Home >> Religion >> How Kim Davis’ Refusal to Issue Marriage Licenses Helps Same–Sex Marriage

How Kim Davis’ Refusal to Issue Marriage Licenses Helps Same–Sex Marriage

Marriage BillboardGod bless Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis a devout, if confused, Christian who decided her belief in God prevents her from issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples.

Davis fails to understand when one works for Caesar one is required to follow Caesar’s rules. Since she can’t follow that rule, the right and Christian course is to resign her position in protest.

But she refuses to resign and refuses to obey a local court order.

Davis appealed to the Supreme Court for a stay and it landed on the desk of the morally bankrupt Justice Elena Kagan who long before the court considered homosexual marriage presided over a same–sex wedding and then refused to recuse herself from deliberations this year.

Her appeal was rejected when it didn’t gain the support of four justices.

Now Davis has run the race, made the public aware and now should resign.

As an Evangelical Christian I’m beginning to feel my view is in the minority, but that doesn’t make me wrong. A Twitter acquaintance said, “I am positive the state is required to make an accommodation if feasible, which it certainly is.” Fellow columnist Terrance Jeffery writes, “Can a Christian be a county clerk in the United States?…Can a Christian be a doctor? A nurse? A public-school teacher?”

The answer is maybe, yes, yes and maybe. Both Jeffery and my Twitter pal are making the same category error by refusing to issue marriage licenses that homosexuals made when they demanded licenses.

Homosexuals were always free to get married as long as they agreed with the definition: One man joined to one woman. But that’s not what the same–sex activists wanted. They demanded a relationship of their design that is not and never has been a marriage. Then they wanted the government and society to approve and ratify this drastic redefinition of a centuries–old institution.

Davis’ supporters claim she is entitled to accommodation for belief under religious freedom laws. The go–to example is the Moslem woman being allowed to wear a headscarf on the job. Yes, that’s allowed. What’s not allowed is permitting the Moslem woman to refuse to deal with Jews.

Then there’s the Costco employee who refused to work in the fast–food kitchen because he didn’t want to handle pork, but Davis isn’t refusing to make pigs–in–a–blanket, she’s refusing to let people share a blanket.

READ:  Fifteen Years On, I Wonder What the Falling Man Would Think

Government official Kim Davis acting on her personal belief and refusing marriage licenses is no different from IRS enforcer Lois Lerner acting on her personal belief and conspiring to deny tax exempt status to Tea Party organizations. Sure one is passive aggressive and the other is aggressive aggressive, but bottom line is both are aggressive.

EEOC regulations don’t support Davis. The law requires accommodating: “…an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs or practices unless the accommodation would impose an undue hardship.” Refusing to issue marriage licenses defines “undue hardship.”

This case has even driven me to agree with an ACLU lawyer that told the Courier–Journal “government officials must carry out the duties of public office.” If she doesn’t resign, Davis single–handedly gives homosexual activists the Holy Grail they’ve been seeking for decades: A legitimate denial of their civil rights.

Before the Supremes’ unGodly decision the civil rights argument was risible. Now it isn’t. A Kentucky clerk refusing to issue a marriage license to a qualified couple in 2015 is exactly equivalent to a Kentucky registrar refusing to allow blacks to vote in 1962.

Jeffery contends nothing prevents homosexual couples from driving to another Kentucky county and get a marriage license from some heathen clerk — just as nothing prevented our 1962 blacks from moving to New York and registering to vote, proving this is ground on which believers don’t want to fight.

If Davis ran a bakery and refused to make a cake for a homosexual wedding, then she would be in the right and I would contribute to her legal fund. The same goes for being a photographer, caterer or valet parking firm. But continuing to resist as a government official only helps create sympathy for homosexual marriage and undermines the Christian cause.

One final note: Davis, like all of us, is a flawed Christian. She worked 26 years in the clerk’s office before winning the job last November, possibly explaining her reluctance to resign the position now. Nothing however, can explain Davis winning as a Democrat, which is where her confusion becomes painfully evident. How can a Christian run for office as the standard bearer of a party that’s made a sacrament of abortion?

I can only assume that so far no one has asked her to sharpen a scalpel.

Looking for more great news and commentary from a conservative perpective? Visit our homepage!

About Michael R Shannon


  1. As a Christian, I am thrilled to see another stand strong in faith….that is her choice,.. as is continuing to work as an employee of the County…..Now is the time, perhaps, to decide “which” is the most valuable to her…..she can continue to work there and follow the laws or she can resign and let this same faith provide other employment…..

    This isn’t the first time the Supreme Court has appointed itself as law ‘makers’ and sadly it may happen again. They either don’t know or ignore the Constitution. If you are praying for Kim Davis, throw in one for POTUS….they need it more than she does.

    • Exactly. We must be in the world but not of the world. Until the political situation changes, and sexual idolatry is not the law of the land, Christians must be very careful where they choose to serve in government.

  2. The Supreme Court ruling negated KY law. A Supreme Court decision by definition cannot be unconstitutional.

    I don’t think you’ve thought this through.

    Are you okay with every religious person interpreting the Constitution according to their own beliefs?

    How about a Moslem sheriff that implements Sharia law in his county?

    How about an atheist in county government that decides to remove foster children from all homes with Christians that home school their kids?

    Lois Lerner was just interpreting on her own, too.

    You assume that all the do-it-yourself Constitutional interpreters are going to be Christians and that’s a dangerous assumption.

    If Kim Davis was a butcher, baker or candlestick maker I would stand with her. If she was a protester outside the courthouse I stand with her. But not now, she’s making a mistake that damages our cause.

  3. Kim Davis was following the rule of Kentucky State Law, which does not recognizing SSM.

    I stand with Kim Davis. Unequivocally. I stand with every American that the Obama Administration is trying to force to chose between honoring his or her faith or complying with a lawless court decision.

    Those who are persecuting Kim Davis believe that Christians should not serve in public office. That is the consequence of their position. Or, if Christians do serve in pubic office, they must disregard their religious faith–or be sent to jail.

    Kim Davis should not be in jail. We are a country founded on Judeo-Christian values, founded by those fleeing religious oppression and seeking a land where we could worship God and live according to our faith, without being imprisoned for doing so.

    I call upon every Believer, every Constitutionalist, every lover of liberty to stand with Kim Davis. Stop the persecution now

    Kim Davis is not defying The Law, she’s resisting a mere decision, a court order of The Supreme Court which is un-Constitutional.

    What does it say about our nation when secular law is so incongruent with Christian principle that a Christian is sometimes left with the choice of violating conscience or poverty?