Objections to Certain Unaffable Rites: Kim Davis and the American Conscience

Kim Davis, County Clerk of Rowan County, Kentucky, was held in contempt for her defiance of Constitutional law on the grounds of her faith. She refused to issue marriage licenses altogether in response to marriage equality.

The Kim Davis case, the County Clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses in Rowan County, Kentucky, presents a conundrum. For many, the conversation is wraught with problems on both sides of the argument. The debate is redefining and has strained the relationship between government employment and conscientious objection to federal/state policies, which were already tenuous. One thought I had, however, is how accountable or not accountable should we hold government employees when they defy policy on any grounds?

As a Christian, I may disagree with certain policies that are incongruent with my faith. Under federal law, reasonable accommodations are to be provided to employees such as wearing a burka or accommodations for prayer. These are physical accommodations where no federal law necessarily eschews. But what about philosophical accommodations?

Former Secretary of State, First Lady and Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has come under fire for using her personal email account for government purposes. As a federal employee, she defied a government policy that prohibited use of private email in her work. Everything from Benghazi to what staffers knew in her employ has been called into question. The GOP as well as America has held her accountable for not valuing transparency.  Clinton should have been more responsible by adhering to the rule rather than valuing her own convenience. Kim Davis, on the other hand, has invoked the name of God in both her defiance and defense of the Constitution. It would be silly to think Hilary Clinton could invoke the name of Jesus on the issue of whether to use her gmail account or the .gov account. However, in a pluralistic society where poly-fill-in-the-blank is the aspired value, is there room for a Christian science teacher working in a public school to choose not to teach the core curriculum when she knows evolution is incongruent with her belief in creation? Is separation of church and state a "hard and fast rule" or is it pliable? Are religious people to be more creative in how they perform their job responsibilities w/o violating their consciences? Or, are departments such as the DOJ the only ones given the grace to defy federal policies?

In the Jim Crow South, and across America, laws and policies were violated by many people of whom were not employees of the state. However, we do know that there were places where county and state employees who were white (not a whole lot, a smidgen really) subversively and secretively defied segregation laws. The conscientious objector is the role of a person ready to risk it all to bring public attention to harmful policies. Edward Snowden, for example, is now living in exile in Russia for whistleblowing the federal government's harmful surveillance debacle while many illegal immigrants (not all) gain certain protections under law.  No matter where you stand on immigration, does government of the people and by the people protect objections to certain unaffable rites in it?

There are consequences for being the conscientious objector living and preaching in a hostile environment that cuts to the core of faith, belief and what it means to be American in this country. Should Kim Davis be held personally accountable for her defiance of the federal law as a state employee? The answer is as much yes as was the case for Meshach, Shadrach and Abegnego who defied Nebechadnezzer's law to worship him instead of the one true God. That story can be found in the Book of Daniel in the Bible. Since God is sovereign, if it is His will, she will be vindicated. However, she and others have to get comfortable with facing negative consequences when we defy the federal government and its laws. All of us, not just people of faith.

In View of the SCOTUS Decision on Marriage Equality

When Jesus confronted the Pharisees who caught a woman in her adultery and then brought her before Him to test Him (John 8:1-11), they quoted the Law of Moses which required that she be stoned. Unmoved, Jesus (knowing their thoughts) began writing in the sand. We don't know what he scribbled there. Maybe he was biding time before responding to them. Yet, He replied to her accusers, "You who have no sin cast the first stone," then returned to his scribbling. Eventually, one by one from oldest to youngest, her male accusers dropped their rocks/stones and went away until there were none. Jesus then turned to the adulterous woman and asked her, "Where are your accusers, those who condemned you?" She replied to Him "There are none Lord." 

"Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more."

In view of the SCOTUS decision on marriage equality, some of my dear brothers and sisters in Christ have made themselves into Pharisees. They've made themselves the moral authorities when to be honest they are not. Christ is the moral authority and we are flawed at best in our own moral standards.

However, many of my 'neighbors' in the LGBT community refuse to acknowledge that we've all stumbled in our attempts to create our own standards around sex and human sexuality rather than follow God's standard. Jesus simply desires that we confess our sin and he will be faithful and just to forgive our sin and to restore us from all unrighteousness; to restore us toward his standard. Jesus restored this woman, and he wants to restore us by his love and mercy: his moral authority. He gave her life when according to the Law she was deserving of death. We, too, are deserving of death, but Jesus offers us life in his name.

Jesus also confronts our sin w/o accusation. It is our responsibility to acknowledge our sin. He also wants us to sin no more, which is the task before us. Though we may fail at times, he still commands us, "Sin no more." In Christ and Christ in me there is no sin. Yet if I refuse to acknowledge my faults, I call God a liar. However, Father forgive me for when I fail. Lord thank you for your love and mercy towards me. Thank you for forgiveness. Thank you for the cross. Thank you for life in your name through the power of the resurrection. 

Many will ask, though, "Whose God?" This is also the metaphorical crux. If people refuse to believe Jesus, then they themselves are their own moral authority and do not acknowledge their nature as sinful in the face of challenges to their lifestyle choices, decisions and behaviors. For without faith it is impossible to please God, for one must acknowledge that he exists in order to pursue greater revealed knowledge of he truly is.

All this to say: as Christ followers, refuse to be hypocrites. Refuse to be Pharisees in your own eyes, in your own condemnation of others as a moral authority. Understand the motives of your hearts. Be like Jesus who, not lacking in compassion, confronted this woman with love, mercy and grace. Sinner — acknowledge your sin. Accept God's love and sin no more. If you stumble or fail, acknowledge it. You have an Advocate before the Father, Christ Jesus the Righteous, who is the propitiation for our sins. 

I love all of you and wish only the best that God has to offer each and every one of us.