Kim Davis End Of Same-Sex Marriage Jokes
A little context: Kim was the Kentucky county clerk who made headlines for refusing to give marriage licenses to LGBTQ+ couples after same-sex marriage was legalized in 2015. The courts ordered her to cut the crap, but she refused, citing her Christian faith, and was thrown in jail.
Memes and jokes abounded, and it become a whole thing. She was even mocked by SNL in a parody film trailer called God Is a Boob Man.
So, why is Kim trending again? Well, a decade after making a fool of herself in front of the whole country, she's back for more. According to ABC News, she's appealing the jury verdict that ordered her to pay $100,000 for emotional damages and $260,000 for attorneys' fees. Additionally, Kim argues that the First Amendment — which protects the right to practice your religion — means she shouldn't face any consequences for denying those marriage licenses back in 2015. Furthermore, she wants the Supreme Court's Obergefell v. Hodges decision overturned and called it "egregiously wrong."
In the fall, the Supreme Court justices will privately choose which cases to take on, and they'll review Kim's case at that time, per ABC News.
That's already a lot, but the internet is really coming so hard for Kim because of her personal marital history.
Naturally, people had a lot to say about all this:
Note: The photo of Kim in the original tweet was replaced here due to photo rights.
And finally:
Note: The photo of Kim in the original tweet was replaced here due to photo rights.
What do you think about all this? LMK in the comments below!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
37 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Critics say President Trump's push for fairness in college admissions is leaving out legacy preferences
Advertisement 'It's hard to think of a more flagrant way in which the system is rigged than legacy preferences,' Kahlenberg said. 'Rarely is a system of hereditary privilege so openly practiced without any sense of shame.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up In recent weeks, Trump has taken several actions to scrub any vestiges of race from admissions decisions, suggesting that some schools are ignoring a 2023 Supreme Court decision striking down affirmative action. His administration negotiated settlements with Brown and Columbia universities that included provisions to share admissions data. Last week, Trump issued a call for colleges nationwide to submit data to prove they do not consider race in admissions. Trump has taken several actions to scrub any vestiges of race from admissions decisions, suggesting that some schools are ignoring a 2023 Supreme Court decision striking down affirmative action. Alex Brandon/Associated Press Some are urging Trump to go further. Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., applauded the settlement with Brown requiring the university to turn a blind eye toward race — even in application essays. But 'restoring meritocracy warrants more,' said Young, who cosponsored legislation in 2023 aiming to end legacy admissions. Advertisement 'Federally accredited institutions should eliminate ALL preferences grounded in arbitrary circumstances of ancestry that students have no control over, such as legacy status,' Young said on social media. Many selective colleges consider family ties Sometimes called 'affirmative action for the rich,' the practice of legacy admissions remains widespread among elite colleges even as it faces mounting bipartisan opposition. Virginia's Republican governor signed a bill last year barring legacy admissions at public institutions, following similar measures in Colorado, California and elsewhere. Some Republicans in Congress have worked with Democrats on proposals to end it nationwide. Roughly 500 universities consider legacy status when evaluating applicants, including more than half of the nation's 100 most selective U.S. schools, according to 2023 disclosures to the federal government. A few have abandoned the policy, but it remains in place at all eight Ivy League schools. Stanford University said in July it will continue considering legacy status, even after a California law barred it at institutions that receive state financial aid. Stanford opted to withdraw from the state's student financial aid program rather than end the practice. The university said it will replace the funding with internal money — even as it begins layoffs to close a $140 million budget deficit. Stanford officials declined to comment. Last year, as part of a state transparency law, the school reported that about 14% of its new students were relatives of alumni or donors. A push for merit, but no mention of legacy admissions The executive action signed by Trump last week requires universities to turn over more information about students who apply to and are accepted to their campuses. Taxpayers 'deserve confidence in the fairness and integrity' of decisions, his memorandum said, adding that more information is needed to ensure colleges are heeding the