this issue and I hope she is thrown out of her elected office,

but I completely agree with you. I do not see anything wrong with the way she wears her hair, many of my friends are shaped similarly, and I have to admit that I would not even notice if someone's "seams" did not match up. Shallow people are shallow. I hope you do not take any of those despicable comments seriously because none of those who commented in that way are worth one second of your time or thought. I have a very good friend who looks very much like her in terms of weight and hairstyle. I suppose I should pay more attention to what she wears (ha!) but I am more interested in her eyes, her smile, her wonderful loving self.

[840high]

181. There have been threads about her looks.

[whatthehey]

48. which is of course expressly and entirely caused by her religion, which is off limits why?

[CBGLuthier]

59. Because she has the right under the 1st amendment to believe whatever bullshit she wants

My problem with attacking her religion is that the RW is saying she has been locked up for being a christian and that is bullshit too. She is in trouble and gone to jail because she refuses to follow the law of the land. Nothing else should matter and nothing else does.

Personally I am fucking sick of so-called progressives making fun of people and belittling their beliefs. It lowers us. Is makes us not one fucking bit better than them. Concentrate on her actual transgression of not obeying the law.

And I am an atheist. But not one of those high-handed asshole atheists. If people want to believe in silly things and even hateful things I do not care. Just do your damned job if you work for the government or take your principles and resign.

[Tanuki]

63. She would be "standing up for her beliefs" by resigning in protest.

I grew up about 50 miles from Morehead and come from an Evangelical background myself, so I "get it". I would never mock her weight, choice of clothing, or religious beliefs, but she has no right to impose those beliefs on others, especially on the taxpayers' dime. Her mom was the clerk in that county for nearly 40 years prior to Ms. Davis' election, during 26 years of which Davis herself was deputy. Now that she is the clerk, her son is one of the deputies. It sounds as if her family has a pretty good thing going on and have become accustomed to a publicly funded cash flow. She promised when she was elected that she would "uphold the letter of the law." If her conscience no longer allows her to do that, she needs to move along. It's not about her faith, which she selectively applies and which doesn't prevent her from living in a marriage which her own denomination regards as adulterous. Her "conversion" four years ago doesn't exempt her from that inconvenient truth, even though it may absolve her of prior indiscretions. She is a hypocrite, but more to the point, she is violating the public trust.

[fishwax]

73. "whatever bullshit she wants" (sounds like mocking her religion)

[AlbertCat]

108. Because she has the right under the 1st amendment

Well, actually, the 1st amendment says CONGRESS can make no laws abridging speech.


It says nothing about what she can believe.


It also allows us to mock her for whatever we want.... and Congress can make no law against it.


DU could however if they wanted.

[Marr]

66. Bull. Shit. This is *exactly* the sort of thing that earns religion legitmate mockery.

When religious people use their beliefs to trample on other peoples' rights, they're making their religion an issue. You cannot insist that everyone show respect to someone's religion when they're using it as a club.

[smirkymonkey]

152. +100

[ladyVet]

173. I agree. I have no problem with her personal beliefs, but when she uses them to hurt others,

not to mention to break the law, then I have issues with it.

I don't care how she dresses, nor how she wears her hair (I've worn mine like that, especially when growing out my bangs, but that was before it became fundie chic). And I'm overweight and don't wear fashionable clothes. I'm sure I'm the topic of conversation when I'm out and about, but it's just clothes.

We have a large group around here of some Baptist off-shoot, not to mention lots of Mennonites and Amish who dress pretty much like this woman. I'm used to it, and it doesn't affect me, so why should I care? I saw a woman in a head scarf and modest dress the other week. Her covering her hair and body didn't bother me, she didn't try to shame me for dressing differently, so why should I care?

I don't care what church she goes to, nor what they preach, unless it harms another. Or breaks the law.

If she truly believed that issuing licenses to gay couples was something she personally could not do, then she should either authorize a willing deputy to do so in her name, or resign and let someone who is willing to follow the law take the office.

Something that gets me about people like this, is that they hate the government so much, but they sure won't stop suckling on that teat.

[HERVEPA]

76. Her religion yes, her fashion sense yes, her hypocrisy yes, her weight no.

[840high]

182. I'm sure you are fashion perfect. How sad.

[backscatter712]

78. Her batshit religion's fair game.

Her religion led to her discriminating against the LGBT community, led directly to her getting her sorry ass thrown in jail, and is full of bass-ackward nonsense.

Hey, I'm an atheist. I thrive on ridiculing religion. Especially hers...

[truebrit71]

89. Bullshit. She climbed up on that cross as a justification for her bigotry....

....And she STILL uses it to this very moment...

