WASHINGTON, September 5, 2015 — Kim Davis is no saint.
Let’s be clear on that right now. Religious liberty is without question under assault in America, but Davis’s refusal to honor her oath of office and do the job she is paid for and was elected to do is not noble.
Davis could have demonstrated some integrity by resigning her position to stand on principle; when you have two masters who conflict, you must leave one to follow the other. Resigning would have allowed her to emphasize the problems facing people of faith who work for a secular state, while not preventing couples — gay and straight — from receiving marriage licenses that the state says they’re legally entitled to.
The Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage was flawed, and there are valid arguments against recognizing same-sex marriage as a constitutional right. The court’s 5-4 decision was close, the majority’s logic not entirely compelling, but at least for now, it is the law of the land.
Yet the response from the left has been way off base. The approach has been two-fold: to paint Davis as a religious bigot, and to declare the sacred obligation public officials have to uphold and follow the law.
Attempting to paint Davis, a Democrat, as some Bible-thumping lunatic out to forcibly convert the world is intellectually dishonest and just plain wrong. The Bible inspires millions of Christians around the world to live good and honest lives. In this case, neither the Bible nor Davis’s religion are the issue. Ignoring that fundamental reality by pretending that she got up that morning with hatred for gays in her heart is incorrect.
The rhetoric from the White House has not been more subtle than the rhetoric from the main stream media, and has had an arguably greater impact while ignoring some White House reality.
That Davis is not a saint doesn’t make her wrong, and neither does her Christian faith. The White House, on the other hand, cares about the rule of law only when it suits them, which is both wrong and dangerous.
The White House comment regarding the Kim Davis situation was shocking to anyone who pays any attention to politics. White House press secretary Josh Earnest said:
“I will just say on principle that the success of our democracy depends on the rule of law and there is no public official that is above the rule of law … Certainly not the President of the United States. But neither is the Rowan county clerk. That’s a principle that is enshrined in our Constitution and in our democracy.”
The Obama Administration is suddenly concerned about the Constitution and upholding the rule of law — after it has circumvented laws on the books at least 70 times since 2008.
The issue that most clearly demonstrates the hypocrisy of Earnest’s statement is immigration. The sanctuary city laws that were brought to national attention by the murder of Kate Steinle are an example of official lawlessness. Steinle was killed in San Francisco by an illegal immigrant who had been deported five times, yet who the city shielded from custody.
San Francisco’s Democratic leadership and Democratic leaders in other cities ignore federal immigration laws because they don’t agree with them. They subordinate the law to their own morality. That is exactly what Kim Davis did.
Yet liberals are pleased that Davis is in jail because “no one is above the law,” even while the White House ignores immigration laws and encourages cities to do the same.
President Obama has routinely criticized and often times ignored laws that he doesn’t agree with. Aside from immigration, his rhetoric on guns and free speech suggest that he’d happily ignore the Constitution if he could. It makes no sense for liberals to blast Kim Davis for doing just that.
We applaud the incarceration of Kim Davis for violating her oath to uphold the law in favor of pursuing her own moral agenda. It would never occur to us that the officials who facilitated Kate Steinle’s murder should be jailed for the same thing. How in the world do you reconcile positions like that?