Thursday, September 3, 2015

Chicken Noodle soup & Kim Davis (Kentucky)

My easy recipe for today is Chicken Noodle Soup.  I make it at least bi weekly for Sarah.  Since she eats only pureed food, I make most of her own soups because I don't want her eating from cans.  I'm able to add things in and make it thick and good.

So I start with my big white crock pot -
Use about 6 cups of chicken broth, 2 cans of  cream of chicken soup, a bag of small carrots, 4 or 5 stalks of celery, a cup of green peas, lots of pepper, 2 or 3 boneless skinless chicken breasts.   Turn it on high for a few hours, go back and shred the chicken breasts and add a bag of egg noodles.....YUM!  Nice thick chicken soup.  Then I fill the blender up and puree it.  Then the soup will go into individual serving bowls and be frozen for her.  The rest of  the soup we will eat.




Sam found my cup this morning and he just taught himself how to drink from it. He is so happy!  Always before he has used a sippy cup but he did fine with this.  When we've tried before with a big cup and  he's choked himself by taking in too much drink but not today.  So we've had a couple of wardrobe changes but he's been drinking from the cup all day. 



===================================================


I feel I would be remiss if I did not write about Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who refuses to issue a marriage license to gay couples.  Since 1998, the state of Kentucky had on its' statute that marriage was between one man and one woman.  In 2004 the voters gave Kentucky Constitution Amendment 1 75% of the vote 
"Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized."


Of course in June 2015, the Supreme Court - by a 5-4 vote, made gay marriage legal.
But in my opinion, no one should have the right to make another person violate their conscience .  I was careful about different jobs I took over the years because I did not want to have sell alcohol, cigarettes,  or be involved with anything I felt was questionable.  This woman feels she answers to God over the government and I agree.  I probably would not have had the backbone to do what she is doing, I probably would have just transferred jobs or something BUT I admire her. 
In all of recorded history, marriage has been acknowledged as between "one man and one woman" when it was anything else, it was not considered marriage. 
Of course people say polygamy was discussed in the bible.  Yes, the bible tells of kings and nations who practiced such things.  Even King David and his son King Solomon, but the bible ONLY records what happened.  It did not give its' stamp of approval to the "marriages".  In fact, the bible says that the multitude of wives and concubines is what led Solomon's heart away from God according to the bible. 
The bible says in Genesis 2 :18  "The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called “woman,” for she was taken out of man.’ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh."
Jesus upheld marriage in Matthew 19:4  He answered, t“Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, u‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and vthe two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. wWhat therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”
If Jesus had wanted to say homosexuality and gay marriage was ok- he had the perfect opportunity.   Actually that verse seems to knockout transgender too.....
People want to bring up her past life.  She fully admits to having a messed up sin sick life BEFORE she became a Christian just a few years ago.  By all accounts since then she has strived to follow God.  She probably knows what sin can do to a life, since she was saved from a troubled past.   She realizes that her judge is God. 
I support her and her stance. 


16 comments:

  1. I. Liked what she said as they were taking her out of the ciurt room about her sinful past and they can repent and be saved from their lives of sin too. My paraphrase.
    I agree with you on this. I have a ton I could say, but God sees and He will finish the story of what happens on earth. Jesus is our Hope. I Love You, Jesus, who saved a wretch like me.
    Love from NC
    Love from NC

    ReplyDelete
  2. If she can't do her job she should have stepped down. These are civil unions, not marriages taking place in a church. The law now states that she must issue marriage licences to same sex couples. She doesn't have to agree with it but she must obey because hers is a civil servant job. Just because her religion forbids same sex marriages doesn't mean that all others seeking marriage licences in her county must have the same beliefs. Suppose a person of the Muslim faith worked in a civil office? Would it be okay if they refused any type of licence(marriage, driving, etc) based on their beliefs? What about a Mormon who believed in plural marriage? Could they go against the law and allow multiple marriage licences since that is their belief? I have a feeling these wouldn't fly. If she really believed her convictions, she would have stepped down. America is not a Theocracy. She has the right to believe anything she wants, but her job is a civil one and she must follow the law.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. she swore to uphold the law. She feels the law is that the people of Kentucky voted to keep marriage between one woman and one man. I'm sure she believes the constitution that would uphold the people's vote....not the Supreme Court- they have no authority to make a law according to the constitution.

      Delete
  3. And yes, her past matters. She refuses to allow same sex marriage licences yet has been married 4 times? If she is not remarried to her first husband then according to the Bible she is also living in sin yet has the nerve to judge others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She is not judging others, she is saying she does not want to be involved in their sin. ALL that happened before she was a Christian. She had no claims of being a Christian until a few years ago. She knows how sin can ruin a life and she was saved out of a deep pit.

      Delete
    2. So she can live in sin by not being married to her first husband(as the Bible states) and all is forgiven since she has become a Christian, even though she is still technically living in sin? Yet gay couples can't "live in sin"? If she found God and became a Christian and really followed the book she spouts,she would have left her current husband and remarried her first. She chooses bits and pieces of the Bible, to fit her views, she is a hypocrite.