[LiberalAndProud]

90. I reserve the right to mock bigotry where I find it. When it is found in religion I mock.

and mock and mock

Her religion is the reason for this egregious behavior. To name it off limits to the discussion is ridiculous in the extreme. I'm sorry people believe stupid things for whatever reason. To name stupid ideas out of bounds because they are rooted in religions protects too many very wrong ideas simply because they are based in Faith and Belief.

[AlbertCat]

106. THIS ^

"To name stupid ideas out of bounds because they are rooted in religions protects too many very wrong ideas simply because they are based in Faith and Belief."


and again


"To name stupid ideas out of bounds because they are rooted in religions protects too many very wrong ideas simply because they are based in Faith and Belief."

[Warren Stupidity]

112. her religion needs a shit ton of mocking

[Arugula Latte]

137. Wrong. Her beliefs are fair game, just like Republican beliefs are fair game.

[Warren DeMontague]

155. Is it permissible to "mock" those who genuinely believe The Earth is 6,000 years old?

Sorry, some shit deserves to be mocked.

[840high]

179. + a zillion.

[Bettie]

187. She should be mocked for using her religion

as an excuse not to do her job.

Some will see that as mocking her religion, I see it as mocking her twisting of religion. Her supporters are guilty of the same thing, using religion as a tool to harm others.

[Juicy_Bellows]

2. No, but I'll mock the bajesus outta her hypocritical bullshit behavior. nt.

[Cha]

3. Jury results.. I was #3

Is it appropriate for progressives to mock Kim Davis's weight and fashion sense?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027138918

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Is sanctimonious finger wagging appropriate?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Sep 4, 2015, 12:10 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The political correctness here is often over the top.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The Alert Squad is what needs to get a HIDE. Alerting over every damn thing. If you don't like the OP.. debate it.

Some things are egregious and do need to be hidden but there's too many itchy fingers out there.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't know the reference the alerter is making. As a stand-alone post, there's nothing here that's offensive. Vote to leave.
.Centaur.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I have no idea what this was alerted.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't believe anyone on this board should be made fun of, period. It's rude.

[Suich]

5. It got alerted on??????????

Good grief...I've seen some idiot alerts lately but this takes the cake!

[Cha]

15. Ergo, my message to the alerter.

[longship]

178. As usual, Cha, I am happy to stand with you. nt

[MADem]

4. Fashion sense? SURE. Why not.

We've made fun of L'il Boots Bush and his cowboy hats, Paul Ryan's stupid backwards hat while weight lifting, Mitt Romney's Mom jeans, Donald's idiotic hair style, etc. You think the GOP will eschew going after HRC for everything from her hair to her pantsuits and who knows what else?

Being rotten about fashion is a team sport. This woman chose to be a national public figure by disobeying her charge to issue marriage licenses. She's gonna get a good look-see.

Being cruel about weight is not a good move, though.

[Psephos]

10. It's not team sport.

It's petty and cruel.

The issue here is whether, in a nation of laws, she upholds the law. She should be rightly condemned for failing to do that. The rest is indulgence of what's small and ugly, and destructive of a better world.

[MADem]

12. Sorry--I don't agree. There's nothing funnier than Bush in a too-tight, sweat stained shirt.

And there's nothing wrong with noticing. We are visual creatures, we notice things. And public figures do not have a right to privacy. One can take mocking too far, but if you think that this woman's "fashion sense" won't be highlighted should SNL decide to do a spoof on her boneheaded conduct, I have a bridge to sell you. Visual cues--to include quirks--are noticed by people, and they're made into fodder for political humor. It's public life for ya.

If you want to be "high minded" about it, fine, but don't expect everyone else to follow your lead. It is a team sport--otherwise Google wouldn't give you so many hits when you google fashion and certain public figures.

Turn off your TV, say goodbye to Maher, Oliver, SNL, and the late night talkers--they do this kind of thing all the time.

[AlbertCat]

107. It's petty and cruel.

None of it is as cruel as she is. And her offense are not petty.

She's in the public sphere now.... she will just have to take it.

[Tipperary]

116. It is not about her taking it. It is about

the kind of people who make fun of others' appearance and weight.

[840high]

183. Agree 100%

[spinbaby]

36. Fashion sends messages

Women on the religious right favor frumpy dresses and very long hair, which sends a complicated but very specific message. This is not lack of fashion sense, it's dressing to group identity.

[xmas74]

47. I agree.

Mocking her weight is absolutely wrong. Mocking her fashion sense, otoh, is fine.

What she has chosen to wear and how she is presenting herself is part of her identity. The grooming and outfits are chosen to present herself as a born-again hardline conservative Christian. She is purposely doing this to curry favor and I'd bet it's working.

