The internet seems to be buzzing about the Kim Davis issue. In case you have been living under a rock, or in the Australian outback, here's a brief summary. Kim Davis is a Clerk of Court for a County in Kentucky, the exact one is not relevant to this. She has taken the position that she will not issue any marriage licenses to same sex couples. In the heat of all this, she stop the clerk of court for the county from issuing any marriage licenses. As you would assume this has caused a furor. Rather predictably it has involved the courts.
The court system has demanded compliance with the law of the land. She has completely refused. She was given multiple opportunities to back down in this matter. She has refused. She claims that her faith tells her that she can't do it. The courts told her that she did not have a choice in the matter. She refused to comply. She is now in jail for contempt of court.
There are a lot of people saying an awful lot about this situation. Some are claiming she is where she belongs. Some are saying the whole thing makes no sense. Some are saying it is a matter of persecution.
Let me be clear, we cannot have office holders with a responsibility to uphold the law of land in defiance of that law. When someone is elected to office, and they take the oath of office, part of their personal liberty evaporates. That oath becomes their driving mandate during their term of office. That oath includes the concept of upholding all the laws of the land. It does not include an exception for the ones you don't like. It does not give you an out if your faith says otherwise. It is a binary thing you are either in compliance or you are not.
Ms Davis, failed in her obligation to uphold the law of the land. It does not matter how you feel about the law. How I feel about the law. It is the law of the land that same sex couples have a right to obtain marriage licenses. If her conscience precluded her from complying with the law that left her with as I set two options. She could comply with the law or she could resign her position and allow the people of her county through whatever process they have find a replacement for her.
When she refused to comply, the courts jailed her for it. I do not see this as persecution at all. She defied the courts. She had her, 'here I stand I can do no other', moment. And the courts rightly judged that she was in contempt. She has ended up exactly where she was going to be given the trajectory of this matter.
I believe fervently that office holders cannot defy the laws they are assigned to uphold. If they do so, they do so at their own peril. I also believe that the legitimate needs of any county's clerk of courts office cannot be a part of some political blood sport. There are just too many things that these offices have to do, have to do correctly, and have to be punctual about getting done for some three ring circus to erupt over someone's personal belief's.
It is sad to see this thing happen, but Ms Davis got to where she is by putting her own beliefs ahead of the law of the land. That sort of conflict cannot be tolerated for any reason.
The court system has demanded compliance with the law of the land. She has completely refused. She was given multiple opportunities to back down in this matter. She has refused. She claims that her faith tells her that she can't do it. The courts told her that she did not have a choice in the matter. She refused to comply. She is now in jail for contempt of court.
There are a lot of people saying an awful lot about this situation. Some are claiming she is where she belongs. Some are saying the whole thing makes no sense. Some are saying it is a matter of persecution.
Let me be clear, we cannot have office holders with a responsibility to uphold the law of land in defiance of that law. When someone is elected to office, and they take the oath of office, part of their personal liberty evaporates. That oath becomes their driving mandate during their term of office. That oath includes the concept of upholding all the laws of the land. It does not include an exception for the ones you don't like. It does not give you an out if your faith says otherwise. It is a binary thing you are either in compliance or you are not.
Ms Davis, failed in her obligation to uphold the law of the land. It does not matter how you feel about the law. How I feel about the law. It is the law of the land that same sex couples have a right to obtain marriage licenses. If her conscience precluded her from complying with the law that left her with as I set two options. She could comply with the law or she could resign her position and allow the people of her county through whatever process they have find a replacement for her.
When she refused to comply, the courts jailed her for it. I do not see this as persecution at all. She defied the courts. She had her, 'here I stand I can do no other', moment. And the courts rightly judged that she was in contempt. She has ended up exactly where she was going to be given the trajectory of this matter.
I believe fervently that office holders cannot defy the laws they are assigned to uphold. If they do so, they do so at their own peril. I also believe that the legitimate needs of any county's clerk of courts office cannot be a part of some political blood sport. There are just too many things that these offices have to do, have to do correctly, and have to be punctual about getting done for some three ring circus to erupt over someone's personal belief's.
It is sad to see this thing happen, but Ms Davis got to where she is by putting her own beliefs ahead of the law of the land. That sort of conflict cannot be tolerated for any reason.
RSS Feed
