Judge: “Mr. Larch you are accused of invoking your Catholic faith in refusing to bake a cake for this gay couple’s wedding and instead referring them to a rival bakery. As a broad open minded liberal judge I must ask this question, aren’t you ashamed of yourself?”
Mr. Larch: “Your honor I think one of them voted for Donald Trump in the last election.”
There are thousands–maybe hundreds of thousands–of explanations about why Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton last week that you can find online and in print, as well as why the Republicans maintained control of Congress and gained governorships.
Here’s another one, although this discussion confronts one angle, what I call “inevitable leftism.” Barack Obama was the “Hope and Change” candidate for president in 2008; four years later, “Forward” was his rallying cry. Some conservative pundits noticed that “Forward” has a long history as a communist and socialist slogan.
Leftists, Obama is one, firmly believe that their cause is one of inevitable success, that humanity is headed towards–choose your term–a collectivist, socialist, or communist utopia. They view popular leaders such as Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan, as atavistic aberrations, mere potholes that can be paved over when the time is right, sooner, as opposed to later.
Except when they are wrong.
The French Revolution, still idealized by the Left, deposed a king and disestablished the Roman Catholic church, and replaced the Ancien Régime with an atheist republic that executed thousands, which was quickly transformed into a dictatorship led by an Italian. Along the way the days and months were renamed in a new decimal calendar–hours and minutes were divided by ten too, as were weights and measures. A couple of decades later there was a king again in France, the Catholic church was the state religion–but the metric system survived, yet strangely enough, it still hasn’t completely caught on in the United States.
Maximilien Robespierre, the guiding force of the French Revolution, and his inner circle were certain they were guiding the world on the right path. He may have even held on to that belief as he walked up to the guillotine, two years after Louis XVI after made the same, final stroll.
The Russian Revolution’s state, the Soviet Union, was similarly hailed by the Left as a societal inevitably, it also led to regicide, and tens of millions were killed. Because the USSR survived much longer than the French Republic, it succeeded in shattering Russian culture. But the surviving Russian nation is a South American-style sham democracy run by a thug, not a nation consisting of a populace that lives “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
Barack Obama is not a psychopath or a murderer. But he’s a leftist, albeit one along the lines of French President François Hollande. Obama decided that America needs government-run health care in 2009 but he knew that what the Democrats euphemistically call single-payer would be unpopular, so a hybrid program, quickly dubbed ObamaCare, was developed as a bridge to that health care utopia. ObamaCare is deeply unpopular, and it was one reason for Trump’s win. The president-elect says he will repeal most of ObamaCare. The Democrats’ push for gay marriage is another page from the book of Dem inevitability, but only 21 nations allow same-sex marriages, none of them are in Asia, and South Africa is the only country in Africa that allows it.
It was the Democrats who, through their many friends in the judiciary, that created the so-called crisis surrounding the minuscule segment of the population who feel compelled to use the washrooms and the locker rooms–even in high school–of the opposite gender. They view choose-your-own-bathroom as their next social inevitability. The Democrats are the party of the confused horny teenage boy who wants to shower with girls.
Next year France will hold a presidential election. Marine Le Pen, a far-right politician with a fierce anti-immigrant stance, whose election as president last year ago seemed as likely as Trump moving in to the White House was, is confident of her chances. Hollande hasn’t declared himself as a candidate. Is Le Pen, another atavistic aberration, the inevitability of France?
France is ten percent Muslim. With the higher birth rates of its Muslim citizens a majority Muslim France could be possible by the end of the century. Gay marriage has been legal in France since 2013. Will it be in 2113?
The policy of open borders is also viewed as the next level of human achievement by the Left. It has worked well for the European Union, but there’s a big difference between thousands Germans buying homes in Italy and thousands of Middle Eastern migrants arriving in ramshackle boats there. Democrats, and even some Republicans, have been ignoring calls from ordinary citizens, now dubbed “the Forgotten Man,” to secure the southern border for decades. Opposition to open borders was the main reason why British voters voted to leave the EU.