We mock the Duggars and the Bates for sticking their women in potato sacks and permed hair. (We worry about and pity the women for their experiences.) Why is this woman any different? She chose this lifestyle. She makes decent money that's not the issue.

IMO, mock away.

[JoePhilly]

54. Plus, she's wearing garments with mixed fibers.

God HATES that!!

[mythology]

74. This is my position.

I don't know why she's overweight. Some overweight people are such outside of their control. I don't know if she is in that category and so I don't think attacking that is okay.

But her clothing is entirely her choice. She's not destitute. She could afford more tasteful clothing.

That said, it's her bigotry and refusal to do her job that I care about most.

[AlbertCat]

109. Some overweight people are such outside of their control.

Considering her past, she does't seem to have much self "control" over more important things than her weight or fashion. She seems like a spoiled brat who thinks she can just do as she pleases, and then make up excuses for her behavior.

I find it (like a lot of "religious behavior&quot extremely egotistical. It's all about her and her need to show how much better she is than everybody. She even thinks her past is irrelevant...she's so awesome now! She is loving her martyr role. "Look at me! LOOK AT ME!"



BS to the max.

[840high]

184. So you define what's tasteful? Glad you

don't seem me on week-ends.

[ericson00]

6. she mocked our way of life and government,

not gonna be PC for her.

[LostOne4Ever]

7. I don't think it is

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]But I don't think we should be giving her any attention at all. Rather, I think we should focus on congratulating the couples who fought her (and the state before her) for so very long.

Raising the level of the discourse begins with oneself.[/font]

[demosincebirth]

8. I never gave it a second thought, but bringing up this poll is mocking her.

[Behind the Aegis]

11. Her weight? No. Her fashion sense? No, but in the grand sceme, so what.

However, her religion? Yes! It is the basis of her bigotry and therefore, IMO, "fair game." She made it about religion.

[Logical]

157. IYO you are wrong. But I assume makng fun of people in general is OK with you. nt

[longship]

13. I think ridicule is appropriate here.

So I myself have ridiculed her sartorial senses. I would not say anything about her weight, however.

But somebody as ridiculous as Kim Davis deserves only ridicule. So her lack of sartorial style is certainly an appropriate target. As is the hypocrisy of her religion.

But no. Not her weight. Which I had not even thought about.

[dorkzilla]

27. I agree

I've not ridiculed anything but her hypocrisy...and her fivehead. And her resemblance to Dick Cheney. And her bullying her deputies to also disregard the law because of her newly-found conscience, not because of their own.

Yeah she pretty much deserves all the ridicule we can throw her way.

[eridani]

14. What happened to the FUCK NO!!! option? n/t

[YabaDabaNoDinoNo]

17. No weight, Yes Mock Fashion, Yes mock her religion because she is the one who brought her religion

to the table which IMHO makes it fair game for mockery.

[Spider Jerusalem]

18. there are as many childish assholes on our side as there are on the other side

I would have thought you'd have noticed this by now.

[quaker bill]

20. It is not productive

but we need a sense of humor, as getting all guilt-trippy about it is not productive either.

[kcr]

99. Getting all guilt-trippy about it. Well said.

I don't think it's nice to make fun of how people look of course, but there's something about threads like this that are so off-putting. They almost feel like they're meant to distract from the issue. I really don't care about the posts making fun of how she dresses and I don't care if that somehow makes me horrible in some people's eyes. I don't feel a bit guilty about it. I'm glad she isn't getting away with her hate.

[backscatter712]

21. Her weight? No. How she dresses and her religion? Yes.

Her weight is biology. Not easy to take control of one's weight, so making fun of it is off limits.

But she gets to choose what clothes she puts on in the morning (except today, she gets the lovely orange jumpsuit whether she likes it or not.) Fair game.

And she chose her derpy, bigoted religious beliefs that resulted in her actions and incarceration. OPEN SEASON!

[ileus]

22. She's one of them even though she's one of us.

Around here anything goes when it comes to our enemies.

[RandiFan1290]

23. More bad news, eh?

[Vinca]

24. She's mocking the Constitution.

[RedCappedBandit]

26. I don't care what she looks like or how she dresses. It's what she does that matters.

Making fun of her outfit is some childish bullshit. Mocking her because of her weight is lookism.

[romanic]

28. I won't make potshots at her weight

but everything else is up for fair game. And I don't give a shit either because she's a hateful bigoted little Xtian who thinks she's above the law.

[mnhtnbb]

29. I suppose this OP is aimed at me for daring to suggest she could use some fashion advice

based on her perp walk.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027137616

I stand by my comments in that thread...and particularly what I wrote this morning.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7139106

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7139148

I have never mocked her weight: I only suggested that she could make different choices for what she
wears that would take away some of the mocking a la Duggar dressing.

