Rainbow Reality: Submit or Else

When the militant homosexual lobby and its supporters tell you no one will be adversely impacted when homosexual marriage goes through, they are lying. They knew full well that everything changes – for the worse. Everyone must bow the knee and submit fully to the homosexual jackboot.

In my recent book Strained Relations I documented around 170 cases of this happening. There I offer one shocking case after another of ordinary citizens being dragged over the coals by employers and governments, resulting in fines, the loss of jobs, and even imprisonment.

Try telling these folks that homosexual marriage will not impact them. And while you are at it, try telling Kim Davis this. She is a committed Christian and a Kentucky county clerk who will not allow her faith to be violated by the militants.

She has been another supersaint, standing strong for her faith in the face of severe persecution. Her story goes as follows:

davis, kim 2Davis’ office has steadfastly denied marriage licenses since the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage this summer, and that practice continued Tuesday morning when at least two same-sex couples were denied as Davis invoked “God’s authority.” Rowan County Attorney Cecil Watkins says the federal court alerted him later Tuesday morning that a hearing was scheduled for 11 a.m. Thursday in Ashland. Watkins says clerk Kim Davis is summonsed to attend, along with all the deputy clerks who work in her office.
After Davis initially stopped issuing marriage licenses, two gay couples and two straight couples sued her. A federal judge ordered her to issue the licenses, an appeals court upheld that decision and the Supreme Court on Monday declined to intervene in the case, seemingly leaving Davis with no legal ground to stand on.
But Davis has refused to issue the licenses, saying her deeply held Christian beliefs don’t let her endorse gay marriages.
As an elected official, Davis can’t be fired. Any impeachment of her would have to wait until the legislature’s regular session next year or could come during a costly special session.
“I have received death threats from people who do not know me,” Davis said in the statement. “I harbor nothing against them. I was elected by the people to serve as the County Clerk. I intend to continue to serve the people of Rowan County, but I cannot violate my conscience.”

Another recent report says this:

A homosexual duo left the Rowan County, Kentucky, clerk’s office early Tuesday “red-eyed and shaking,” according to the Associated Press, after the clerk, citing “God’s authority,” refused to issue them a marriage license despite a court order.
Clerk Kim Davis’ appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to stay a lower court’s order to issue the licenses was rejected late Monday.
On Tuesday, she was barraged by catcalls of “bigot” when she met people lined up waiting for services.
AP reported James Yates and Will Smith Jr. “marched” into the office to get a marriage license. Davis, however, continued her position of not issuing marriage licenses for anyone in response to the U.S. Supreme Court decision June 24 creating a right to “same-sex marriage.”
Law-enforcement officers told both “gay”-rights activists and the clerk’s supporters to leave.
Randy Smith, who was among Davis’ supporters, said he was aware that Davis might go to jail on contempt charges for defying the federal court order.
“But at the end of the day, we have to stand before God, [who] has higher authority than the Supreme Court,” he said.
When asked on whose authority she would not issue licenses, Davis replied, “Under God’s authority.”
One homosexual activist said, “We’re not leaving until we have a license,” AP reported.
“Then you’re going to have a long day,” Davis reportedly said.

Kim Davis recently issued a very strong statement about why she is risking everything for her Christian convictions:

