Texas is not exactly a bastion of human rights. I know this because I live here. If she can refuse to perform same-sex marriages, then it seems she would also be justified in refusing to perform marriages for people of color, or mixed-race marriages. Conservative theists of all stripes, can always rationalize excuses for their many hatreds.
It should. The entirety of the right's judicial project has been to stack the Federal courts with judges that will restore the apartheid regime of the deep South and empower fundamentalists in government.
I've noticed that a disproportionate number of Republicans these days seem to think that 𝑮𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑾𝒊𝒏𝒅 was some sort of historical instruction book. The 'old South' was never the way this novel portrays it; there was none of this 'well-mannered, well-dressed wealthy white landowners with happy slaves working their plantation' business. It's a fiction entirely, which makes sense once you figure out the book is a romance novel. Everything about the book was idealized or marginalized to make things more dramatic and it is a work of fiction, not history.
The slaves in the 'old South' were miserable, commonly mistreated, and while there might have been a few exceptions around, that does not excuse the practices in place at the time. Most people - including white people - were not wealthy landowners; that was the 1% of the period. The problems we have now were problems they had then, too; humanity didn't have any kind of 'fall from grace' between then and now that lead to our current woes.
Expecting to go back to some magical time period when things were better is a lie. Things were not, in fact, better when the old South existed, they were far worse for large numbers of people; and I do not mean just those with dark skin. The old South might have had some good points, but that does not make it a worthy goal, and quite bluntly, we can do better than that and there's no reason not to. Grow up, get ready to help put in some hard work, and stop looking to the past for answers it doesn't have.
Hensley's recusal from performing same-sex marriages is not, in my view at least, based on her "Christian" beliefs. I'd change my tune if anyone could tell me that Jesus said something about same-sex anything, but this is Old Testament stuff. It's why so very many Christians prefer the OT, with its bigotry, hate and punishments, to the love and forgiveness of the New Testament. What harm does love between gays and lesbians cause? None that I'm aware of.
Given a free hand, the evangelicals would build the world of their dreams around the worst parts of the Old Testament, with the death penalty handed out for almost every offense.
". . . all crimes are punishable by death, followed by involuntary donation of the perpetrator's transplantable organs (including skin, scalp, and teeth). Not surprisingly, only Colonists are ever arrested for crimes; and only Crew are eligible to receive transplants, except as a rarely granted privilege in return for service to the Crew"
As a Jew I will say things were a little strange back then, then again, I am an atheist. However, there is many misinterpretations of the OT (as you call it) by so-called Christians.
I am a retired United Methodist minister. There is nothing highbrow about the faction that split off, they are just homophobic bigots. The trash took itself out.
I am no longer a practicing christian, but I am still a licensed pastor. I will marry any two people as long as they do it in my living room. I don't do churches anymore.
For the last decade, the Sovereign Christian Theocracy of Texas has consistently acted in favor of individuals' idiosyncratic, adlib "sincerely held religious beliefs" over THE LAW. That is, as long as that religion is Christianity.
If she loses this case, which I doubt, she will probably follow the custom and quit the bench and run for public office so she can do even more theocratic damage to what little of democracy is left in the SCTT.
You visited Texas willingly? I only went there for Basic Training and Tech School in the Air Force. I'd never been there before and I've never gone back. 🙂
Went to Big Bend National Park this spring and caught the McDonald Observatory on the way back. Had a great time. Glad I didn't stay much longer though.
I spent about 3 weeks in San Antonio on holiday. Apart from the proselytising and my 1st sight of a beggar, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Try going back with an "English" accent. Apparently it's really cyute!
No one at home thinks my accent is cute, and we've caught up with the begging if not the proselytising.
To someone from a fairly small place albeit the country's capital, it seemed like megalopolis to me. (My 1st trip out of the country had been for some reason to Norfolk Island, which is hardly that.) And being young I bought 2 pairs of cowboy boots. I must confess, later on I decided I much preferred San Francisco and Honolulu.
That happened after Castle Air Force Base (my stateside assignment after Vietnam) closed as an active SAC base and became an air museum. In my absence, the land in the area got so developed I didn't recognize it when I visited 3 decades later.
The only proper marriages are sacramental performed within the confines and with the blessing of the holy Catholic Church.
This judicial Har-lot shouldn't be performing marriages at all! And your priest has to use all of the right words! None of this "good enough" crap. In Latin! My God forbids any other weddings! This woman promulgates Satan's deception and adultery! Burn the witch!