[DonViejo]

40. Please see....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027138918#post39 regarding her "fashion sense"

[Logical]

158. Yes, I hope it is. People like you make DU look bad. And insult others who look like her. nt

[Tipperary]

30. It is despicable and it would not happen except

for the fact Kim Davis is female. I'm sad to see how many shallow people there are here. No doubt those who criticize are in perfect shape and always dress impeccably.

[merrily]

37. As of this post, 84% have voted no.

[Tipperary]

53. I am glad to see that. But there was another thread where posters were falling all over themselves

to exclaim how awful she looks, dresses, and how much she weighs. The woman is a complete fool, a rightwing nutjob, but I just wish we were better than what I saw in that thread. She is getting twice as much attention for her looks and "fashion" choices as any man would. It is just sickening to me no matter where this nastiness is coming from.

[backscatter712]

80. I guess I'll have to go back to making fun of Trump's "hair" then.

[Democat]

144. No one has ever made fun of Trump's hair because he's a man

People only make fun of women on DU.

[dembotoz]

31. Her stance is repugnant enuf all by itself

Funny using a tablet and as typing repugnant the word Republican kept coming up

[merrily]

34. Leave no shit unstirred.

[Lulu Belle]

35. This is why I have much respect

For most here.
You stick to your principles even when the other side does not.
Thanks!

[DonViejo]

39. Her "fashion sense" is directly related to her religious beliefs....

I have three in-laws that are fundamentalist/literalist in their religious views; all the women/girls, once achieving the age of 18, must wear their hair long (back in the day when these mandates about hair length were issued, only prostitutes wore short hair styles); they must wear long skirts, the women wear jumpers with a long sleeved blouse under it and, actually, any time they wear a dress/jumper or whatever with a "low" neckline, the women wear a garment underneath the low cut neckline garment, keeping their chest covered and preventing a man's wandering eyes from checking out her bosom. My sisters-in-law wear either white socks or leotards so as not to display their ankles and sexually arouse men. I noticed Kim Davis doesn't go quite so far as to hide her ankles; the picture taken of her in the perp walk shows her bare ankled. No jewelry, makeup, gold.

Christian sharia law in America.

[Nye Bevan]

41. So should we mock the hijabs worn by Muslim women who oppose marriage equality? (nt)

[DonViejo]

43. Did I say, or even suggest, she should be mocked for her attire?

On edit:

Check the voting in your poll, I voted no.

[DonViejo]

49. Courtesy is a one way street with you, huh?

You asked a question, intended to snag me into officially being disapproved of by you, I responded. I asked you a question, you went silent.

[backscatter712]

81. My university campus has a decent-sized Muslim population.

And some of the women wearing the hijab really make themselves look good.

Yeah, I'd say that Kim Davis could make herself look a lot better and more fashionable while obeying her religious clothing rules, but she just doesn't give a shit.

[mnhtnbb]

45. All of which is intended to make women feel bad about themselves.

It's no accident that the Christian sects which emphasize covering everything
up also think women's role is to be subservient to men.

Women are powerful, beautiful creatures. Look at art through history.
If you want to limit that power, be sure to cover up the beauty of a woman's
body and make her feel guilty for being created with such power that
life literally comes from within her.

The patriarchal dominated religions--Christian, Muslim, Jewish--that want women to be
subservient make sure that women are forced to cover themselves up.

So this woman--Kim Davis--abides by some right wing dress code, but will not abide
by the tenets of her Apostolic Christian Church which INCLUDE being obedient to
government. Kind of strange, isn't it? Makes you wonder what else is going on in
her head.

For those interested, check out #17 in the Statement of Faith from the website for the Apostolic
Christian Church.

17. Governmental authority is respected and obeyed. Members serve in a non-combatant status in the military. Oaths are not taken, but truth is affirmed.

Matthew 22:21
Luke 3:14
Romans 13:1-10
1 Timothy 2:1-2
Hebrews 12:14
James 5:12
1 Peter 2:12-14

http://www.apostolicchristian.org/page.cfm?p=555

[etherealtruth]

110. Agree, Don ... this isn't "fashion sense" it is religious proscription

... the banning of cutting hair, the banning of unfeminine and immodest dress (is proscribed by religion).

Like you, I would no more mock someone wearing a yarmulke, a hijab, a dastaar ....however, I do not understand the problem with pointing out that her particular mode of dress is not "fashion" it is religious declaration. She is claiming that her refusal to follow the law is a religious declaration, so I see no issue whatsoever in pointing this out.