I have worked in the Rowan County Clerk’s office for 27 years as a Deputy Clerk and was honored to be elected as the Clerk in November 2014, and took office in January 2015. I love my job and the people of Rowan County. I have never lived any place other than Rowan County. Some people have said I should resign, but I have done my job well. This year we are on track to generate a surplus for the county of 1.5 million dollars.
In addition to my desire to serve the people of Rowan County, I owe my life to Jesus Christ who loves me and gave His life for me. Following the death of my godly mother-in-law over four years ago, I went to church to fulfill her dying wish. There I heard a message of grace and forgiveness and surrendered my life to Jesus Christ. I am not perfect. No one is. But I am forgiven and I love my Lord and must be obedient to Him and to the Word of God.
I never imagined a day like this would come, where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage. To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven or Hell decision. For me it is a decision of obedience. I have no animosity toward anyone and harbor no ill will. To me this has never been a gay or lesbian issue. It is about marriage and God’s Word. It is a matter of religious liberty, which is protected under the First Amendment, the Kentucky Constitution, and in the Kentucky Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Our history is filled with accommodations for people’s religious freedom and conscience. I want to continue to perform my duties, but I also am requesting what our Founders envisioned – that conscience and religious freedom would be protected. That is all I am asking. I never sought to be in this position, and I would much rather not have been placed in this position. I have received death threats from people who do not know me. I harbor nothing against them. I was elected by the people to serve as the County Clerk. I intend to continue to serve the people of Rowan County, but I cannot violate my conscience.

Yet again we see the intolerant activists, coupled with the heavy arm of the rainbow state, seeking to break the will and the resolve of ordinary men and women who choose to put the Lord Jesus Christ over and above the tide of filth and perversion sweeping the land.

These are modern day Christian martyrs, standing steadfast for biblical truth despite everything the gaystapo can throw at them. I and others have been warning about this for many years now. We said this is exactly where we would get to when we start granting special rights to this militant sexual lifestyle group.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. It is getting worse every single day. Please, stand with Kim Davis. She is a hero who needs our prayers and needs our support. And thank God for those groups offering her real tangible help, such as Liberty Counsel.

Also, thank God for others, such as the Foundation for Moral Law in Alabama. As they say in a press release:

The Montgomery-based Foundation for Moral Law, a nonprofit corporation established to defend the Constitution as written and the right to acknowledge God in the public arena, stands firmly with the Kentucky clerk who refuses to issue marriage licenses for same-sex couples….
Foundation President Kayla Moore called Ms. Davis a “woman of exemplary courage who is willing to risk her career to stand for what is right.” Ms. Moore added, “I hope and pray that millions will be inspired to follow her example.”
Foundation Senior Counsel John Eidsmoe said, “The reason the Supreme Court’s Obergefell fails to command respect is that it has no basis in the Constitution. Rather, it is simply an edict of five unelected lawyers, two of whom had no business deciding the case because they had themselves performed same-sex marriages. To regain the respect of the American people, the Court needs to interpret the Constitution for what it says rather than what the Justices wish it said.”

It is time for all true Christians to stand against the rainbow warriors and their war on faith, family and freedom. Thank you Kim Davis for leading the way.


[1410 words]

14 Replies to “Rainbow Reality: Submit or Else”

  1. Good on her. What an amazing testimony as well. I will be praying for God’s protection over her.

    David Clay
    Darwin, NT

  2. Would it not be possible for the office to direct homosexual marriage license enquiries to staff members that do not object to issuing them? This would allow people like Mrs Davis to continue with minimal disruption to their job. Kim should be able to do her job while staying true to her beliefs. But with the law on their side, gay couples can reasonably expect to present to the license office and receive their licenses. IMO this seems like the most convenient solution, until a more long term solution is found.

  3. Kim Davis gets my full respect and that is not an easy thing to do, plus I stand beside Her all the way unrtil all Hell Freezes Over. “No unclean thing can enter the Kingdom of Heaven” and as the Saviour Himself said “I am the way, the truth and the light and no man can come unto the Father save it be in and through Me”. Enough said, maybe we ought start complaining and be offended by the Actions of the Rainbow Warriors and take our Cases of Discrimination on Religious Grounds to the Courts.

    Leigh D Stebbins.

