Facts about Kim Davis case – why she is correct and SCOTUS and Judge David Bunning are wrong

1. Kim Davis was elected and swore or affirmed to uphold the Kentucky constitution, which only recognizes marriage between a man and a woman.

2. Supreme Court reinterpreted or decided that there was no law against (but certainly no law in favor of) gay marriage.

3. Kim Davis determines this new interpretation is not consistent with the Constitution (u.s. , not state) as it was when she swore her oath.

4. Supreme Court doesn’t have actual jurisdiction over Kentucky state offices

5. Kentucky governor orders clerks to comply with SCOTUS

6. Kentucky governor has no standing.

7. Kentucky Supreme Court is only court with jurisdiction.

Kim Davis’ religious views really have no play in this. Her religious conviction can drive her actions, but this is purely a states right issue. She is not bound by the SCOTUS decision. The law has to be changed at the state level with a vote put to the people of Kentucky.
She is not breaking any law.

As Kentucky law stands:

Any clerk who knowingly issues a marriage license in violation of KRS Chapter 402 shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. Any clerk who knowingly issues a marriage license to any persons prohibited by KRS Chapter 402 from marrying shall be fined $500 to $1,000 and removed from office by the judgment of the court in which convicted (KRS 402.990).

And so what would be a violation of KRS Chapter 402? Oh, well if the clerk issued a license to known relatives, someone who already has a living spouse, someone underage, AND to couples of the same sex. Read the law!

In Kentucky only persons of the opposite sex may enter into marriage. See Elkhorn Coal Corporation v. Tackett, Ky., 49 S.W.2d 571, 573 (1932). Thus in Jones v. Hallahan, Ky., 501 S.W.2d 588 (1973), the court held that the attempted marriage between two women was not a valid marriage since by being of the same sex they were incapable of entering into a “marriage” as the term is defined by common usage. The court concluded that it could find “no constitutional sanction or protection of the right of marriage between persons of the same sex.”

Look it up. She’s upholding KY laws. People just need to stop with the narrative that she is being persecuted for her religious belief. Belief, or not, she is legally in the right.

Sodomite marriage is not wrong because it infringes on religious liberty

Sodomite marriage is NOT wrong because it infringes on any particular person’s so-called “religious liberty” — it is wrong because it is a violation of God’s Law. He classifies this particular conduct as both sinful AND criminal while commanding civil authorities to enforce His classification on such conduct.

The pantheistic approach advocated by most professing Christians in this country – particularly leaders, is: (1) a treasonous violation of the First Commandment in that the form of law one advocates for IS a recognition of Sovereignty; (2) a rejection of God’s Law for the statutes of Omri (humanism – Micah 6:16); (3) a refusal to provide justice to either side of the issue because “justice is sent away backward”; and (4) is precisely the approach, as one gentleman properly noted, which has kept abortion “legal” in this country long enough for at least 55 million deaths not counting what has been exported.

It was God’s Law as the legal and social framework, though not perfectly developed, which allowed freedom the room and opportunity to grow in our early history. What we are trying to pursue is the fruit of that faith without the root of that faith. Professing believers love, absolute love, making themselves victims instead of being victors as good soldiers of Jesus Christ. When Christians adopt any way other than God’s Law, we deprive the world of salt, light, and any genuine opportunity of freedom they may have.

Poem: A Civilization in love with sodomy

I think that I shall never again, have in my sight
A “Civilization” in love with the sodomite

A man whose hungry appetite
Is prest against his catamite

A man who is a Canaanite
Now hailed as our great White Knight

A man who thinks of his penis all day
And then without irony says, “I’m gay”

A man who now demands the right
to be a sexual Troglodyte

A man who will do all to join the fight
to change the day into night

Cultures are made by the Great King’s Lex
But only Lucifer can destroy with sex

by Pastor B.L.M.

Should we be in favor of gay rights?

God’s Law-Word reveals death as the proper punishment for sodomy.

Leviticus 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”

It is no different than implementing the proper punishment for other crimes such as murder, stealing, etc. Thus, the only rights sodomites should have is a fair trial.

Is homosexuality a choice?

Mankind was created in the image of God as male and female. Thus, every person is born with a natural affection for the opposite gender. To pervert that affection is to rebel against God on the most fundamental level. God’s common grace prevents most men from becoming sodomites, murderers, or other types of degenerates. It is only the most depraved and rebellious men that God gives over to such abominable acts. But, only by God giving them over to their sinful desires can they commit such acts.