[Skittles]

147. ankles arouse men?

who knew?

[DonViejo]

148. That's what my sisters-in-law tell me...

actually, it's the bare skin that gets the men all a twitter.

[Skittles]

162. that's their problem

I don't like it when women are blamed for the feelings / actions of others - that right there is pure misogyny

[TeddyR]

42. No

Doing so is childish and nothing more than internet bullying that we would attack if someone on the right did it.

[cwydro]

88. Well said.

And welcome to DU!

[840high]

185. Yep.

[Rex]

44. Not a very progressive thing to do imo.

However she made herself a public target for ridicule and this is a free country. I guess you just have to decide for yourself.

[book_worm]

46. Of course not--I'm sure there are many better looking people in Ky & in the US

who agree with her. Looks should have nothing to do with it. We oppose her because she is just plain bigoted and wrong.

[MoonRiver]

50. No, but sure is tempting!

[abelenkpe]

51. Weight no.

[Facility Inspector]

52. Her dehumanization of gays is worse than anything

[DrDan]

55. no - it is the kind of thing you see in middle-school

we should be above it.

This includes mocking her religion. Questioning it based on ideas is ok - but mocking? nope.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

57. In all honesty, I don't think it helps.

Because the story concerns issues that are so important to the gay community and their legal rights, making shallow comments about one's weight and fashion sense runs the risk of opponents playing to the offensive stereotypical image of the petty, snarky, superficial fashion obsessed queen all up in a tizzy. When we really ought to be talking about the much more important issue of having the rule of law enforced on a governmental clerical level regardless of one's individual personal beliefs.

So no, I don't think it's appropriate or helpful to distract from the greater issue like that.

[Bluenorthwest]

58. All is fair in love and war and in the war for love it's all double fair. However her actions are so

absurdly hypocritical that there is no need to go with low brow comments. She cites a religion that commands her to be silent and forbids her from having authority over men to explain why she's screaming at men to do as she says. Who cares how dowdy her clothing is when she's ranting about sanctity on marriage #4. She's a hypocrite by my standards, a heretic by her religion's standards.
But when it comes to bullies one really does not need to play fair, the bully is not playing fair. Fair play follows the rules agreed upon and what Davis is doing is refusing to follow the rules, she's cheating, her game is inherently unfair. She claims the right to make the rules and then command others to follow her orders. She has no standing to request 'fair play'. She's a rule breaking Constitution hating liar.

[MillennialDem]

61. Well, both are changeable, unlike sexual orientation and gender identity.

[Person 2713]

67. Agree^^

[Iggo]

62. No and Yes.

[One_Life_To_Give]

64. Then who is next? Chris Christie for being Fat?

Ann Coulter for her low cut blouse?
Then Hillary, Elisabeth etc.

Really shaming someone should be about matters of substance and not sexist drivel. Unless we are ready to tell everyone in Politics "Your Ugly and Your Mother Dresses You Funny"

[Tipperary]

69. Oh there has been plenty of both here on the DU.

[geek tragedy]

65. weight no, fashion sense yes nt

[merrily]

95. If a man were doing this, would you focus on his outfits?

[geek tragedy]

98. If he were dressing Amish, you bet. nt

[merrily]

104. Except she is not dressing Amish.

[Warren Stupidity]

113. focus? no, but if he looked ridiculous I'd certainly mention it.

[Democat]

145. People make fun of Donald Trump's hair every day

Probably more than they make fun of anyone else around here.

[Lancero]

71. It's a bit fishy to attack her on her weight, rather then her actions...

Maybe they secretly agree with what she's done and want to attack her to try and 'fit in' with the rest of DU who calls her out on her blatant bigotry?

It's nice that DU shows who voted what though - Lets just say that some people voting for one of the choices doesn't surprise me at all.

[Xyzse]

72. Too much to mock as is, there is no reason to go for her looks.

[joeybee12]

75. Definitely not her looks...but her fashion...well, I have a smiliar nutjob

at work...she has long hair because her husband would allow her to cut it, and she wears long dresses because that's all her husband allows...I wonder if this same thing is going on with Davis, that her "religion" is so patriarchal and sexist.

[randys1]

77. I just want to elect Quakers in every GA AL TX KY WV county for clerk who issues gun licenses

[joeybee12]

79. Start a GoFundMe Account!

[Frank Cannon]

103. I worked with another fundie nut who could be Kim's twin sister.

It seems that there's a "look" they're going for. I won't make fun of it, but it is a sign that you should avoid the person.

[joeybee12]

139. Yeah...I agree...

The look is pretty cultish.

[Tipperary]

82. K and R.

I hope this thread stays kicked and I thank you for posting it.

[LanternWaste]

83. I can only speak for myself

I can only speak for myself-- mocking any one person for anything is wrong, regardless of how many times I myself may engage in it. I do tend to creatively rationalize (to myself) that mocking someone for something they choose to do is far more righteous than mocking them for something they don't choose. However, at the end of the day, the result is the same, and the poison unchanged.

But, as I'm often told, I certainly can't impose my personal belief onto anyone else (including the demographic of Progressives).

[GOLGO 13]

85. I'll mock who I want & how I want.

It's your problem if you don't like it.

[cwydro]

86. Good for you.

I've seen posts today that remind me of the mean girls of junior high school.

Very sad.

I'm glad to see most here have grown beyond that.

[TeddyR]

130. You go!

You internet bully. I'd hope that most Dems can move beyond mocking someone based on their weight, clothes, race or whatever, since that adds nothing to the adult conversation.

[Shandris]

87. Mockery is petty, childish, and cruel.

We can't POSSIBLY claim to hope for a 'better future' when our archetypical response to those we disagree with is to treat them like we're back in 4th grade or exterminate them.

Neither option is a 'better future'. Neither is progressive. In fact, they are pretty much the definition of regressive.

(Edit to add: Which naturally doesn't mean I've never done it, or never do it. I'm not perfect. But on principle, the point stands.)

[cwydro]

91. ...

[Warren Stupidity]

114. mockery is an excellent method of viral meme generation

taking the mock tool away is full of self-defeating pompous prudery.

[Shandris]

115. I don't consider memes a good tool.

Effective and good are two entirely different things. Sure, it's effective. It's also slimy.

There's a reason we got away from shaming. But I guess we're going to make it memetic warfare instead, because wounds that can HEAL apparently just aren't enough.

[Warren Stupidity]

125. ah of course we must rise above the fray.

Perhaps we should shun the internets entirely. A letter campaign would surely be the most righteous activity. We could reach out to hundreds. Think of the children!

[Shandris]

128. Well, at least your name fits.

Have a coke and a smile!

[Warren Stupidity]

138. wait - I thought you were staking out the moral high ground and now you mock my name?

[Shandris]

140. Persecution complex much?

"Warren stupidity". "War and stupidity." Two great things that go great together.

When mockery is your only weapon, everything you see suddenly looks like mockery. 'Case in point', perhaps.

Ah, well. Either way, I don't care enough to respond again.

[Democat]

146. We must not respond to the Swiftboat attacks, people will realize they are wrong on their own

It's better to lose every election but sleep well at night.

[Warren Stupidity]

149. The important thing is to feel superior

not to communicate effectively.

[TeddyR]

132. If I knew how to rec a post

I'd rec this one. Someone who'd bully on the internet is no different that someone who'd bully in person, and no better. In short, you're a bully and a coward.

[backscatter712]

150. Ridicule is a powerful weapon against oppressors.

Last edited Sun Sep 6, 2015, 04:27 PM - Edit history (1)

And yes, contrary to popular belief, Kim Davis is an oppressor. Up to the point where she pissed off a judge by defying a direct court order to stop her oppression and got jailed for contempt.

Do you think anyone would be bringing up Kim Davis's four marriages if she wasn't using her government-granted authority to force her batshit fundy religion on the LGBT community?

No. Under any other circumstances, it'd be none of our business. Lots of people have multiple marriages.

But she had to go and inflict her religious fucknuttery using government authority and power to tell gay people they can't marry because God said so.

So we go and see if she's following the rules of her own religion.

Nope.



As the chart shows she is the Queen of Cuckolds. So if I was a right-wing carpet-biter, I wouldn't be using words like "cuckservative" if I was howling for Kim Davis's "religious freeeeeeedom".

She's a hypocrite. She goes out and tries to deny the LGBTQIA community basic civil rights, while she gets to have four marriages and multiple affairs, and then parades herself about in her fucking piety act, wearing her religiously ordained birth-control clothing.

Yeah, she's a legitimate target.

[smirkymonkey]

153. Ow, my head hurts. WTF?

What a complicated marital history.

[backscatter712]

160. And her marriage's and cheating is fair fucking game.

She tried to use government power to tell the LGBT community that they're doing it wrong, that they're being immoral, so she won't allow them to marry.

Well, she's fucking doing it wrong. Four times. She's one to talk. At least I'm not trying to use government authority to tell her who she can or can't marry.

[etherealtruth]

94. What you are calling fashion sense ....

... may be dictated by her religion.

Pentecostal women re expected to NOT cut their hair and wear "feminine attire" (read a skirt or dress) that is completely covering.