Supreme Court's decision. Advertisement A week earlier, the Justice Department issued a memo clarifying what it considers illegal discrimination in admissions. It takes issue not only with overt racial considerations but also 'proxies' for race, including 'geographic targeting' or personal essays asking about obstacles applicants have overcome. Similar language requiring 'merit-based' admissions policies was included in the government's resolutions with Brown and Columbia universities. None of the actions made any mention of legacy admissions. Trump's silence caught the attention of the nonprofit Lawyers for Civil Rights, which has an open complaint with the Education Department alleging that Harvard University's use of donor and alumni preferences amounts to illegal racial discrimination. The group's 2023 complaint says the practice overwhelmingly benefits white students. If the Trump administration wants to make admissions a meritocracy, it should start by ending legacy preferences, said Oren Sellstrom, litigation director for the group. 'These deeply unmeritocratic preferences simply reward students based on who their parents are. It's hard to imagine anything more unfair or contrary to basic merit principles,' he said. Few Americans support legacy or donor preferences Colleges defend the practice by saying it builds community and encourages families to become donors. Some backers say it increasingly helps nonwhite students as campuses become more diverse. Then-President Joe Biden, a Democrat, urged colleges to rethink legacy preferences in the wake of the Supreme Court decision, saying it expanded 'privilege instead of opportunity.' Some feared it would drive up white enrollment as affirmative action ended. Georgetown University reviewed the policy but kept it in place this year after concluding the pool of legacy applicants had a similar makeup to the wider admissions pool. Advertisement An AP-NORC poll in 2023 found that most Americans have a dim view of legacy and donor preferences, with few saying either should play a strong role in decisions. Universities are required to tell the federal government whether they consider legacy status, but they don't have to divulge how far it tips the scale or how many legacy students they admit. Among the 20 most selective universities that say they employ the practice, none would tell The Associated Press what percentage of their incoming class has a family connection to alumni or donors. Trump's blitz to root out racial preferences has hinged on the argument that it undermines merit. New scrutiny is needed to ensure colleges are following the Supreme Court's order and 'recruiting and training capable future doctors, engineers, scientists' and other workers, he said in his executive action. That argument sends the message that minority students are 'intellectually suspect until proven otherwise,' said Justin Driver, a Yale law professor with a forthcoming book on affirmative action. He worries Trump's latest actions will intimidate colleges into limiting minority enrollment to avoid raising the suspicion of the government. 'I believe that the United States confronts a lot of problems today,' Driver said. 'Too many Black students on first-rate college campuses is not among them.'
Politico
39 minutes ago
- Politico
Are Christian nationalists targeting women's right to vote?
Happy Friday. Thanks for keeping up with us! As always, reach out with thoughts, questions, offerings: ecordover@ and klong@ This week we examine the theocratic, patriarchal movement making waves in Washington. Last week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reposted a CNN interview of his pastor, Christian nationalist Doug Wilson, writing 'All of Christ for All of Life.' In the video, church members discussed why they believe women shouldn't be allowed to vote — a tenet of Wilson's main church, Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho. In the CNN segment, Wilson, who founded a network of churches in the late 1990s called the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, or CREC, said 'women are the kind of people that people come out of.' He has written several books on marriage, masculinity and childrearing, along with blog posts with titles like 'The Lost Virtues of Sexism.' He has referred to various women as 'small-breasted biddies,' 'lumberjack dykes' and 'cunts' and extolled the 'benefits' of slavery. The pastor's views are coming under scrutiny as he gains influence within the Republican Party. Last year, he declared that his church was seeking to make inroads with 'numerous evangelicals who will be present both in and around the Trump administration.' Since then, he's appeared at congressional events, cheering when Hegseth — one of his congregants in Tennessee — was confirmed. Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought also has ties to the church. Christian nationalism is the belief that the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation and should remain so in the future — and that our laws should reflect Christian values. A 2024 survey by the Pew Research Center found that half of U.S. adults think the Bible should have some influence on federal laws, even though the First Amendment prohibits the government from 'establishing a religion.' The public support for Christian nationalism from high-ranking members of the White House cabinet is alarming for civil rights advocates, political scientists and Christians alike who say it could impact policy, further gender inequality and promote fear among women. 'To have the Secretary of Defense repost this message is especially worrisome ... because it resonates so strongly with this notion of threat. What role does Pete Hegseth see the military playing in carrying out, in enforcing, in reinforcing this Christian nationalist understanding of women's submission?' Traci West, professor emerita of Christian Ethics and African American Studies at Drew University Theological School, tells Women Rule. A 2024 study from the Public Religion Research Institute found that a 'key aspect often linked to Christian nationalism is adherence to patriarchal ideals.' According to their research, 33 percent of Americans agree that 'in a truly Christian family, the husband is the head of the household, and his wife submits to his leadership,' while 51 percent of Christian nationalism sympathizers and nearly seven in 10 adherents to Christian nationalism agree with that statement. Also, 'there is a very, very high correlation between support for Christian nationalism, and those who voted for Trump in 2024,' says Diana Orcés, director of research at PRRI. According to Samuel Perry, a professor of sociology at the University of Oklahoma, with Hegseth and others in the Trump administration, there's a 'reassertion that 'No, patriarchy is not just an option, I think it's a good thing.'' Perry says that the Christian nationalist ideology has already influenced Trump administration policy, particularly regarding childbearing and fertility. He says that data shows that 'conservatives, even when they're quite pronatatalists,' i.e. promote having more babies, 'are actually the least likely to support things like paid leave and childcare, even tax credits — which, he says could make it 'more difficult for women to go back to work.' Jared Longshore, a minister of Wilson's church, tells Women Rule he personally supports President Donald Trump and is 'very grateful for what he's doing. … I'm certainly grateful for what he did with Supreme Court justices. … I know Pete has done things' related to women in combat roles. 'Scripture calls the husband the head and then the woman the body,' Longshore says. 'When you hear that the husband has a hierarchy in the home, we should think in the same way that we think about the relationship between our heads and our bodies.' Longshore says repealing the 19th Amendment is 'not something I'm pressing for, but when asked would I support that, I said yes, I would. … from the beginning of our nation up until the time of the suffrage movement, we had one vote per household and I think that would be a good thing.' Women Rule reached out to Hegseth to ask if he supported his church's belief that women should not vote or participate in government. In response, Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in an emailed statement, 'The Secretary is a proud member of a church affiliated with the Congregation of Reformed Evangelical Churches, which was founded by Pastor Doug Wilson. The Secretary very much appreciates many of Mr. Wilson's writings and teachings.' POLITICO Special Report 'My Life Became a Living Hell': One Woman's Career in Delta Force, the Army's Most Elite Unit by Seth Harp for POLITICO: 'Courtney Williams was 24 years old when she learned of an intriguing job opportunity at an unnamed 'special mission unit' at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, the headquarters of the top secret Joint Special Operations Command. It was 2010, and she was coming off a four-year enlistment in the Army, in which she'd been an interrogator and Arabic linguist but never deployed. She was recruited at a job fair by K2 Solutions, a contractor in Southern Pines, North Carolina, run by former members of Delta Force, the Army component of JSOC.' Eleanor Holmes Norton Keeps a Low Profile as Trump Takes Aim at DC by Nicholas Wu for POLITICO: 'Washington's locally elected government is under attack from President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans. But the capital city's self-proclaimed 'warrior on the Hill' is nowhere to be seen on the front lines. Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia's nonvoting House delegate, issued a written statement Monday after Trump seized control of the city's police force and moved to send in National Guard troops, calling it 'counterproductive,' a 'historic assault on D.C. home rule' and 'more evidence of the urgent need to pass my D.C. statehood bill.' Donald Trump Took Over DC's Police. Why Is the City's Mayor So Zen? By Michael Schaffer for POLITICO: 'Muriel Bowser has given Donald Trump everything a blue-city mayor could possibly give a MAGA president. And he kicked her in the teeth anyway. But what's most telling about the power dynamics between Washington's mayor and Trump's administration is that the Bowser allies I spoke to think Trump's furious White House press conference on Monday actually represented a victory of sorts.' Number of the Week Read more here. MUST READS Trump Has Said Abortion Is a State Issue. His Judicial Picks Could Shape It Nationally for Decades. by Christine Fernando for The Associated Press: 'One called abortion a 'barbaric practice.' Another referred to himself as a 'zealot' for the anti-abortion movement. Several have played prominent roles in defending their state's abortion restrictions in court and in cases that have had national impact, including on access to medication abortion. As President Donald Trump pushes the Senate to confirm his federal judicial nominees, a review by The Associated Press shows that roughly half of them have revealed anti-abortion views, been associated with anti-abortion groups or defended abortion restrictions.' A Right-Wing Influencer Tried to Be a Tradwife. It Almost Broke Her. by Michelle Goldberg for The New York Times: 'Lauren Southern, one of the most well-known right-wing influencers during Donald Trump's first term, first went viral with a 2015 video titled 'Why I Am Not a Feminist.' Then 19, beautiful and blond, Southern argued that women are advantaged in many areas of life, including child custody disputes and escaping abusive relationships. 'Feminists are unintentionally creating a world of reverse sexism that I don't want to be a part of,' she said. But being an antifeminist, it turns out, is no shield against abusive male power. Southern's new self-published memoir, 'This Is Not Real Life,' is the story of conservative ideology colliding with reality.' How One Oregon Activist Is Using a Decades-Old Liberal Policy to Stall Green Energy Projects in Rural Areas by Tony Schick for ProPublica: 'During the outcry against nuclear power in the 1970s, liberal Oregon lawmakers hatched a plan to slow an industry that was just getting started. They created a burdensome process that gave the public increased say over where power plants could be built, and the leading anti-nuclear activists of the day used appeal after appeal to delay proposed nuclear plants to death. It had a huge impact: Oregon's first commercial nuclear plant, the one that spurred lawmakers into action, was also the state's last. What those lawmakers didn't plan for was that 50 years later, an Oregon citizen activist would use that same bureaucracy to hinder some of the very energy projects that today's liberals want: wind farms and the new high-voltage lines needed to support them. They didn't plan for Irene Gilbert.' QUOTE OF THE WEEK Read more here. on the move Families Against Mandatory Minimums President Shaneva D. McReynolds has been appointed as a voting member of the United States Sentencing Commission's newly formed Sentence Impact Advisory Group. Dezenhall Resources has added Katie Runkle and Steffen Newman as associates, Amma Boateng as senior director of coalitions, Mary Grace Lucas as vice president and Jana Spacek as managing director of organizational development and operations. (h/t POLITICO Playbook) Meghan Green is now general counsel for the Senate Budget Committee. She most recently was general counsel for the House Intelligence Committee. (h/t POLITICO Playbook)
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Peace Prize envy is just the latest round in his obsession with one-upping Obama
Donald Trump's renewed efforts aimed at brokering a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia may in fact have their roots in Trump's most famous political grudge. As the president prepares for a summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin in Alaska — potentially to be attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as well — one of his former advisers sees a pattern emerging in Trump's second-term foreign policy agenda that indicates the US president is seriously pining for what he sees as the ultimate sign of global recognition and respect: a Nobel Peace Prize. But what John Bolton described to ABC's This Week on Sunday as Trump's latest fascination may have deeper psychological roots. And the biggest clue providing a glimpse into the president's psyche is the simultaneous focus of his entire national security team on Barack Obama, Trump's first-term predecessor and a figure many have argued propelled Trump's political ambitions through mockery and dismissal. Bolton, who served as Trump's national security adviser, explained Sunday that Trump's peacemaking attempts in Ukraine were part of a clear bid for a Nobel Peace Prize. He pointed to the president's efforts to claim credit for halting other global conflicts as part of the same concerted campaign; the Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict, and India's clashes with Pakistan. 