  4. Jason, with all due respect, five judges on the Supreme Court do not make the law; Congress does. And the judgment was based on an entirely specious interpretation of the 14th amendment (passed after the Civil War, in 1868), which gave blacks political and legal equality. The “interpretation” given now was that homosexual partners have the same status as blacks, including marriage rights, something never dreamed of by the framers of the 14th Amendment, nor even contemplated until now. But of course, the Left has no regard for original intent or meaning; they have an agenda and since they have failed in the proper sphere of lawmaking (the elected legislature), they resort to courts with activist judges. But judges cannot make law. Was the Dred Scott decision of 1857 “the law of the land” merely because Justice Taney said it was?

    And another thing: Kim Davis was acting pursuant to existing Kentucky law, which forbids same-sex marriage, a law which has the endorsement of the population of that state. She took the view that the judgment of a bare majority of judges on the Supreme Court bench cannot overthrow the law of the state endorsed by plebiscite of the people of Kentucky.

    I can see this whole issue erupting into (i) a mass campaign of civil disobedience (if such it is), and (ii) another “states’ rights” battle, as the Civil War of the 1860s was at its outset.

  5. I do like how some people are trying to destroy her based on her past life, before she was a Christian. Obviously since she has become a Christian she has been changed and her past sins are no more.

  6. I read an opposing article on this which is almost persuasive: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/formerlyfundie/hijacking-the-government-what-franklin-graham-is-wrong-about-today/

    His basic argument is, that we are called to conform ourselves to Christ, but not to try and conform the government to Christ. He says we should come out from among society and be separate (here’s the author’s Anabaptism coming out).

    He says, if a person from any other religious tradition were to ‘hijack’ their position in government and do this: “What about a Muslim government official who were to deny a building permit for a pig farmer, on the basis of their religious conviction?

    “What about an Anabaptist who would refuse to issue concealed carry permits since violence is against our beliefs?”

    The author suggests we’d be up in arms against these examples. But I think actually it would be good to uphold religious freedom for these people, and get someone else to do the religiously objectionable deal. Otherwise, yes, what leg do we have to stand on – it would seem to be hypocritical.

    One commentator in support of the author invoked Romans 13:1 ‘submit to the government’ (paraphrase) to say Davis should accept same-sex marriage. But another replied – hang on, that’s what Nazi’s did to justify their killing: my boss told me to do it.

    I guess the difficulty can be where to draw the line – at what point do you decide to disobey government. But I think marrying two people who symbolise hatred of God’s ways is a pretty clear line.

    Nathan Keen.

  7. Thanks Nathan. Needless to say I fully disagree with the Anabaptists on all this. We are commanded to be salt and light, and to promote righteousness in all areas of life, including government. I have written more about this topic here:

    We are in a war, so we need to think biblically and theologically, as well as legally and constitutionally, about the Kim Davis case and others like it: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2015/09/03/christianity-the-constitution-and-marriage-wars/

  8. Thanks Murray and Nathan. Of course Kim should have the freedom to refuse an action on grounds of conscientious objection. But the office in which she works has a duty to provide civil services to eligible persons, which at the present time, includes gay couples. Individual employees need not agree or act in certain situations, but at the end of the day, the office is obliged to provide these services as a branch of the government. That’s why Kim’s actions, while earning the support of many, will never be the solution to this problem; the headlines will only ever be negative and will likely sway public perception in favour of the other side. Our focus should be peaceful civil protests you spoke of, which is more likely to produce a long term solution to this problem.

  9. Thanks for another informative article.

    One forecasts that, if marriage laws are changed here, similar things will happen to people as have happened overseas.

    I have discussed this with some peers at church, since a few of them are in favor of ‘marriage equality.’ They do not share your concerns.

  10. Kim is a county clerk who is elected to office.
    This means I believe, that she is not an ordinary employee but a manager, maybe even the head, similar to Australia’s “clerk of court”. As such she doesn’t have the easy option of saying “go to the next teller”.
    Kim has the responsibility of setting the standard for the whole office. I imagine that she has thought through her attitude carefully.

    If the laws of a country cannot make room for freedom of conscience on an issue like this then we are in a very dangerous position as objectors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *