Two Masters

We are now in Day 5 of Kim Davis Held Hostage, the daily soap opera cleverly disguised as Christian ideology at a standstill (or something like that).

If you're not familiar with this story, WHERE THE HELL HAVE YOU BEEN THE PAST TWO MONTHS? On June 26, the Supreme Court of the United States, in a 5-4 landmark decision (Obergefell v. Hodges), ruled that same-gender couples should be afforded the same opportunity to be miserable in marriage as "traditional" male-female couples, because the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution (i.e., the set of rules which serve as the legal backbone to freaking govern this nation) forbids states from denying any person "life, liberty or property, without due process of law" or to "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Which basically means states cannot discriminate against anyone seeking a marriage license, regardless of who they choose to marry.

Well, Rowan County, Kentucky, Clerk Kim Davis is rotting in jail for violating a court order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Faced with the SCOTUS ruling, Davis - an Apostolic Christian - directed her office to stop providing marriage licenses to any applicants, because she believes her religious beliefs forbid her from issuing said licenses to same-gender applicants. The jailing took place after she went through a number of legal challenges (all denied) basically insisting she be given special treatment under the law, so she can deny equal treatment to people living in her jurisdiction.

Conservative advocates have rallied behind Davis, arguing her religious freedom is being violated. Republicans (such as GOP presidential candidates Rand Paul and Mike Huckabee, among others), claim she should ignore the SCOTUS ruling because her religious beliefs are far more important than treating everyone equally. This despite the rampant hypocrisy in her pre-Apostolic Christian life (prior to being born-again, Davis was divorced three times, married four times, and had an affair somewhere in there which bore two children). And the irony that Davis is a Democrat being supported by Republicans while being thrown under the bus by the Westboro Baptist Church, of all groups, due to her own alleged pre-born-again personal transgressions before God.)

Others argue when she took office in November, the SCOTUS ruling hadn't taken effect (true), so she shouldn't be bound to it (not so true). Except ... Davis isn’t self-employed. She doesn’t get to revise her own job description on-the-fly. Only her employers retain that discretion; her employers happen to be the people of Rowan County, Kentucky. You know - the people who pay her salary, who she represents, who she works for.

And this is part of what is so galling to me. Supporters of Davis have tossed about comments like, "Well, same-sex couples can always go to another county to get married; they don't have to do it here." Except, if they live in Rowan County - if their taxes pay for services rendered in Rowan County - then they have the right to use the services for which they have paid, provided by the employees for which they provide salaries and benefits.

It's really that simple.

To me, the fact the SCOTUS had not made its ruling when she took office is a non-issue and irrelevant. Laws - and interpretation of laws - change all the time. Her role is as a public employee, who has sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States as part of her job duties. That, in and of itself, means that she is willfully choosing not to do her job, as expected by the people residing in her jurisdiction - regardless of race, color, creed, religious affiliation, or sexual orientation. She basically has, IMHO (and I obviously do not stand alone on this), two choices:

• resign, so someone else can actually do the job based on what its requirements are; or
• follow the 14th Amendment, as interpreted by the SCOTUS, and not discriminate against anyone, even if she has a religious opposition.

[OK, apparently there is a third choice: spend time in jail for contempt of court. She chose Curtain Number 3.]

Honestly, either of these options are fine with me. If she resigns, and gains employment in an arena which suits her both personally and religiously, all the power to her. Go with God, and be strong! If she does her job, and doesn't force state-sanctioned discrimination on residents in her county through her own personal choice to do so, that's cool, too. And if she chooses to neither resign nor follow the law, then welcome to the Rowan County Hilton! Hope you enjoy your stay!

While the whole commentary regarding her four marriages and infidelity and such have been tossed around (by many, including me) as a sign of hypocrisy, this is essentially side-show material. Even if she is throwing stones here. If this were a high school Student Congress speech, I'd stay away from that whole avenue and stick with the facts, the primary one being: the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extends to "certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices that define personal identity and beliefs."

Justice Anthony Kennedy - considered the court's key swing vote - based his decision on the recognition of four fundamental principles, arguing that marriage is inherent to the concept of individual autonomy, that it is of unparalleled importance to committed couples, that it is crucial for safeguarding the rights of the children of couples in committed relationships and that it has long been a keystone of social order.

Years ago, long before the SCOTUS same-gender marriage ruling, I was asked the question of whether I supported gay marriage. My response was two-part: (a) I don't believe the state should have any role in marriage whatsoever, since it's purportedly a religious ceremony, and that whole "church and state" thing seems to get in the way - why is the state making money by charging couples for marriage licenses? (b) But, if the state IS going to be involved with marriage, then same-gender couples should be afforded the same opportunity of marriage as female-male couples.

Quite frankly, the whole "Christianization" of this issue appalls me. I'm Jewish; I have plenty of friends and family that are not of any form of Christian belief - Jewish, Muslim, atheist, Hindu, whatever. IF WE ARE DENIED EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AS OTHERS BECAUSE A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE'S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS INTERFERE WITH HIS OR HER ABILITY TO DO HIS OR HER JOB, THERE WILL BE HELL TO PAY!

Davis is in jail because she has the audacity to use her religion as a way of discriminating against citizens in her political jurisdiction, and ignored a federal order to do her job. She is a jailed welfare queen - getting paid (even while in jail) her $80,000-a-year salary (plus benefits) for choosing not to do her job. No more, no less.

I am a public high school teacher. My salary and benefits are taxpayer-provided. I am a servant of the people, some of whom have children in my classroom, many of whom do not. It doesn't matter; my position is that of the public trust. I can't just decide, "Oh, teaching The Canterbury Tales goes against my religious code, so I'm not going to teach it to my English class." Or, better yet, "I refuse to teach Muslim students because [list some horribly bad analogy here about Muslims and Jews not getting along for thousands of years and all the killings and stuff that's been happening in the Middle East for decades]." If I did that, guess what? I'd be suspended immediately and fired in the blink of an eye, for insubordination and refusing to do my job. And I'd be labeled a religious extremist and a bigot.

There is no protection under the law - any law - for religious extremists in government positions (whether elected, appointed, or hired) to impose their personal beliefs on the people they have sworn to serve. This applies to public high school teachers, firefighters, law enforcement officers, and elected officials - and many more who fall under this umbrella. To the contrary, all of these public individuals are required to obey the laws, regardless of their personal preferences. All the laws, not just the ones they cherry-pick. And you don't get to hold other peoples' lives hostage while imposing your warped version of Christian Sharia Law.

You are trying to serve two masters, Kim Davis - your God, and your government - but it looks like you have a choice on which master to serve. I suggest you choose wisely.