Gay rights group posts billboard in Kim Davis’ Kentucky town

Print More
Planting Peace erected a billboard in Davis' hometown of Morehead, Ky., that reads: "Dear Kim Davis, The fact that you can't sell your daughter for three goats and a cow means we've already redefined marriage." Photo courtesy Planting Peace

Planting Peace erected a billboard in Davis' hometown of Morehead, Ky., that reads: "Dear Kim Davis, The fact that you can't sell your daughter for three goats and a cow means we've already redefined marriage." Photo courtesy Planting Peace

Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content by logging-in here.

Their goal is to "expose how the anti-LGBT movement is selective in what rules to follow and how they choose to define 'traditional...' , a spokesman said.

  • Pingback: Gay rights group erects billboard in Kim Davis’ Kentucky town - mosaicversemosaicverse()

  • Diogenes

    A “traditional” economic transaction associated with marriage not practiced in the west for many centuries has no logical linkage to the question of gender in marriage. The discontinuation of brides for beasts does not meet the definition of redefinition.

  • Zammer

    Christopher Ciccone’s comments were spot on. No matter where you stand on this issue, hurling insults, public shaming, name calling and insulting….these are counterproductive and immature. The tone of this billboard is hypocrisy at it’s purest. Grow up, “planting peace”. (Hypocrisy in the title too…should be “planting conflict…”

  • Pingback: Homosexual activist group named “Planting Peace” attacks Christian woman | Laodicean Report()

  • Richard Rush

    ” The discontinuation of brides for beasts does not meet the definition of redefinition.”

    Then, neither does same-gender marriage. The significant thing about marriage is that it is a union of two adult human beings who love each other and intend to be committed to each other for life. Allowing both to be the same gender is a very minor tweak or expansion . . . unless you suffer from Gender Obsession Disorder.

  • Larry

    Quite untrue. Marriage as a commercial transaction never went away in practice. We still have “mail order brides” and “trophy wives” in the developed world. The only difference is the lack of a broker/father in the transaction.

  • Mark Cohen

    Firstly, I do not see any “hurling insults, public shaming, name calling and insulting” in the billboard. It does not make any characterization of Christians at all. Instead it targets cherry-picking: when Kim Davis got divorced twice she happily ignored the fact that Jesus forbids divorce but says nothing about same-sex marriage, when it suited her God’s law did not matter. So what she has done is to pick those sections of the Old Testament (notice not the New Testament) that confirm her feeling that gay marriage is wrong and ignores ohters. She is using the Bible to confirm her prejudices just like say, Whites did in the era of segregation and before (see Noah’s Curse: The Biblical Justification of American Slavery). The Socratic point ot make here is that the Bible is not much good for deciding questions of law and morality because it too old, too complex and too contradictory. Which parts of the Bible does she deem obsolete and which not?

  • Jo Dawg

    Mark,

    It sounds to me like you’ve been getting your information from homosexual propaganda and memes.

    In actuality, Jesus condemned homosexual marriage when he echoed the creation order definition of marriage from Genesis. He also consistently denounced the sin of pornia, which included any sexual acts outside of a heterosexual marriage covenant. Jesus was a conservative first century rabbi, the notion that he would have been cool with homosexuality is ridiculous. You don’t have to like the Jesus of the bible, but to try and paint him in a different light to appease your 21st century pop morality is intellectually absurd. Take Jesus for who he is or leave him.

  • Larry

    “definition of marriage from Genesis”

    1. Polygamous Marriage:
    Probably the most common form of marriage in the bible, it is where a man has more than one wife.

    2. Levirate Marriage
    When a woman was widowed without a son, it became the responsibility of the brother-in-law or a close male relative to take her in and impregnate her. If the resulting child was a son, he would be considered the heir of her late husband.
    3. A man, one or more wives, and some concubines
    4. A male soldier and a female prisoner of war
    5. A man, a woman and her property — a female slave
    6. A male rapist and his victim
    7. A male and female slave
    8.Monogamous, heterosexual marriage

    The important thing to realize here is that none of these models are described as better than any other. All appear to have been accepted.

    So there you go. The next time someone says that we need to stick with biblical marriage in this country, you can ask them which of the eight kinds they would prefer, and…

  • Shawnie5

    “She is using the Bible to confirm her prejudices just like say, Whites did in the era of segregation and before (see Noah’s Curse: The Biblical Justification of American Slavery).”

