We have all heard about Kim Davis, an apostolic Christian elected county clerk of Rowan, Kentucky. She claims having her name on a marriage license for gay people violates her Christian beliefs and will land her in hell. Her recent imprisonment for contempt of court, after she said she would not allow anyone in her office to sign those licenses, has prompted republican politicians, bigoted conservatives, and other rightwing blowhards (is that redundant?) to rally around her and decry the persecution of "Christians." (Never mind the fact that many Christians disagree with Kim Davis.)
That made me wonder how they would feel about these hypothetical "Kim Davis" county clerks. (Over the fold)
How do they feel about the "Kim Davis" in DuPage, Illinois, who decides not to let her office issue liquor licenses to any restaurant because drinking violates her B'Hai Faith?
Or the Jehova Witness "Kim Davis" in Davidson, Tennessee, who refuses to issue birth certificates for children born to unwed mothers because her beliefs prohibit premarital sex?
Or the Mormon "Kim Davis" in Clark County, Ohio, who won't let any of her staff license tobacco dealers because smoking is against her faith?
Or the Orthodox Jewish "Kim Davis" in Brooklyn County, New York, who won't allow her office to issue a license for a Shake Shack because it will serve meat and dairy together, which is not kosher?
Or the Hindu "Kim Davis" who won't grant a license to any restaurant that plans to serve meat because her particular Hindu faith believes eating meat is wrong?
Or the Muslim "Kim Davis" in Thurston County, Washington, who refuses to grant pet licenses to owners of pet pigs?
Or the Sikh "Kim Davis" in Williamson County, Texas, who will not allow barber shops to be licensed because her religion opposes cutting hair?
Or the Buddhist "Kim Davis" in Wayne County, Michigan, who refuses to issue licenses to carry a concealed weapon because she believes it would be untrue to her commitment to nonviolence?
The actions of these hypothetical Kim Davises are minor compared with the egregious violation of Constitutional rights committed by the real Kim Davis. And I suspect if any of these hypothetical Kim Davises were real, conservatives would not be trying to outdo one another to rush to her side. Instead, Mike Huckabee, Bryan Fischer, Ted Cruz, and others would be the first to call for her impeachment and arrest. In fact, Huckabee and Islamaphobic legislators have made a point of condemning the nonexistent encroachment of "Sharia law" in the United States and Europe and tried to pass laws to prohibit "Sharia law" in the United States, which shows they do place limits on how far they believe religious freedom should be taken.
What separates the real Kim Davis from the hypothetical Kim Davises is that she is a Christian protestant, which plays into the "government is persecuting Christians" fiction. Never mind that Christians routinely occupy the presidency, dominate national and state legislatures, and hold most court seats (including on the Supreme Court). In 2014, a Pew Poll found that 70% of the United States population identified as Christian. Kim Davis belongs to a subset of Christianity that includes 36 million US adherents, which is more than triple the estimated number of US residents who identify as LGBT. Most of the government people doing the "persecuting" are also Christians.
Notice how rarely (or never) we hear about lawsuits to remove Muslim or Jewish monuments from government property or to stop Muslim or Jewish teachers from trying to indoctrinate public school children in their religious beliefs. That's because people who belong to true religious minorities know the backlash they'd receive.
Being a powerful majority, Christians are confident in their ability to violate the separation of church and state without strong public outcry. This is even more likely in conservative strongholds. In 2015, a poll by PPP showed 57% of republicans supported establishing Christianity as a national religion. The obstacle they keep running into is that judges are required to base their decisions on law, not poll numbers.
None of the conservative manufactured outrage stems from a genuine concern that Christians are persecuted. These zealots' outrage stems from their realization that courts will not facilitate their desire to see God's law (along with the bigotry and discrimination some individuals attach to it) become the law of the land. They want to use these laws to persecute non-Christians or Christians who do not adhere to their version of Christianity. (American Taliban, anyone?)
Finally, the media needs to stop lending credence to the fiction that Kim Davis' efforts to deny gay couples their Constitutional rights springs from a deeply held fear of damnation, as she sobbed in court. Her true objective, as she said in an interview before the hearing, is to use her elected government position to prosleytize:
Before she appeared in court Thursday, Kim Davis told The Kentucky Trial Court Review that she was prepared to go to jail.
“I would have to either make a decision to stand or I would have to buckle down and leave,” she told the monthly publication in a radio interview. “And if I left, resigned or chose to retire, I would have no voice for God’s word," calling herself a vessel that the Lord has chosen for this time and place.
As an aside, do you suppose Huckabee and his ilk have ever considered the possibility that their over-the-top bigotry and advocacy for a theocracy are contributing to the decline in US Christians and the even steeper decline in Protestants? Maybe those Christians who truly do believe in Jesus' messages of peace, love, and tolerance are becoming more reluctant to identify themselves with a label that is increasingly becoming identified with intolerance in the United States. Using the same label for Christians like Kim Davis and the kinds of Christians I have had the pleasure of knowing is a bit like using the word
mammal to describe both a dolphin and a person. Sure, it's accurate but the differences between the two are monumental.
And as another aside, I really do want to know how Kim Davis' 21-year-old son (who is also denying people their Constitutional rights) landed that job working for his mama. How much is he being paid? Was it a fair hiring process and he just happened to be the most qualified candidate? What are his qualifications, anyway? Does he get paid more than the other women doing the same job in that office?