Only when they need the extra numbers- just like Mormons and Jews. As soon as they get control, though, don't blink or you'll miss how fast they eat their allies...
Is their god a god of love and forgiveness or a god of loopholes and legalities? ←That is almost a rhetorical question. Conservatives and Evangelicals like to scream "woke mind virus," but it seems to me that their slow infection of government is more like cancer...
There's only one cure: radiation. From orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
It’s love and forgiveness for them, vengeance and judgement for others. Loopholes for them and legalities for others. In other words, their religion is whatever serves their purposes to give them power and control over as many folks as possible.
Their god is not a god of love and forgiveness. Not Jahve and not JX. Some xians have tried to make it so, and that's probably a good thing. But there are lots of stuff in the bible to support any bad behaviour.
The compelling government justification is that she’s a governmental official and by discriminating according to her religious beliefs she is establishing an official religion. As a judge, she is also supposed to be impartial in her duties, discriminating in this duty most likely is an indication that she is discriminating in other duties that demand impartiality. She ought to be removed from the bench over her zeal to be a bigot. There’s no justice in her position, and her decisions will be tainted from now on. She’s ineffectual at best, but mainly just the opposite of fair.
Of course, she will win since the GOP has games the systems across the board in their favor to install an anti-democratic, un-American, and unconstitutional theocratic dictatorship. Four years of Trump was enough to destroy our country.
Believers are told to obey all earthly laws and authorities and why in their own book (see Romans 13:1-5). Just saying.
Short answer to the question? Yes. She can and should be punished for disobeying the law. Any judge who can't or won't do the job they are required to do by law should be immediately removed from the position.
Perhaps Hensley should become a minister if her religion is so important to her. That might also prove difficult for her due to her own religion's teachings (1 Timothy 2:12, a rather misogynistic bit of scripture that should be illustrative of how Christian bigotry can be employed against HER. Irony, indeed).
What a tired joke this line of 'reasoning' is. "I'm facing consequences for my bigotry, you must be bigoted against my religion like I'm bigoted against you!" It's very childish and the judge should just offer her a binkie and a nap.
I wish I had known about this during my 20 years as a paramedic in Washington DC. At the time I was a practicing Christian and wouldn't you know it, I could have discriminated against all those gay / trans patients of mine. I'm guessing this gives firefighters and police officers the right to refuse to save life and property of gay / trans people as well. Maybe 911 operators should be allowed to ask if the caller or the patient they're calling for is gay or trans. It would really reduce the volume of calls we had to run. Even as a Christian, I would never have even considered refusing to care for someone because of their sexual orientation. Now that I'm an atheist, it angers me even more that Christians are allowed to get away with this crap. I have witnessed patients refusing care because the paramedic or firefighter was black. I'm guessing if this judge had to call 911 and a gay paramedic responded, she would have to refuse care for fear of being contaminated and her god rejecting her. The more I see this crap from people, the more I love my dog.
And I would not have had to endure watching so many children die when I worked on specialty teams at Children's National Medical center. You can't tell me that a god purposely wants children to die from brain tumors and diseases. Oh, that's right. It's all their imaginary Satan's fault. Or their god wants them to learn a lesson by having them suffer through the death of their child. What a sadistic POS he is then. Sorry. Touchy subject for me.
This behavior has its roots in the degradation by the deniers in the GOP of the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause. If these people can't separate their religious beliefs from their job as a public servant then they are in the wrong profession. We have a separation of powers so that no one part of the government becomes too powerful and if that is too much for these religious bigots then we must have the remedy of removing or sanctioning them.
Interesting (to me, anyway) that Texas law overrides religious beliefs when it comes to making Justices of the Peace perform inter-racial marriages. That fact seems to make it harder to claim for Hensley and her supporters that this is a case of "religious freedom."
The argument is that she can't religiously refuse marriages for legally protected classes (like race) but she can otherwise. Orientation not being a protected class in Texas.
If that argument holds up, maybe her boss can just fire her for being straight. After all, orientation is not a protected class lol.
I think that's how SCOTUS made SSM uniformly legal? Can't remember. That might win in California, but I doubt SCO Texas will say anti-gay discrimination is a form of sex discrimination.
I doubt we want that. It was 5-4 with Breyer, Kennedy, and RGB now replaced with Barrett, Gorsuch, and Jackson. I suspect they would overturn Obergefell if a challenge came to this SCOTUS. Tellingly, Roberts dissented, and he'd be the 'swing' vote now. Though I'm guessing he'd probably prefer it never come before the court than be stuck in the position of swing voter on gay marriage in 2024.
Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 101–650, title IV, § 404, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)
Now we can all note here that the Oath of Office Judges take does not say with the exception of one religion when it conflicts with the law. She was in violation of here oath and there should be no questions as how her case will end. However in Texas one really doesn't know for sure.
Texas is not exactly a bastion of human rights. I know this because I live here. If she can refuse to perform same-sex marriages, then it seems she would also be justified in refusing to perform marriages for people of color, or mixed-race marriages. Conservative theists of all stripes, can always rationalize excuses for their many hatreds.
I'm sure she would love it. But she can't discriminute based on razed.
That's only a SCOTUS decision away.
It's What scare me
It should. The entirety of the right's judicial project has been to stack the Federal courts with judges that will restore the apartheid regime of the deep South and empower fundamentalists in government.
Allow me a moment here.
I've noticed that a disproportionate number of Republicans these days seem to think that 𝑮𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑾𝒊𝒏𝒅 was some sort of historical instruction book. The 'old South' was never the way this novel portrays it; there was none of this 'well-mannered, well-dressed wealthy white landowners with happy slaves working their plantation' business. It's a fiction entirely, which makes sense once you figure out the book is a romance novel. Everything about the book was idealized or marginalized to make things more dramatic and it is a work of fiction, not history.
The slaves in the 'old South' were miserable, commonly mistreated, and while there might have been a few exceptions around, that does not excuse the practices in place at the time. Most people - including white people - were not wealthy landowners; that was the 1% of the period. The problems we have now were problems they had then, too; humanity didn't have any kind of 'fall from grace' between then and now that lead to our current woes.
Expecting to go back to some magical time period when things were better is a lie. Things were not, in fact, better when the old South existed, they were far worse for large numbers of people; and I do not mean just those with dark skin. The old South might have had some good points, but that does not make it a worthy goal, and quite bluntly, we can do better than that and there's no reason not to. Grow up, get ready to help put in some hard work, and stop looking to the past for answers it doesn't have.
Just like the 1950s were not a golden age for blacks, women, Jews (non-kkkristians in general), the LGBTQ+, et al.
I wonder oh Cleos thomas Well fair Send
Uncle Thomas would jockey for the position of 'house negro' should the Antebellum South rise again.
Hensley's recusal from performing same-sex marriages is not, in my view at least, based on her "Christian" beliefs. I'd change my tune if anyone could tell me that Jesus said something about same-sex anything, but this is Old Testament stuff. It's why so very many Christians prefer the OT, with its bigotry, hate and punishments, to the love and forgiveness of the New Testament. What harm does love between gays and lesbians cause? None that I'm aware of.
Given a free hand, the evangelicals would build the world of their dreams around the worst parts of the Old Testament, with the death penalty handed out for almost every offense.
...and then they'll be surprised when they end up like this poor fellow: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ5YU_spBw0
Gotta keep the organ banks stocked.
". . . all crimes are punishable by death, followed by involuntary donation of the perpetrator's transplantable organs (including skin, scalp, and teeth). Not surprisingly, only Colonists are ever arrested for crimes; and only Crew are eligible to receive transplants, except as a rarely granted privilege in return for service to the Crew"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Gift_from_Earth
Look up the real interpretation of an eye for eye, better yet ask a Rabbi.
As a Jew I will say things were a little strange back then, then again, I am an atheist. However, there is many misinterpretations of the OT (as you call it) by so-called Christians.
I came across this Urban Dictionary entry once and bookmarked it.
WCARTATOT: 1. What Christians Arrogantly Refer To As The "Old Testament"
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=WCARTATOT
Nobody thinks more about gay sex than supposedly straight conservatives.
I am a retired United Methodist minister. There is nothing highbrow about the faction that split off, they are just homophobic bigots. The trash took itself out.
I am no longer a practicing christian, but I am still a licensed pastor. I will marry any two people as long as they do it in my living room. I don't do churches anymore.
It's Texas. Gee. Waddaya think is gonna happen?
For the last decade, the Sovereign Christian Theocracy of Texas has consistently acted in favor of individuals' idiosyncratic, adlib "sincerely held religious beliefs" over THE LAW. That is, as long as that religion is Christianity.
If she loses this case, which I doubt, she will probably follow the custom and quit the bench and run for public office so she can do even more theocratic damage to what little of democracy is left in the SCTT.