Of course no one can predict the future. Not even leftists, even though they never tire in telling you how smart they are.
In the United States the hubris of inevitability led to the defeat of the Left last week.
What Cruz has said is that Gay Marriage is not a top three issue for him, but you might be surprised considering all I’ve written on the topic & the culture wars is that it’s not a top 3 issue for me either.
Now I can’t speak for Ted Cruz or Mike Huckabee but here is my top 3 list.
Right now for me Issue #1 is the war on terror specifically the threat of ISIS.
You can’t fight a culture war if you’re dead and ISIS threatens not only the US but all of western civilization and in fact the world.
Then comes issue #2 for me, The Border and Illegal Immigration.
You can’t fight a culture war in your country unless you have a country and you don’t have a country if you don’t have borders.
and that’s not even talking about how important the border is to the war on ISIS or the threat from the various drug cartels that are walking across it.
Does Mike Huckabee think that the border is not a top three issue?
Now there are plenty of issues that are worthy of #3. There is the black lives matter, race relations and the war on cops, there is Gay Marriage and the broader religious freedom issue, there is Russia and NATO, China in the pacific and of course the Economy, but for me there is only one Issue that can go to #3
Abortion trumps all of those remaining issues including the cultural ones because once a country is safe (issue #1) and it’s borders secure (#2) you need to have a country that supports and values life.
Without valuing life, black lives can’t matter (only Abortion is more dangerous to black Americans than the gangs that are slaughtering them in the cities), without the lives thrown away in abortion you don’t have the manpower to for a military to confront Russia or China and unless you respect the lives of your own people you won’t find value in the lives of those oppressed by such totalitarians. Without the respect for life you throw away the people who drive the economy and you don’t respect the people who work within it and while Gay Marriage is a foolish narcissistic choice it can’t trump the right for a person to be born and make that foolish choice.
And anyways if it turn out that the current liberal meme concerning being “born gay” is right, the right and value of every unborn child becomes more critical because the moment homosexuality can be determined in vitro you will see a gay genocide. Every human life has value. Some people object to the murder of Gay people by ISIS, I object to their murder in the womb as well.
Now again I don’t know what is the priority for Mike Huckabee but if he is hitting Ted Cruz for not having Gay Marriage as a top 3 issue but for it to crack top 3 then one of the ones on my list can’t be on his list.
So tell me Governor, which issue ISIS, Immigration or abortion is not important enough to make the Huckabee top 3?
I suspect if the previous governor did this to defuse the whole Kim Davis business a Democrat might still govern the state today.
Kentucky’s new governor on Tuesday ordered county clerks’ names removed from state marriage license forms at the center of a controversy involving Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed after refusing to issue licenses to gay couples.
Governor Matt Bevin had said shortly after his election in November, as only the second Republican governor of Kentucky since 1971, that he would change the forms that had drawn objections from Davis and some other clerks.
“To ensure that the sincerely held religious beliefs of all Kentuckians are honored, I took action to revise the clerk marriage license form,” Bevin said in a statement.
“This is a wonderful Christmas gift for Kim Davis,” the group said. “Kim can celebrate Christmas with her family knowing she does not have to choose between her public office and her deeply-held religious convictions.”
I think driving Kim Davis from the Democrat party will cost them for decades to come.
Note: I don’t recall the ACLU getting their knickers in an uproar over Obama’s exec orders.
11th Doctor:You know, since we’re talking with mouths, not really an opportunity that comes along very often, I just want to say, you know, you have never been very reliable. Idris (the TARDIS):And you have? 11th Doctor:You didn’t always take me where I wanted to go. Idris (the TARDIS):No, but I always took you where you needed to go.
Doctor Who: The Doctor’s Wife 2011
Amy Pond: So, what’s wrong with me? River Song:Nothing. You’re fine. 11th Doctor:Everything. You’re dying. River: Doctor! 11th Doctor:Yes, you’re right. If we lie to her, she’ll get all better.