I am not saying it should or should not be mocked .... just pointing out that if she is Pentecostal .... its not fashion sense it is religion

[mnhtnbb]

118. You are precisely right. She belongs to a Pentecostal church that demeans women

by requiring a dress code: you know, those evil temptresses with their seductive ways that entice men to do evil things because they're so irresponsible they don't know when to keep their pants zipped.

In order to be considered for submission your church must teach and maintain a basic doctrine of holiness and separation. We understand that there are degrees of teaching on this subject but expect pastors who wish to submit their church's website to adhere to the basic doctrine of holiness as taught in the bible. This includes no ornamental jewelry, colored makeup, uncut hair for women and modesty in dress for both men and women which include pants for men and dresses that are below the knee for women. We reserve the right to refuse submission to any church that we believe is not upholding the Apostolic Doctrine and Biblical teaching of Holiness and separation

.

http://www.apostolic-churches.com/about.html

[etherealtruth]

120. I am at a loss as to why people are being jumped on for pointing this out ..?

What she looks like is not pertinent except in the sense that it is indicative of a very particular sect of Christianity .... and she is basing her bigotry and illegal actions on the teachings of that sect.


As to the subjugation of women by that sect .... Oy, I agree

[mnhtnbb]

121. It's supposed to be PC not to comment on a woman's attire

I have been called out as a misogynist because I raised questions about her clothing choices.
Turns out, she's complying with a church dress code...which tells you more about how
she feels about herself as not being worthy/capable/godly enough to make her own choices
without men setting standards for her than her fashion sense. I'd love to see some photos
of her prior to her conversion. Who knows? She might have dressed quite differently--or
maybe not so much. I think the real misogyny is practiced by the church she has chosen to attend.

[etherealtruth]

122. I would never comment on someone's looks ... for the sake of aesthetics ....

... however, pointing out that she is an adherent to a particular religious sect as evidenced by her dress is in no way misogynistic (on its own ... the idiot comments r/t perceived attractiveness, weight etc ARE) ... I think it is more offensive to refer to religious adherence as "fashion sense" ... would we ever call a man's choice to wear a yarmulke as "fashion sense" .... I don't think so

[Liberal_in_LA]

96. no, but her style reminds me of the Duggar woman.

[steve2470]

97. She is legally in the wrong

That's all that needs to be said. She needs to resign her post. Everything else is superfluous.

[mnhtnbb]

119. She's not going to resign because she knew going in that this could happen

and she ran for the office anyway.

She is up to something--and it's mostly in the service of trying to install a theocracy in this country.

[steve2470]

124. theocracy and a big $$$$ payoff somehow

Call me cynical but I don't think she's doing this for "her God" alone.

[flor-de-jasmim]

101. ABSOLUTELY NOT. Neither is relevant to religious views.

Just because we agree with a position she makes is no reason to belittle weight or fashion sense. I am amazed at the number of people who think it is OK. Doing so is engaging in behavior that is in the same arena as Trump referring to MK's period, although MUCH milder, of course. It is talk that tries to diminish the other on irrelevant issues, but serves mostly to show a lack of class on the part of Trump, in this example.

[cwydro]

102. Saturday kick. nt

[AngryOldDem]

111. Both are irrelevant.

And it strikes me as kind of Trumpesque. I would hope progressives would be above that ad hominem crap and stick to the issue -- if she can't/won't do her job as a public official (follow the law), then she should step down. Period, end of story.

[Deadshot]

123. I do what I think is appropriate.

Not what anyone else thinks.

[TeddyR]

133. Ok

So you think it is appropriate to bully someone because of their religious beliefs? What about their weight, skin color or country or origin? To be clear, I don't want a single solitary bully in my political party. If you don't like someone because of the way they look then go vote for Donald Trump.

[orpupilofnature57]

126. Of her sense of entitlement, that runs all trough government though .

[w0nderer]

127. Without going for her Weight, or fashion sense or even Religion

She's still a wide open target in so many ways that I'm sure the entire comedy circuit are rubbing their hands.


Keeping it a little on 'target' just serves to emphasize the point one makes with the humor.

[TeddyR]

134. How about we don't "mock" at all

And keep the conversation to the issues, and not the individuals?

[w0nderer]

136. how about you do that

and i'll do what i want (which didn't involve individuals until you mentioned it, thanks for the great idea)



oh on 'don't mock'
jon stewart
colbert
jonathan swift
shakespeare
(for a short list) all have something in common

[Tipperary]

141. Those people mock issues, not weight ir

other personal attributes.

[w0nderer]

142. and?

did you read my first post in that thread or just randomly post?

[TeddyR]

151. If it makes you feel better to mock someone

Because of their looks or the way they dress then feel free. I'll simply say again that I don't want bullies like you in my political party.