    @Mark: Except that the Bible specifically talks about same-sex behavior, but says nothing about segregation. The “Noah’s Curse” argument, BTW, was based on erroneous ideas about history. Noah’s curse was prophetically upon Canaan, his grandson, who was not black. He was the progenitor of most of the peoples whom the Israelites replaced in the holy land. If anyone is following the segregationists’ lead here, it’s the gay-affirmers, who are obliged to mangle scripture in the same manner to make their case.

    @Larry: It makes no difference. When asked about marriage, Jesus essentially said, Forget Moses and all the accommodations that had to be made for fallen people. Go back to God’s original design (which I’m here to restore) and see what you find. 1 man, 1 woman, together for life.

  • Richard Rush

    “It sounds to me like you’ve been getting your information from homosexual propaganda . . . “

    That’s almost comical coming from a super religious person. There is no propaganda that can begin to match the volume, frequency, and absurdity of the propaganda generated by people to propagate their religion.

  • Larry

    “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And, but for the interference with his arrangement, there would be no cause for such marriage. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”
    -Leon Bazile
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/388/1#writing-USSC_CR_0388_0001_ZO

    Yep, people have claimed God supported their prejudices about marriage for quite some time. Your opinion as to whether it was “historical” or “accurate” does not change such things.

    “Forget Moses and all the accommodations that had to be made for fallen people. ”

    Not a very flattering way to refer to the Jewish people. Oh well, behind every Christian fundamentalist is a latent anti-Semite.

    Of course Moses and ilk are always brought up when Christians want to sound tough and authoritative. Hypocrisy when dealing with the Old Testament is inherent to the Christian faith.

  • Shawnie5

    Those are Jesus’ words, not mine. “Because your hearts were hard, Moses suffered you to divorce your wives. But from the beignning it was not so.” Matt. 19:8. He came to raise the bar and restore creation to what it was intended to be. But the Pharisees made the same objection to Jesus, so you’re in good company.

    And your quote from Leon Bazile is gar-bage. It was nothing more than his personal musings, and nothing substantive from scripture. About as valuable as Boswell’s musings about the Bible and homosexuality — lots of fluff and no substance.

  • Pingback: Gay rights group erects billboard in Kim Davis'...()

  • Larry

    “Pharisees made the same objection to Jesus, so you’re in good company.”

    Susan would probably have a word with you on that one. The “Pharisees” you refer to in the pejorative are considered the basis of modern Judaism to her. Post diaspora Judaism also had the same objections. So the latent antisemitism, particularly in your word choice of “fallen people” would be appropriate here.

    The quote from Leon Bazile is proof positive that Christians have used their religious belief to support their prejudices. Making matters worse how they use it to justify accepting such prejudices under color of law. The targets of religious prejudices has changed. The behavior has remained unchanged.

    People love to claim their prejudices are rooted in religious belief. It saves them the trouble of owning up to the malicious nature of their words and actions. A way to seek social sanction for bad behavior.

  • George Nixon Shuler

    Oppression is always peaceful for the oppressor.

  • Jean-Luc Picard

    ..the Enterprise crew currently includes representatives from thirteen planets. They each have their individual beliefs and values and I respect them all. But they have all chosen to serve Starfleet. If anyone cannot perform his or her duty, because of the demands of their society, they should resign.

    http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/files/2015/09/picard.jpg

  • Shawnie5

    “So the latent antisemitism, particularly in your word choice of “fallen people” would be appropriate here.” What an absurd response. We are ALL fallen people — which is one of the primary points of all the gospels. Seriously, you don’t know that by now?

    “Susan would probably have a word with you on that one. The “Pharisees” you refer to in the pejorative are considered the basis of modern Judaism to her.” She’s welcome to have a word with me after she has a word with all the ignoramuses who have called us “Pharisees” with no idea about what the term means. I don’t even have any particular beef with the Pharisees — they are, in a sense, representative of all kinds of ordinary religious people who just want to get along comfortably with the popular culture and think they’re pretty decent people overall. Jesus made those folks quite uncomfortable–and still does today.

  • Shawnie5

    “The quote from Leon Bazile is proof positive that Christians have used their religious belief to support their prejudices.”

    Pfft. So have gay-affirmers. Yet neither have produced any solid scriptural support for any of it.