"Don't mess with Texas. It's already a mess."
Religion only trumps law when the subject is abortion or LGBTQQIP2SA* people.
*For explanation of the 'full' initialism https://whatsonqueerbc.com/woq-bc-stories/what-does-the-acronym-mean (we really need to find a freaking *word*)
I've only spent maybe 3 or 4 months in the US at various times, but I got proselytised in Texas more than all the other places combined.😁
You visited Texas willingly? I only went there for Basic Training and Tech School in the Air Force. I'd never been there before and I've never gone back. 🙂
Went to Big Bend National Park this spring and caught the McDonald Observatory on the way back. Had a great time. Glad I didn't stay much longer though.
I spent about 3 weeks in San Antonio on holiday. Apart from the proselytising and my 1st sight of a beggar, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Try going back with an "English" accent. Apparently it's really cyute!
No one at home thinks my accent is cute, and we've caught up with the begging if not the proselytising.
Lackland Air Force Base is only about 11 miles from San Antonio. Never had the urge to visit. Maybe I should have.
To someone from a fairly small place albeit the country's capital, it seemed like megalopolis to me. (My 1st trip out of the country had been for some reason to Norfolk Island, which is hardly that.) And being young I bought 2 pairs of cowboy boots. I must confess, later on I decided I much preferred San Francisco and Honolulu.
Lackland is now *in* SA.
That happened after Castle Air Force Base (my stateside assignment after Vietnam) closed as an active SAC base and became an air museum. In my absence, the land in the area got so developed I didn't recognize it when I visited 3 decades later.
More than just “a” decade.
The only proper marriages are sacramental performed within the confines and with the blessing of the holy Catholic Church.
This judicial Har-lot shouldn't be performing marriages at all! And your priest has to use all of the right words! None of this "good enough" crap. In Latin! My God forbids any other weddings! This woman promulgates Satan's deception and adultery! Burn the witch!
I'm sure she doesn't consider Catholics to be Christians.
Only when they need the extra numbers- just like Mormons and Jews. As soon as they get control, though, don't blink or you'll miss how fast they eat their allies...
Is their god a god of love and forgiveness or a god of loopholes and legalities? ←That is almost a rhetorical question. Conservatives and Evangelicals like to scream "woke mind virus," but it seems to me that their slow infection of government is more like cancer...
There's only one cure: radiation. From orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Let the game of nuke a xenomorph begin. Appropriate day for news of about a vile monster bursting from the heart of this christo-fascist judge.
It’s love and forgiveness for them, vengeance and judgement for others. Loopholes for them and legalities for others. In other words, their religion is whatever serves their purposes to give them power and control over as many folks as possible.
Their god is not a god of love and forgiveness. Not Jahve and not JX. Some xians have tried to make it so, and that's probably a good thing. But there are lots of stuff in the bible to support any bad behaviour.
What we need is an atheist judge who will only marry secular couples because he/she considers religion irrelevant.
The compelling government justification is that she’s a governmental official and by discriminating according to her religious beliefs she is establishing an official religion. As a judge, she is also supposed to be impartial in her duties, discriminating in this duty most likely is an indication that she is discriminating in other duties that demand impartiality. She ought to be removed from the bench over her zeal to be a bigot. There’s no justice in her position, and her decisions will be tainted from now on. She’s ineffectual at best, but mainly just the opposite of fair.
Of course, she will win since the GOP has games the systems across the board in their favor to install an anti-democratic, un-American, and unconstitutional theocratic dictatorship. Four years of Trump was enough to destroy our country.
Believers are told to obey all earthly laws and authorities and why in their own book (see Romans 13:1-5). Just saying.
Short answer to the question? Yes. She can and should be punished for disobeying the law. Any judge who can't or won't do the job they are required to do by law should be immediately removed from the position.
Perhaps Hensley should become a minister if her religion is so important to her. That might also prove difficult for her due to her own religion's teachings (1 Timothy 2:12, a rather misogynistic bit of scripture that should be illustrative of how Christian bigotry can be employed against HER. Irony, indeed).
Yep, every time there is a case before her that has a male/s of the species* on either side, she should recuse herself.
* Assigned at birth obviously
Bet she has no issues with marrying divorced Christians.
What a tired joke this line of 'reasoning' is. "I'm facing consequences for my bigotry, you must be bigoted against my religion like I'm bigoted against you!" It's very childish and the judge should just offer her a binkie and a nap.