Doctor Who: Flesh and Stone 2010
One of the things about Christianity that is constantly mentioned is “Love”. There is love of God and there is love of neighbor.
The reality of love is wanting the good for your neighbor as if your neighbor was yourself and acting accordingly , even if it causes you inconvenience, pain or death. As Christ put it himself:
This is my commandment: love one another as I love you. No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.
And that’s the thing about love, when you love someone you are willing to accept grief, take for an example a listen to this speech from the Opiate awareness event held earlier this year in Fitchburg:
This lady is willing to take a lot of grief for the sake of loving someone.
And that brings us to Gay Marriage and the whole #lovewins bullshit.
One of the things you’ll find about a Christian is that while we are often accused of hate, the things we generally hate are not actually real individuals Sarah Hoyt put it well
It’s funny, as much as we get accused of “hating” the only things and people I’ve hated are historical people and regimes that have killed millions of their citizens. Yeah, yeah, I hate red and black fascism, aka Nazism and Communism like I hate hell, all Capulets and … well. Not thee. The other things I hate are more things I strongly dislike: Licorice, bad, preachy books, teachers who don’t do their job, cold days. I don’t spend my time sitting around and going “I hate you snow, I do.” I just mumble disconsolately about not being able to walk and my fingers hurting with cold even while inside.
But what happens when a Christian encounters an individual an actual soul the entire equation changes. A person is not a theoretical construct, it’s a fellow soul, created in God’s image. For example, one might oppose illegal immigration but if encountering a person who is an illegal immigrant one would not hesitate to help such a person in need. That’s what Christianity done right does.
It’s similar to what C.S. Lewis Described in Screwtape 6
As regards his more general attitude to the war, you must not rely too much on those feelings of hatred which the humans are so fond of discussing in Christian, or anti-Christian, periodicals. In his anguish, the patient can, of course, be encouraged to revenge himself by some vindictive feelings directed towards the German leaders, and that is good so far as it goes. But it is usually a sort of melodramatic or mythical hatred directed against imaginary scapegoats. He has never met these people in real life-they are lay figures modelled on what he gets from newspapers. The results of such fanciful hatred are often most disappointing, and of all humans the English are in this respect the most deplorable milksops. They are creatures of that miserable sort who loudly proclaim that torture is too good for their enemies and then give tea and cigarettes to the first wounded German pilot who turns up at the back door.
Do what you will, there is going to be some benevolence, as well as some malice, in your patient’s soul. The great thing is to direct the malice to his immediate neighbours whom he meets every day and to thrust his benevolence out to the remote circumference, to people he does not know. The malice thus becomes wholly real and the benevolence largely imaginary.
Christians, those who actually believe rather than those who use the religion for fun or profit or power, will always direct their love toward people who actually exist while disliking things they may do or believe.
But love isn’t just giving people what they want and that’s the weapon the forces of Gay Marriage have used against some Christians, it’s what Hoyt called Weaponized Empathy:
This is why they constantly bleat out accusations of racism, sexism, etc… because the Left knows that Conservatives, Libertarians and other non-Progressives are generally pretty decent people and don’t want to feel as if they hurting people or doing a moral wrong. In simple terms, they propose to use our better natures against us.
In the recent Planned Parenthood scandal, Rebecca Watson released a video practically pleading her viewers to believe the entire thing was a lie. Take a look at this screencap.
You can see her pleading expression, the raised eyebrows, her almost innocent look, the locket, etc… Everything is designed to make you believe this woman is in earnest, and how could you possibly disagree with her? Why, you must be some kind of monster if you don’t believe her! This is a classic example of Weaponized Empathy. White Knights, eager to defend the downtrodden woman, eat this sort of thing up. Of course, where the empathy was on her side when babies (one still living) were cut up for parts, nobody seems to know.
Now of course with abortion the game is much easier to see through, there is a body, a baby once that exists that can’t be denied because it’s something you can see.