  • Greg1

    Jesus was clear that from the beginning, God created man and woman for one another, then permitted divorce as part of the Law of Moses; however, it was not God’s intention to do so. Jesus said, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning (i.e., Adam & Eve); I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for fornication, and marries another woman commits adultery.” (Matthew 19:8-9). So we see Jesus correct a drift from the Plan of God. And we might add that God likely allowed polygamy for a time so to repopulate the earth after the great Flood, which wiped out a good part of the earth’s population. But of course we now live in the Christian era, and are bound by the Law of Christ.

  • Bob

    There is no solid scriptural support for anything, actually.

    Grow some courage. Ask the questions. Break the chains.
    Join the movement. Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

  • Bob

    Great billboard. Nice work, Planting Peace.

    Ask the questions. Break the chains.
    Join the movement. Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

  • George Nixon Shuler

    Any of what?

  • Shawnie5

    Segregation on the one hand and SSM on the other, obviously.

  • Shawnie:

    “We are ALL fallen people..”

    No, Shawnie – you are not fallen because you claim to be one of the obedient servants. You will be among those commanded by Jesus to kill the fallen people.

    “Bring to me those enemies of mine and slaughter them in front of me” – JESUS (Luke 19:27)

    You have already said this Parable of the Parousia is okay with you.
    My question is not answered:

    How did you determine Jesus was not evil for commanding you to slaughter people in front of him?

  • Jean-Luc Picard,

    You are not of the body.

  • @greg,

    “Jesus was clear…..”

    No. Jesus wasn’t clear about anything.

    “Judge NOT that ye be not judged” – JESUS (Matthew 7:1)

    BUT JESUS DOESN’T MEAN IT:

    “Execute them”- JESUS (Luke 19:27)
    “Hate Them” – JESUS (Luke 14:26)
    “Avoid Them” – ROMANS (16:17)
    “Do not associate with the GUILTY..” (1 Corinthians 5:11)
    “Bad company….” (1 Corinthians 15:33)
    “Do not even to eat with such a one.” (1 Corinthians 5:11)
    “Do not receive him…or greet him..” (2 John 1:10)
    “tell him his fault.” (Matthew 18:15)
    “Have nothing to do with him!” (Titus 3:9-11)
    “LET HIM BE REMOVED” (1 Corinthians 1:13)
    “In the name of Jesus..keep away from him!” (2 Thess 3:6)
    “CURSE HIM” – (1 Cor. 16:22)
    “Deem them unworthy” – JESUS (Matt 10:13)

    Religion is just a nuisance – a tribal philosophy. And it isn’t based on anything real or good.

  • Larry,

    “All appear to have been accepted…”

    Bingo again. Excellent reply. Plus Jesus had unmarried gay sex himself:

    Jesus stumbles into a tryst between Peter and Jesus’ lover:


    “Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” As soon as Simon Peter heard him say, “It is the Lord,” he wrapped his outer garment around him (for he had been naked) and jumped into the water” (John 21:7)

    “And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him:
 And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.” (Mark 14:51-52)

    Jesus is okay with man on man lust. Looks like he knew all about it.

  • Shawnie5

    “No, Shawnie – you are not fallen because you claim to be one of the obedient servants.”

    What an absurd response. And you claim to have been a Catholic? I know they’re pretty lax on teaching the scriptures but even they understand universal fallenness of man.

    Is the whole thing about being a Catholic just a BS story like the “teaching Sunday school” thing?

  • Shawnie:

    “And you claim to have been a Catholic?”

    Did you miss the part where I’m an Atheist now? I no longer pretend these despicable passages in the Bible are good.
    Jesus was crucified (if he even existed) because he was a wild-eyed criminal and millions of innocents have been killed at the direction of this superstition.

    I’m waiting for your answer.
    How did you determine Jesus wasn’t evil?

  • Bob

    ” There is no propaganda that can begin to match the volume, frequency, and absurdity of the propaganda generated by people to propagate their religion.”

    Richard, that is a very good point.

  • Larry

    I guess if you are willing to pretend a wannabe George Wallace is the second coming of MLK and Friedrich Bonhoeffer, you are going to deliberately confuse people who are seeking civil liberties with those who are trying to deny them. 🙂

    “Solid scriptural support” meaning interpretations you are willing to accept with regards to your beliefs. Whatever extra-biblical or apologetic sources/lines of thought are only used and accepted to the point where they confirm your belief.

    There is really nothing more pathetic and cowardly than the “God says I have to hate …” argument. All it means is that form of religious belief was the one you chose as acceptable to you out of all the others out there. Simply a way to pretend one’s prejudices can be both socially acceptable and not really personal.

  • Larry

    I guess if you are willing to pretend a wannabe George Wallace is the second coming of MLK and Friedrich Bonhoeffer, you are going to deliberately confuse people who are seeking civil liberties with those who are trying to deny them. 🙂

    “Solid scriptural support” meaning interpretations you are willing to accept with regards to your beliefs. Whatever extra-biblical or apologetic sources/lines of thought are only used and accepted to the point where they confirm your belief.

    There is really nothing more silly than the “God says I have to hate …” argument. All it means is that form of religious belief was the one you chose as acceptable to you out of all the others out there. Simply a way to pretend one’s prejudices can be both socially acceptable and not really personal.

  • Larry

    I guess if you are willing to pretend a wannabe George Wallace is the second coming of MLK and Friedrich Bonhoeffer, you are going to deliberately confuse people who are seeking civil liberties with those who are trying to deny them. 🙂

    “Solid scriptural support” meaning interpretations you are willing to accept with regards to your beliefs. Whatever extra-biblical or apologetic sources/lines of thought are only used and accepted to the point where they confirm your belief.

    There is really nothing more silly than the “God says I have to hate …” argument. All it means is that form of religious belief was the one you chose as acceptable to you out of all the others out there. Simply a way to pretend one’s prejudices can be both socially acceptable and not really personal.

  • “I no longer pretend these despicable passages in the Bible are good.” Nobody asked whether you thought they were good or not. What you are doing is misrepresenting the gospel’s message in a way that even a former Catholic would hardly do.

  • This post and thread has nothing to do with civil liberties, Larry. It has to do with misrepresentation of scripture–something you’re out of your league trying to discuss.

    “Whatever extra-biblical or apologetic sources/lines of thought are only used and accepted to the point where they confirm your belief.” Present some alternatives and let’s examine them. Still waiting…

    “There is really nothing more silly than the “God says I have to hate …” argument.” I agree — which is why that’s not my argument. God doesn’t say I have to hate anybody. He says I have to not participate in or approve sin.

    You know, you don’t make it any easier to remain open-minded toward lefties. I know there must be reasonable ones out there, but I have rarely ever encountered any who could debate without the assistance of strawmen.

  • Larry

    I blame the wonky commenting system here. For the want of an edit function.

  • Shawnie:

    “Nobody asked whether you thought they were good or not…”

    CORRECT – they don’t ask.
    Instead they just ram nonsense at us when we are kids so we grow up afraid to ask also!

    “Kill the gays” – (Leviticus 20:13)

    And you never answered my question.
    How did you determine Jesus wasn’t evil for telling you that YOU would be doing the executions at the Parousia?

    “YOU [obedient servants]…Bring to me those enemies of mine and execute them in front of me” – JESUS (Luke 19:27) [Parable of the Second Coming]

    Answer my question.

  • Shawnie5

    Asked and answered, Max. It’s a parable. God’s Son needs no executioners as does an earthly king, for the word from His mouth will one day disintegrate His enemies instantly as the scriptures say. Move along.

  • Shawnie:

    “…Son needs no executioners…”

    You have already admitted that Jesus will YOU as executioner.
    “Execute them” – JESUS

    You said, “What of it?”

    You did not answer the question,
    AND I’m adding TWO MORE !

    How did you did Jesus is not evil for demanding YOU to execute people?
    And …. How will Jesus eradicate evil by hiring YOU as executioner?
    And… Why does Jesus not become evil immediately upon executing innocent people?

  • Bob

    Speak for yourself there Shawnie5/Jackie. You are left of me, and you never cease popping up strawmen, and insults.

  • Shawnie5

    Your only question I have not already answered is your last one.

    There are no innocent people in the eyes of God.

    The Creator has the exclusive right to determine which of His creatures will be allowed to continue in existence. And He has decreed that the soul that sins shall, apart from His grace, die.

    End of story.

  • Bob

    Funny how an all-powerful being can’t do a message that can’t be so readily “misinterpreted”

    Just another of the many problems with that fictional Christian god.

  • Dogenes

    Larry, point taken on marriage as a “commercial transaction,” though I would hardly consider it normative.

  • Larry

    I would like to think it isn’t. But there are plenty of signs to the contrary (“Housewives of …” comes to mind). 🙂

  • Jimmy Stewart

    Billboard doesn’t make sense. I don’t get it. You need to clear when you do billboards.

  • Ed

    Jimmy, maybe that’s because you need to clear after you do intoxicants.

  • Cathy Linton

    Why only two adult human beings?