I hope the self-righteous hypocrite doesn't use a King James Version of her sacred book. James I had certain leanings she might find objectionable.
To Hensley...
Please name the relevant scripture in any of the 4 gospels where Jesus condemns homosexuals. We'll wait.
Tried that some time back. Finally quit waiting... 😁
Yeah, turning blue isn't good for one's health. 😊
It is according to Jim Bakker and his silver solution...
Yeah, but who wants to go around looking like a Smurf or a Na'vi all the time?
Jim Bakker already looks like a Smurf.
😂🤣😂
He wouldn't survive one day as a Na'vi. Pandora would kill him fast.
I wish I had known about this during my 20 years as a paramedic in Washington DC. At the time I was a practicing Christian and wouldn't you know it, I could have discriminated against all those gay / trans patients of mine. I'm guessing this gives firefighters and police officers the right to refuse to save life and property of gay / trans people as well. Maybe 911 operators should be allowed to ask if the caller or the patient they're calling for is gay or trans. It would really reduce the volume of calls we had to run. Even as a Christian, I would never have even considered refusing to care for someone because of their sexual orientation. Now that I'm an atheist, it angers me even more that Christians are allowed to get away with this crap. I have witnessed patients refusing care because the paramedic or firefighter was black. I'm guessing if this judge had to call 911 and a gay paramedic responded, she would have to refuse care for fear of being contaminated and her god rejecting her. The more I see this crap from people, the more I love my dog.
"I have witnessed patients refusing care because the paramedic or firefighter was black."
Like this?
https://youtu.be/NKCflzENdJ0
Angrums Karens getting the life sentences they so richly deserve...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kE1DQ822VI8
NOTE: Two of them got life sentences. The second one was a religious fanatic. Quelle surprise.
And I would not have had to endure watching so many children die when I worked on specialty teams at Children's National Medical center. You can't tell me that a god purposely wants children to die from brain tumors and diseases. Oh, that's right. It's all their imaginary Satan's fault. Or their god wants them to learn a lesson by having them suffer through the death of their child. What a sadistic POS he is then. Sorry. Touchy subject for me.
The existence of St. Jude CRH is sufficient proof there is no benevolent, interventionist god.
https://youtu.be/UWJFtu2UOHk
Look at the reaction on Muggeridge's face when he gets fact slapped by Fry.
Offended by Stephen hurting his imaginary deity's delicate fee-fees. The old fool.
I love that part.
This behavior has its roots in the degradation by the deniers in the GOP of the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause. If these people can't separate their religious beliefs from their job as a public servant then they are in the wrong profession. We have a separation of powers so that no one part of the government becomes too powerful and if that is too much for these religious bigots then we must have the remedy of removing or sanctioning them.
Interesting (to me, anyway) that Texas law overrides religious beliefs when it comes to making Justices of the Peace perform inter-racial marriages. That fact seems to make it harder to claim for Hensley and her supporters that this is a case of "religious freedom."
The argument is that she can't religiously refuse marriages for legally protected classes (like race) but she can otherwise. Orientation not being a protected class in Texas.
If that argument holds up, maybe her boss can just fire her for being straight. After all, orientation is not a protected class lol.
I think that's how SCOTUS made SSM uniformly legal? Can't remember. That might win in California, but I doubt SCO Texas will say anti-gay discrimination is a form of sex discrimination.
I doubt we want that. It was 5-4 with Breyer, Kennedy, and RGB now replaced with Barrett, Gorsuch, and Jackson. I suspect they would overturn Obergefell if a challenge came to this SCOTUS. Tellingly, Roberts dissented, and he'd be the 'swing' vote now. Though I'm guessing he'd probably prefer it never come before the court than be stuck in the position of swing voter on gay marriage in 2024.
Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 101–650, title IV, § 404, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)
Now we can all note here that the Oath of Office Judges take does not say with the exception of one religion when it conflicts with the law. She was in violation of here oath and there should be no questions as how her case will end. However in Texas one really doesn't know for sure.
Our intrepid reporters have obtained a copy of the Double Secret Judicial Oath:
"𝘐 𝘥𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘺 𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘫𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘺𝘱𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘐'𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘭𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘺 𝘋𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘙𝘕𝘊. 𝘚𝘰 𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘱 𝘮𝘦 𝘋𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘥."
This. Exactly.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6ec07a204ca1a441161946d07b36d28b93602a549dd51dda72fdd20cfd068ed3.jpg
Needs a scythe to complete the picture.