[w0nderer]

171. you didn't read my entry and then called me a bully

and then called for me to leave YOUR party ? YOUR PARTY?

was that really the best you could do
not even reading when i SAID clearly
in plain simple prepared for internet fast reading comprehension english

taken from the headline of my FIRST post
"Without going for her Weight, or fashion sense or even Religion"

and you reply with
" If it makes you feel better to mock someone Because of their looks or the way they dress then feel free."

it doesn't make me feel better, but i'm well enough trained in a multitude of 'political tricks' to know that it is a USEFUL
tool to be used, sarcasm, irony, humor, negative information released at the right time, positive information released at the right time, releasing a banger (big headline) to hide a headline from the opposition, etc etc etc

if all those offend you perhaps politics isn't quite the game for you?

[Mike Nelson]

131. Easy no...

She's not promoting herself as fashionable or thin - and neither has anything to do with the issues.

[sdfernando]

135. He'll no!!!

There so much that is legit to criticize her for. We don't need to go to the gutter on this.

[Kali]

143. I confess I laughed at the side by side

of her and Cathy Bates. OMG had to edit to add another one http://www.discussionist.com/102431268

I think ridicule of her religious-based attire is a little petty but I don't care all that much. I enjoyed making fun of the dip shit in his prezidentin' cowboy boots and other various costumes.

Making fun of her weight is kind of shitty.

[Warren DeMontague]

154. To paraphrase yoda, my own council I will keep on what is "appropriate" or not.

Maybe the weight is a bit of a cheap shot, but the burlap unitards she wears are fair game.

[Logical]

156. Nice to see the ones who voted YES. Nice to expose them. nt

[Ligyron]

159. I'll mock her dress and her hair

but I refuse to make fun of her because she is fat.

or call her a pig or anything else related to her obesity.

[backscatter712]

161. I'll mock her religiously approved birth control clothing.

Her hideous clothes are part of how she markets herself.

She markets herself as the Good Christian, using her Holy Authority to tell the gay community that they're Doing It Wrong. She won't allow them to marry, because she's God's Own Pinch Hitter, and using her authority as an elected official to wield the baseball bat of God's Holy Justice.

Her clothes make her look ridiculous, and they're a costume. They're chosen to show how fucking pious she is, with the long dress with the mismatched seam, and the romper over blouse that makes sure her evil woman parts won't tempt anyone.

It's a costume she uses to show the world that she's a woman of God, and we're not. Fair game for mockery.

Religiously approved birth control clothing.

But her marriage history shows us how fucking phony her repulsive costume is. She looks pious, but it's just a fucking act. Four marriages and multiple affairs are proof.

Her clothes make her ugly on the outside, deliberately, while her bigoted bass-ackwards attitudes and her hypocrisy make her ugly on the inside.

Who in their right mind would want to fuck her? Boggles my mind.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

163. If you draw attention to yourself in such an awful way

you deserve to be mocked.

[mnhtnbb]

164. Some DU'ers have a short memory--or selective memory--or weren't here when GWB

took a LOT of mocking for this. It was a costume--worn with intent-- just like what Kim Davis chooses to
wear to draw attention to herself as a "Godly woman". Turns out she's just as much of a phony as GWB.




http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3245361

[backscatter712]

166. Haha! Who can forget Commander Codpiece? n/t

[frogmarch]

165. No, and I

regret criticizing her because the stripes on her skirt in the off-to-jail photo didn’t match at the seams.

Sorry. I just couldn't help it.

[backscatter712]

168. I don't regret it.

Remember, the Annie Wilkes outfits are a costume, designed to show that she's the God-Fearing Christian (TM) who gets to tell other people who they can and can't marry despite her sordid marriage history.

[frogmarch]

169. I know, and me neither, really.

I forgot to add the sarcasm thingy.

[Drunken Irishman]

167. She's disgusting both inside and out.

I'd have more sympathy for her if she wasn't such a wretched woman. Same with Chris Christie and Donald Trump. Both are ugly, bloated men but that's only amplified by the fact they're even uglier on the inside.

[lumberjack_jeff]

170. How times change.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5816671

[hobbit709]

172. When you publicly make a mockery of the law, you deserve whatever flak you get.

[nomorenomore08]

176. I think "appropriateness" is partly a matter of opinion here. But personally, I would tend to avoid

juvenile cheap-shots like that. There are more effective ways of rebuking people.

[cheapdate]

177. I won't mock a person's weight. All else is fair game.

I won't lie, mockery is a skill and an art in certain circles where I run. Accolades are given to those who mock well. But this is a private, "inside" affair. Public mockery is something else. It's generally distasteful and not a winning strategy for influencing opinion.