But unless you’ve had some sort of private revelation (which I suspect are more common that people think)it’s harder with gay marriage, one doesn’t see the cost directly in front of you, but if you take the Catholic Faith seriously the cost is there.
As I’ve said over and over again no amount of belief makes the Catholic faith true, but likewise no amount of disbelief makes it false and if you know it’s true. If heaven and hell are not concepts but actual facts you also know the cost of unrepented mortal sin is everlasting death.
If you claim Christianity and you excuse mortal sin, or explain away mortal sin or justify it to a person who asks you to do so, then you are loving yourself, not someone else. If one doesn’t have the moral courage or the love, or one wants fame (read Anne Hathaway) one will give into the culture and be cheered for it, rejecting the faith because it will not accept the sins of a loved one.
And because we know this, we’re willing to take the barbs, we’re willing to take the insults, we’re willing to be called haters, willing to be harassed by the culture, by the media, by those on twitter and even in our communities. We’re willing to be fined and even jailed in order to give the warning, mortal sin will destroy you.
We will endure all of those things in the hope of saving somebody anybody from the fire, a friend, an enemy or a stranger that might hear our argument and think.
That is what love is, being willing to endure these things for the good of another, and when even one person changes their path, or decides to appeal to God for help and you help them save themselves from eternal death, that’s when Love wins.
The Kim Davis story has not been kind to our friends on the left.
First she definitely but respectfully refuses to violate her Christian faith by putting granting marriage certificates to gay couples on the grounds that with her name on them it suggests her cooperation in sin.
Then when the court orders her to do so she refuses again and rather than fine her the judge rightly concludes that someone would just pay the fine so her jails her, making them fear she will be perceived as a martyr.
Just as they fear Davis goes to jail, and even worse doesn’t mimic leftist activists attacking police or authorities, she accepts the sentence maintaining her determination not to violate her conscience.
And as she’s in jail people protest for her and unlike the black lives matter protests or the occupy wall street protests there is no destruction or violence.
Then the judge, a member of the GOP, with his prospects for higher position permanently dashed as the PR gets worse and worse for the left and as two presidential candidates show up to lead protests, releases her on the grounds that her deputies (well most of them) agree to issue licences.
Davis when released not only speaks only of God and promises not to violate her conscience, but declines the offer of an armed group to protect her from further arrest.
Now the last thing the left could hope for was that she would fire her deputies, allowing them to attack her for demanding a conscience exception while not allowing her subordinates to do the same.
Before starting her workday, Davis appeared defiant, saying she will not issue any marriage licenses that go against her religious beliefs. But she left the door open for her deputies to continue giving out marriage licenses to same-sex couples as long as those documents do not have Davis’ name or title on them.
The marriage license that the couple received said “pursuant to federal court order” on it, and instead of listing Davis’ name and Rowan County, it says city of Morehead, the county seat.
David said Monday that any such licenses “will not issued or authorized by me.” Her work-around is not to sign them but not interfere with her deputies who do give them out.
“(U.S. District Judge David Bunning) indicated last week that he was willing to accept altered marriage licenses even though he was not certain of their validity,” Davis said. “I, too, have great doubts whether the license issued under these conditions are even valid.”
Actually according to Kentucky law they would not be valid but that would wait upon yet another lawsuit if anyone cared to launch one, but what matters is this.
Kim Davis retains both her elected position and her freedom of conscience. She has been able to force the very compromise that the left was unwilling to consider less than two weeks ago and the precedent is now set for Christians to refuse to participate in mortal sin that risks their soul without costing them any elected office they hold.
That’s the worst possible result for the left unless she is re-elected in 2016, then Thatwill be the worst possible result for the left.
Over the next few years you are going to be branded as bigots, hated and derided. You will be portrayed in every form of culture, plays, TV series and movies as people to be shunned and no member of the media will fail to come after you for your offenses against the twin sacraments of Abortion & Gay Marriage…The days of easy Christianity are over Now is the time to decide.
DaTechGuy March 29th 2013
One of the arguments I repeatedly hear from our friends on the left is that Kim Davis is the next George Wallace on Twitter an example:
I really find such tweets a lot of fun because the depth of historical ignorance they show is astounding
For all his: “segregation today, segregation tomorrow segregation forever” bluster and his showboat blocking of a schoolhouse door, George Wallace proved to be a pol whose primary concerning was getting power and obtaining more. Wallace used his showboat stance for political gain, using it, when term limited in office, to elect his wife as governor, using it to repeal his state’s term limit rule allowing him to run against his wife’s former Lt gov (she died of cancer in office) serving several more terms.
Furthermore he used it highlight himself nationally to peruse four presidential campaigns, the first abruptly pre-empted by JFK’s assassination, the 2nd on a third party ticket where he became one of the few 3rd party candidates ever to win states multiple states, the third for the Democrat nomination in 1972, a race he was doing well in until an attempted assassination attempt ended his campaign and left him in a wheelchair for life, and a fourth in 1976 which didn’t gain much traction.
Wallace didn’t go to jail or risk penalties for his beliefs because he didn’t have any other than “George Wallace deserves to be elected” , when segregation was popular he trumped segregation, when it became unpopular suddenly decided he spoke against it. In fact it seems to me that when it came to pols following in Wallace’s footstep the people are not Democrats like Kim Davis but Democrats like Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who, as you might have forgotten, abruptly changed their position when it appeared large gay donors were closing their purses.
And once they did by an astounding coincidence the entire democrat party from Bill Clinton who signed the Defence of Marriage act to every single Democrat pol who said things like this:
suddenly decided that anyone who didn’t beleve in gay marriage was a bigot. As Dave Weigel put it.
The new Democratic advocates for SSM fall into two camps. The first consists of people who always liked the idea of this but worried about losing national elections. In his memoir, Democratic consultant Bob Shrum remembers John Kerry fretting that the Massachusetts Supreme Court had forced Democrats to talk about gay marriage before they were ready to. “Why couldn’t they just wait a year?” he asked Shrum, mournfully. The second camp consists of people who really do oppose the idea of gay people getting married. Republicans argued that this second camp was tiny, and that liberals were hiding behind it. They were right!
There are two words to describe this: Political opportunism. That sounds very George Wallace to me.
Contrast all of this with Kim Davis. Davis didn’t seek publicity, those who choose to force her hand did, as marriage licences were available just a few miles away. Even as the country’s media and elites demonized her and pundit after pundit attacked her she went to court to defend her position citing her religious beliefs seeking a compromise that would allow her to function without her name being one marriage certificates.
When ordered to jail, she didn’t put on a show, she went to jail and when released during the middle of a rally in her support (a rally used by at least one presidential candidate to showboat a bit) rather than talking politics or anything of that nature she praised God while her lawyers, speaking to media stated that she would not be doing anything different to violate her conscience:
Doesn’t sound very Wallace. In fact, instead of political opportunism that’s a classic example of civil disobedience. Violate law, take penalty. That’s how it works.
Furthermore we’ve had several tweets talking about her disobeying the “law” and noting that some of her defenders have been upset other locations violating federal laws (such as sanctuary cities). There is an excellent answer to these statments that I can’t take credit for writingemphasis mine
Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”
Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.
Yes, these questions are still in my mind. In deep disappointment I have wept over the laxity of the church. But be assured that my tears have been tears of love. There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love. Yes, I love the church. How could I do otherwise? I am in the rather unique position of being the son, the grandson and the great grandson of preachers. Yes, I see the church as the body of Christ. But, oh! How we have blemished and scarred that body through social neglect and through fear of being nonconformists.
That is an excellent summation of what Kim Davis has done, she has stood up against an unjust “law” rejecting the fear of nonconformity and vividly illustrated the attempt to to create a de facto religious test for office, to wit, if you are christian you may not hold public office in the United States unless you are what we call a “cafeteria catholic” or protestant, willing to ignore or even violate you beliefs for the sake of political office.
Now some have argued that Davis wasn’t in jail to protest a religious test for office she was in jail for contempt of court for violating a judge’s order based on her religion and they would be right.
