The perpetually persecuted Michael Brown thinks he has learned something from the Kim Davis situation. He hasn’t, of course. In fact, he learned how to dishonestly spin reality a long time ago through the use of straw men and lies. Like most of his fellow bigots, he’s bleating on about how it’s now illegal to be a Christian and he’s making some rather absurd analogies to demonstrate this allegedly learned lesson.
It is jarring to write the words “the arrest of Kim Davis,” speaking of the Kentucky clerk who was remanded to jail for refusing to issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples, but for years now I and others have been warning that committed Christians could soon face jail time in America for holding to our convictions.
That time is now here, and the only thing that is surprising is that anyone is surprised. How could we not see this coming?
Is there really any point in explaining that Kim Davis was jailed not for being a “committed Christian” but for refusing to comply with a lawful court order? It’s not like it would ever get through to someone like Brown or the millions like him.
Yesterday I tweeted, “It’s interesting that gay activists who praised SF mayor Gavin Newsom for illegally issuing marriage licenses now vilify Kim Davis.”
Hector Alvarez (@eltoritolociito) responded, “@DrMichaelLBrown how is it interesting? He was for marriage equality, she was an anti gay bigot who wasnt doing her job.”
Doesn’t that say it all?
As Andrew (@AKUContraMundum) tweeted later in the day: “Civil disobedience is only cool when it is God’s Law that’s being broken.” Or, as expressed by Sean Davis, writing on the Federalist.com, “Kim Davis Uproar Shows That Breaking The Law Is Only Okay When Progressives Do It.”
When Gavin Newsom refused to submit to the law in 2004, he was a hero. When Kim Davis refuses to submit to the law, she is a bigot and a monster.
But doesn’t this accusation of hypocrisy work both ways? People like Brown blew a gasket over what Gavin Newsome did but are not only defending Kim Davis but claiming that making her do her job and follow the law amounts to a Christian holocaust. Ironically, he’s being hypocritical in his accusations of hypocrisy.
And can we please stop with this ridiculous false equivalence? Yes, it is sometimes morally acceptable to break the law and sometimes not (but in either case, doing so will likely have consequences). What Newsome did in no way deprived anyone of their equal rights; what Kim Davis did certainly does. This is like saying that Rosa Parks refusing to sit in the back of the bus and the bus driver refusing to let black people on the bus would be morally equivalent, which is clearly false.
Rosa Parks’ civil disobedience was done in the service of increasing equality and ending discrimination; what Kim Davis did is in the service of diminishing equality and fostering discrimination. No, these are not morally equivalent actions. And you make yourself look quite ridiculous in claiming that they are.