'I think what Trump has done is make it clear that he wants a Nobel Peace Prize more than anything else.... the way to his heart? Offer to nominate him,' Bolton told ABC News. Though Bolton said that Trump was having mixed success: 'I don't think what he has done materially changes the situation in -- in any of those circumstances, or several others he's mentioned, like Pakistan/India, where the Indians, not just the government, the entire country are outraged that he tried to take credit for [a peace agreement].' On Friday, the president invited the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia to the White House to sign a peace agreement. The deal is aimed at ending decades of conflict, but builds on a peace process moderated by Russia's Vladimir Putin and a previous agreement crafted by Russia that the two countries signed. Writing Thursday on Truth Social, Trump boasted of his role in reaching the agreement. The agreement between the two nations will create a major trade and transit corridor called the 'Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity.' It will connect mainland Azerbaijan with the autonomous Nakhchivan region, satisfying a major objective of the Azerbaijani government in the peace talks between the countries. Meanwhile, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard and Attorney General Pam Bondi collaborate on an effort to reignite interest in 'Russiagate' and the 2016 investigation into the Trump campaign. And the president himself continues to rage against a man he now accuses of 'treason' and efforts to rig the 2016 and possibly 2020 elections. Gabbard has eagerly echoed his accusations and argued that the Obama administration's efforts to call out Russian election interference efforts should be considered a 'coup'. Bondi acted to give the pair as much political cover at the Justice Department as possible; the embattled attorney general opened a grand jury probe into the 'Russiagate' investigation this past week, even despite a previous DOJ special counsel review finding no evidence of criminal wrongdoing in the case. No charges have been filed yet against Obama or anyone else. Combined with Trump's bid to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, a clear pattern is emerging. As former RNC chair Michael Steele (the only Black chair in the Republican Party's history) wrote earlier this year in an op-ed for MSNBC: 'It's clear that Obama has been living in Trump's head rent-free for the last two decades. Some think he first ran for president because Obama made fun of him at the White House Correspondents Association dinner. He mistakenly called Biden by Obama's name multiple times while campaigning, once even saying he beat Obama in 2016.' 'Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize? Trump spends years obsessing about winning it himself,' Steele added. In March, Bolton saw the connection too. He told the New York Times that Trump 'saw that Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize and felt if Obama got it for not doing anything, why should he not get it?' The Times noted other instances where Trump has publicly and privately groused about not getting the award in spite of Obama's reception. 'If I were named Obama, I would have had the Nobel Prize given to me in 10 seconds,' the president told the Detroit Economic Club last year. The evidence is clear: Trump is entering the latest phase of a years-long obsession with a political foe who consumes more of his attention than Joe Biden and even, at this point, Hillary Clinton. Obama is, in reality, Trump's one unvanquished foe remaining on the left. But he's also the last U.S. president who commanded clear respect and admiration not just in the U.S. but around the world, where he was invited to speak before the legislative bodies of the UK, Canada and Australia as well as to huge crowds elsewhere, like Germany and his father's home country of Kenya. The 44th president, the nation's first Black commander-in-chief, struck a nerve in Trump early and the man who would succeed Obama spent years coordinating a false, racist campaign of abuse centered around Obama's heritage and birthplace. Hillary Clinton won his attention and became a focus of his anger during and after the 2016 election, though she's largely faded from his view. But while the president can order his Cabinet members and aides to launch probes and issue statements tarnishing Obama's reputation, he's found so far that his ability to solve geopolitical conflicts is far more limited. Even as Trump has seen some success bullying U.S. trading partners into line with his 'reciprocal' tariffs, his promises to end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza overnight have dissolved into failure. The international community waits to see whether this grudge-turned-ambition will propel Trump to actually force the end of a three-year war in Ukraine or the bloody siege and starvation of Gaza caused by Israel's blockade, or whether he will once again be frustrated by the realities that have thwarted his efforts so far.