However they forget that the person who wrote that excellent summation of what Kim Davis did, some fellow by the name of Martin Luther King, did so while in jail, not for protesting segregation, but for parading without a permit and as for legalities King had a few things to say about that too: emphasis mine again
of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.
We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s antireligious laws.
You know this is the type of language that Democrat pols and our friends on the left have labeled “christofacist” or a “homophobe” or a “bigoted” comparing it to the words of the mullas in Iran, Saudi Arabia & ISIS.
Who knew they hated Martin Luther King so much?
Closing thought: Given the choice between loyalty to a political party willing to join you when the political wind is with you and likely willing drop you twice as fast if the wind changes and loyalty to a God who love yous and sent his son to die for the redemption of our sins, I, along with Kim Davis, Martin Luther King and Pope Francis suggest the latter.
Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.
Martin Luther King Letter from a Birmingham Jail 1963
I John Brown, am now quite certain that the sins of this nation can only be purged with blood.
John Brown in a note handed to his jailer as he was being led to his hanging 1859
A few days ago, just after her release from jail Kim Davis was given an offer that was…interesting.
In this video, Stewart Rhodes and some of the Oath Keepers national and local leadership discuss the real issues behind what is happening in Rowan County, Kentucky. We have had boots on the ground there since last week and will continue to have a presence. Stewart Rhodes reached out personally to Davis’s legal counsel to offer protection to Kim, to ensure that she will not be illegally detained again. We would like to stress in the strongest terms possible that we are doing this not because of her views on gay marriage, but because she is an elected public servant who has been illegally arrested and held without due process.
Even assuming the absolute best of intention on behalf of the Oath keepers accepting their offer would have been the absolutely worst decision that Kim Davis could have made.
Kim Davis’ actions, liberal protestations to the contrary not withstanding, are not only a classic example of civil disobedience but in the best traditions of the early saints who were willing to suffer for the sake of the word.
Consider her words upon unexpectedly being released from jail:
Regardless of the event (planned before anyone knew she was going to be released) with its political overtones (including using some good old-fashioned muscle employed by the Huckabee team to keep Ted Cruz off that stage with Davis) Kim’s Davis’ entire speech was about God and serving him and thanks and love for her supporters.
No critique of the judge, no anger over her imprisonment, no fancy words about the political irony of a bunch of Republicans defending an elected democrat. No talk about the likelihood of her being re-imprisoned. Everything completely consistent with the dignity of the stand she took for the sake of her soul and others.
Given her situation the offer of armed protection must have been attractive, she has been vilified and hated not only by the left for her principled stand but by some on the right objecting to her civil disobedience on law and order grounds. How easy would it have been for her to accept this offer of protection. How comforting might it have been to know people considered her so important they were willing to fight for her. How tempting.
I’m pleased to say she did not give into this temptation:
Oath Keepers has been contacted by Kim Davis’ legal team at Liberty Counsel, and they have, on her behalf, declined our offer of assistance in protecting her from a possible repeat incarceration by Federal District Court judge David Bunning. We will, of course, respect her wishes, and are hereby issuing a stand-down for our security volunteers who were planning on deploying to Morehead, Kentucky on Monday.
The taking of this officer would have been transformative. Suddenly instead of her being a Christian martyr for her soul and others she would have set up a possible armed confrontation between the Oath Keepers and federal marshals, a confrontation that would have ended badly and could have ended in bloodshed, and given the state of division in the country at this time, who knows what might happen next?
So given the choice to be John Brown or Martin Luther King she has chosen King. I think it was the right choice.
Rowan County clerk Kim Davis and her deputy clerks were summoned to appear before U.S. District Judge David Bunning after she repeatedly denied them marriage licenses, cited her religious beliefs and “God’s authority.”
The judge said his only alternative was to jail her because he did not believe she would comply with his order even if she were fined. She was escorted out of his courtroom by a deputy, although not in handcuffs, to be turned over to the custody of federal marshals.
