According to the New York Times, Davis's lawyer, Matthew D. Staver, the Davises and Vatican officials agreed to keep the meeting secret until after the Pope returned to Italy because “we didn’t want the pope’s visit to be focused on Kim Davis.”
Translation: “We didn’t want anyone to be able to check this story while the Pope was still here.”
This statement by itself gives the lie to Liberty Counsel’s claim. LC has done nothing but focus the country on Kim Davis for months. If LC had an opportunity to focus the Pope’s visit on Kim Davis, they would have done it in a flash.
“According to a source the Pope’s only comment upon meeting Ms. Davis was ‘Who is this cow?’ The source reported that the Pope was under the impression he was meeting Kim Novak.”
As he left the country, he told reporters who inquired that he did not know Davis’ case in detail, but he defended conscientious objection as a human right.
Holy crap! (No pun intended.) Her publicity-whore lawyers knew that the Pope wouldn’t know who she was, so they pitched it as a “conscientious objection” situation. What a bunch of lying liars.
Well, you didn’t accept the photo from Peru as representing her big rally. Very disappointing! As a peace offering to her, would you kindly accept that same photo as being a picture of her meeting with His Holiness?
Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but after listening to the Pope and his rather obvious being less than comfortable with English, I’m not really getting the “stay strong” quote.
“Several media outlets jumped on Francis’ comments as tacit support for Davis. But while the pontiff’s answer made his support for conscientious objection clear, he was vague on what conscientious objection actually would mean in Davis’ situation. For example, Francis did not explain whether he believed an elected government official should be allowed to keep a job while refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
The distinction is crucial to millions of religious Americans such as Mennonites, who are allowed to refuse military service and some taxes but, unlike Davis, willingly accept the consequences of doing so — including passing on certain jobs. Others take financial hits to accommodate their faith: Some pacifist Christians oppose paying federal taxes that support the military, and so intentionally make very little money to avoid paying the IRS.”
If true, then the Pope acknowledged her right of conscientious objection, which is not a controversial position.
But do you know what conscientious objectors don’t get to do?
Keep the job that they’re refusing to do. Conscientious objectors from military service don’t continue getting a paycheck from the Army. Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t have to serve in the Army, but the Army doesn’t let them live for free in Army barracks and eat in the Army chow line.
Pope or no Pope, she is breaking the law…the gop has left sanity behind, and are pushing their fascists on the rest of the Nation…May this woman lose her cozy job…
Why? He’s defended her right to be Conscientious Objector. That’s a perfectly legitimate position to take. If she feels something is immoral and violates her religious principles, then she shouldn’t be forced to do it. Instead, she’s free to sit in jail for failing to either uphold her Oath of Office or resign her position. Which is what being a Conscientious Objector would require - you don’t retain your position if you cannot faithfully discharge the duties you’ve sworn to do.
Seems pretty simple. The padre just met with her, told her to stay strong, cuz he’s probably aware that she’s gonna get her ass tossed in jail again. I mean, he can’t tell her ‘quit your job’ - that’s a potential international incident, a foreign head of state telling an elected official to quit.
With its history of torturing and killing non-believers, and its practice of lobbying to impose its rules on non-Catholics, the head of the Catholic Church is not the go-to authority on religious liberty.
The handing out of rosaries is pretty much de rigueur for a papal encounter. They are, however, so very Catholic, and I can’t imagine Davis would find them anything but slightly abhorent.
But the right to be a conscientious objector usually means being excused from a duty, or not being punished for failing to comply, not the power to block the performance of a responsibility. It is the right to stand aside. As best I can follow the ‘conscientious objector’ branch of Ms Davis’ logic, it would now permit a confirmed pacifist to serve in a combat unit, while refusing to fight. Better yet, to have command of the whole military. Certainly a new recruiting tool for quota-strapped military recruiting offices, but I wonder whether the implications have been considered. On second thought, no, I do not wonder. Of course not. There are no principles with these folks, only what they want at this moment.
They did but his flight was delayed coming back from Peru. God must have wanted it not to be photographed so you’d have to believe what you hadn’t seen and have faith…
I doubt it happened, but the lie won’t be corrected in the mainstream press, just as the lie about that stadium photograph wasn’t corrected in the mainstream press. Meanwhile, this lie about the Pope is on the front page of the NYTimes, so Liberty Council can fundraise off that, and their purpose has been served. They are evil, evil people. Hey lawyers, when are you going to disbar these addle-pated louts? Sooner would be better than later.
