U.S.-Constitution-WikimediaI’m still on my Kim Davis kick, especially since it has such major implications for America’s future and the future of not only Christians, but also of Jews and other people with a good moral conscience in the U.S. and elsewhere. I came across this article on the American Thinker website which is among many of the good arguments made regarding how Christian Kentucky clerk Kim has been treated by judicial left-leaning activists (including the ungodly ones on the Supreme Court) and the lieberals backing them. Blogger Tom Trinko, who wrote the article entitled “Liberalism and Optional Law” makes some very succinct and wise observations for why it’s important to support Kim Davis’s decision not to give out marriage licenses in response to the rogue majority opinion of the Supreme Court on gay “marriage” (even though there is no such thing). Here are 3 observations Mr. Trinko made:

1) “…because conservatives believe in the rule of law there is a natural tendency to say that even if we, especially government officials, don’t like a Supreme Court ruling we have to abide by it.

“On the other hand, there’s the fact that liberals constantly break the law with impunity. For example, Jerry Brown refused to defend Prop 8 and Obama refused to enforce DOMA yet neither are in jail.”

2) “…rule of law — that the laws apply equally to all Americans — no longer exists in America. Obama’s imperial presidency, sanctuary cities, and the liberal establishment’s refusal to enforce laws they don’t like means that the law does not apply equally, even in principle, to all Americans.”

3) “Given that liberals have no problem using the full force of the government against anyone who objects to unjust laws our options are either acceptance of second-hand citizenship for the American people or standing up to the liberal elites…The Constitution never mentions marriage but it does say that whatever the Constitution does not cover is reserved to states. That’s why the 14th Amendment had to be passed — to ensure that blacks were treated fairly — and why an act of Congress was required to grant Native Americans citizenship.”

This is just a very small sample of the many points he made. Since we have all kinds of examples across the U.S. similar to what Mr. Trinko notes, can we afford to cave to every whim of lieberals who really care nothing about the law? What would’ve happened in Houston if the pastors just caved to the illegal ordinance of their mayor and city council regarding LGBTs’ use of their facilities or her order to submit their sermons for her review? What if the Tshirt maker in Kentucky had just caved to gay activists and the Human Rights Commission decision with their boycotts and demand to print shirts with a message not in line with their business model?

If we follow the reasoning of the lieberals, we would hate the remarkable, exceptional history of our nation. But that’s what they want. If we must obey unjust laws, the Declaration of Independence would never have been written–and, thus, no United States of America. Abolitionists and the Underground Railroad would have never been effective against slavery.

So the lieberal mentality that “unwavering obedience applies to thee, but not to me,” deserves a good, swift kick in the rear, if you ask me (and even if you don’t ask me 🙂 ).

The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. 2 Samuel 23:3

Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness which they have prescribed Isaiah 10:1