An interesting detail from BuzzFeed: Lawyers for the gay couples who want her to issue the licenses asked the court to fine her, not send her to jail. Since when do gay-rights supporters ask for leniency for a Christian who’s defying them on gay marriage? Since, I think, this case started picking up national media attention. They don’t want to make a martyr out of Davis. Locking her up does that in a visible way that hitting her in the wallet doesn’t.
They should be, from the very first Christians from St. Peter to St Paul and public officials like St. Thomas More all willingly went to jail and worse for Christ and rather than destroy Christianity it has made it stronger.
Before all this happens, however, they will seize and persecute you, they will hand you over to the synagogues and to prisons, and they will have you led before kings and governors because of my name. It will lead to your giving testimony. Remember, you are not to prepare your defense beforehand, for I myself shall give you a wisdom in speaking that all your adversaries will be powerless to resist or refute. You will even be handed over by parents, brothers, relatives, and friends, and they will put some of you to death. You will be hated by all because of my name, but not a hair on your head will be destroyed. By your perseverance you will secure your lives.
Now I’m a law and order guy and personally I would have resigned which is consistent with the actions of some Roman officials who converted but Ms. Davis stance is not inconsistent with others.
Her position takes a lot of courage and it’s likely why so many are so enraged at her.
I don’t know how long she will be in jail but I’ll tell you this in 100 years I suspect many of those who hate Ms. Davis today will hate her even more.
Update: At Instapundit Ed Driscoll has some has fun:
Saint Thomas More’s last words before being beheaded
Yesterday at the Washington Post Jonathan H. Adler quoted a speech from Justice Scalia from 2002 to make the case that Kim Davis, the elected Democrat County Clerk in Kentucky should resign:
[W]hile my views on the morality of the death penalty have nothing to do with how I vote as a judge, they have a lot to do with whether I can or should be a judge at all. To put the point in the blunt terms employed by Justice Harold Blackmun towards the end of his career on the bench, when he announced that he would henceforth vote (as Justices William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall had previously done) to overturn all death sentences, when I sit on a Court that reviews and affirms capital convictions, I am part of “the machinery of death.” My vote, when joined with at least four others, is, in most cases, the last step that permits an execution to proceed. I could not take part in that process if I believed what was being done to be immoral. . . .
[I]n my view the choice for the judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted, constitutional laws and sabotaging death penalty cases. He has, after all, taken an oath to apply the laws and has been given no power to supplant them with rules of his own. Of course if he feels strongly enough he can go beyond mere resignation and lead a political campaign to abolish the death penalty” and if that fails, lead a revolution. But rewrite the laws he cannot do.
Looking at this quote it occurs to me, rather than an argument for Kim Davis to resign it’s actually an argument for her not only to stand her ground but to seek re-election for continuing to do so.
In the example cited three Different supreme Court justices Harold Blackmun, William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall all despite the having taken an oath to apply the laws and having no power to change them made a conscious decision based on their personal morality that they would, regardless of evidence, undermine legal proceedings all made according to laws passed by the people and upheld by the courts because they “believed what was done to be immoral”.
However despite this, the media made no attempt to pillory them, the legal community did not censure them, the democrat congress did not demand their impeachment and today all of them are well remembered and honored. Nor did anyone object to said principles being based on a religious moral code.
And our friends on the left have routinely cheered civil disobedience in defiance to law, nobody on the left or in the mainstream media was calling for the resignation of Gavin Newsom when he was issuing marriage licences contrary to law.
Furthermore if you go back in history it’s not those who enforced the fugitive slave laws, those who upheld the Dred Scott Decision or those who acted under Plessy v Ferguson that are remembered or lionized in history, it’s those who opposed them and took risk to their reputation, their livelihood and their lives to oppose it.
And of course as an elected official she can’t just be fired, it means a long legal process in a state where judges are elected.
Based on all the evidence the surprise isn’t that she is ignoring the calls for her to cave, the surprise is that anyone expects her to do so.