      Delete
    3. Her first husband may be remarried and may not want to marry her again....I don't know.
      I agree divorce and remarriage is wrong. Sometimes when people come to Christ with a lot of heavy luggage, it is very hard to know what to say. Generally my husband would counsel someone that the past is the past and often can not be changed or altered. If there is a way to make amends then that is great and it should be done. I'm not sure adding another divorce is the correct thing to do.
      Jesus met the woman at the well who'd been married 5 times and was living with a man who was not her husband. He forgave her and told her to go and sin no more. It seems to be that He was admonishing her to start from where she was right then and do no more sin.

      Delete
  4. I think you meant that no one should violate their conscience?

    ReplyDelete
  5. You would be right. Spell check is a wonderful thing but it can change the whole meaning of things if a person is not careful. Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry, but if you take a civil service job you check your beliefs at the front door and move on. Signing a marriage document does not mean that you support the marriage. It's not saying "KIM DAVIS THINKS THIS IS LIKE THE CUTEST COUPLE EVER OMG SO SWEET #LOVETHEMTOGETHER." No. It means that you recognize that two people have the legal right to marry, despite what your beliefs are. It means that you recognize that it is the law now, two consenting men can marry each other and two consenting women can marry each other. It means that if you so choose, you may spend your off days or your time after work attending protests against this. But when you are at that civil service job, you acknowledge that you are not working to stand for your personal beliefs, but you are working for the government. It isn't the United States of Kim Davis and all of her beliefs. It's what the majority of the United States population has decided is right for this country. If you cannot accept that and the responsibilities that come with it, then you are not fit for the job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually you are so wrong. The great majority of the US population- over 35 states voted to keep marriage between one man and one woman. It was the Supreme court in a vote 5-4 that did this. The PEOPLE did not. The people of Kentucky voted with over 75% of the vote to keep marriage between one man and one woman

      Delete
    2. And? That's the supreme court's job. They decide what is unconstitutional. They decided that preventing gay marriage was unconstitutional. If the majority of the state of Kentucky decided that they didn't want to allow people the right to bear arms, they could not just decide they weren't going allow anyone that right. They have to follow the constitution. This is the same thing. It does not matter what YOU believe or what the majority of Kentucky believes. People have the right to marry those of the same sex because it's constitutional. Get over it! How does it impact your life? Are you really that insecure in your relationship that two men marrying will make your marriage feel worthless? Don't play the "Oh I'm trying to protect people from their sins" card. Because you know what? If someone of another religion tried to prevent you from doing something because in their religion it's not okay (like eating a certain food, living a certain lifestyle, etc) how would you feel? Because in their minds they're just trying to protect you from an act that will cause you to look bad in the eyes of their god (AKA the true god, the one they believe you'll face at some point. Would you not be upset if you were told that chicken soup was no longer allowed to be eaten? It would impact your child, wouldn't it? Yeah, she could eat other soups. But maybe she doesn't love the other soups. That's what if feels like when you tell someone who does not share your beliefs that they cannot marry someone they love because YOU don't agree with it. If you don't support gay marriage, don't marry a woman. What's so hard about that?

      Delete
  7. I agree that if she cannot do her job as a
    Civil Servant she should step down. If she owned a business she should have every right to run it along her religious beliefs. (Hobby Lobby and Chick Fil A are good examples.) In the US marriage is as much a legal matter as a religious one. We all should have the same legal rights.

    ReplyDelete



  8. By Phil Stringer who explains it better than I do.....
    The United States Government is based on a three fold system of checks and balances. The Legislative Branch makes laws, the Executive Branch carries out the laws and the Judicial Branch interprets the laws. This used to be basic junior high school curriculum in the public schools. It still is in Christian schools. This was designed to prevent a small group of people from seizing control of the country. Everything was tied to the elected representatives of the people. This was considered to be a group who would be responsive to the will of the people.
    Now the Chief Executive makes laws, the Judicial Branch makes laws and the Legislative Branch timidly surrenders its role. It does not matter which party in in control. Congress has become irrelevant. We now live under the very kind of government our founders were determined to prevent. The very few rules over the many.
    I would not accept a very good law if if it came from the Executive Branch or the Judicial Branch. They have no authority to make laws, not even good laws.
    Our public schools have taught a very different system of government for years and the American people no longer yearn for our liberties. Sadly, most Christian young people were taught in these public schools and they have grown up to be no more discerning about government than unsaved people. There are a few exceptions. We are reaping the results of a lack of support for a Biblical education.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bull, my kids go to public school and have learned about the government in depth. Biblical education doesn't belong in public schools. Which religion should we teach? Every different group has different beliefs, even among the Protestant faith, should we teach Baptist beliefs, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Quaker, etc. etc.? What about the kids that are other religions? Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim? Their religion is just as important to them as yours is to you. Why should Christianity get to be the only religion taught? I am VERY discerning about issues with the government. The very few do not "rule" the many. The many are not allowed to take rights away from the few. That is the point of the Supreme Court and the Constitution. Every American deserves the same rights, whether they believe the same as you are not.

      Delete
    2. He's not saying to give any student any bible classes. He is saying to teach the students the Constitution what is taught in public school now is not what I was taught in public school 30 years ago

      Delete