Romans 1:28-32 And, according as they did not approve of having God in knowledge, God gave them up to a disapproved mind, to do the things not seemly; having been filled with all unrighteousness, whoredom, wickedness, covetousness, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil dispositions; whisperers, evil-speakers, God-haters, insulting, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, unintelligent, faithless, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful; who the righteous judgment of God having known—that those practising such things are worthy of death—not only do them, but also have delight with those practising them.

Why did God create gay people if being gay is a sin?

Often, sodomites and supporters of sodomy ask Christians “Why do you think God created gay people of being gay is a sin?” However, the question could be restated, “why did God create man with a sinful nature if sinning is a sin?” Of course the answer to the original question and the restated question is that God had a purpose in allowing Adam and his descendants to sin.

Here are a couple verses which speak to the question of why God created man with a nature prone to sin.

Romans 11:32 For God closed up all of the ones in disobedience, that all
of the ones he should show mercy.

Galatians 3:22 But the scripture consigned the whole under sin, that the
promise of belief of Jesus Christ should be given to the ones trusting.

Romans 8:20 For to vanity the creation was submitted, not willingly, but through the one submitting it, upon hope;

Homosexuality attempts to strip the image of God from men and women

In the embrace of homosexuality there is the attempt to strip off the imago dei by the Lesbian or sodomite in question. Sexuality is so closely tied up with the Image of God in men and women that when one defiles and reverses their sexuality they at the same time are seeking to rip the image of God out of themselves.

The reason this can be advanced is that male and female together comprise the image of God.

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

When a man or a woman seek to strip themselves of their God ordained sexuality they are therefore seeking to undress themselves of the Image of God appointed to them in their composite role as image bearers.

There is also the reality that in man and woman together reflecting the character of God, in all their glorious God appointed sexuality, the fact that, together as image bearers, they reflect the one and the many found in the Unity and plurality of the Godhead. In seeking to strip off their God ordained masculine or feminine sexuality there is the attempt to turn God into a monad absent of His plurality.

The embrace then of Lesbianism and / or Sodomy then is, at its foundational level, an attack on God via the means of the attempt to erase God’s Image by erasing God’s ordained sexuality placed upon the man and the woman as God’s creaturely image bearers.

This explains why this particular sin is so dangerous and why St. Paul can write,

I Corinthians 6:17 — Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body.

The lesbian and / or the sodomite is sinning against their own body because by illicit coupling they seek to disembody themselves of the image of God contained in their physical bodies as given in their sexuality.

Sexual sin is particularly primal. It goes to the core of our identity as image bearers of God. While one can never successfully sanitize themselves of the fact that they are the Imago Dei, one can so twist their self understanding of the reality that they are image bearers that the twisting begins to approach a searing of the conscience so severe that few recover.

Alabama Supreme Court Affirms Natural Marriage

The Alabama Supreme Court issued a ruling on March 3 to order probate judges to stop issuing same-sex marriage licenses and to follow state law which defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

The Alabama Supreme Court has held that judges “are ordered to discontinue the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples.”

Following are important quotes from the ruling:

  • “[M]arriage, as a union between one man and one woman, is the fundamental unit of society.”
  • “[M]arriage has always been between members of the opposite sex.  The obvious reason for this immutable characteristic is nature.  Men and women complement each other biologically and socially.”
  • “[O]ne legitimate interest behind the laws (among others) is recognizing and encouraging the ties between children and their biological parents.”
  • “Government is concerned with public effects, not private wishes.  The new definition of marriage centers on the private concerns of adults, while the traditional definition focuses on the benefits to society from the special relationship that exists between a man and a woman, i.e., the effects for care of children, the control of passions, the division of wealth in society, and so on.”
  • “[I]f love was the sine qua non of marriage, then polygamy also would be constitutionally protected . . . .”

“[W]hat ultimately is at issue is the entire edifice of family law . . . an edifice that has existed in some form since before the United States was even a country. . . . It is no small thing to wipe away this edifice with a wave of the judicial wand.”

Insane Thinking About the Law

From Chapter 27 of The Institutes of Biblical Law Volume 3.

By Dr. Rousas John Rushdoony

I frequently get telephone calls and letters, attacking me for affirming Biblical law. The questions begin thus: “Do you believe that homosexuals should be executed?” My answer always is simply that God so requires it in the Bible, and, as an interpreter of and a believer in the Bible, I do not believe that I have the right to disagree with God. The next question is usually this: how then can you be a Christian since Jesus said, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone” (John 8:7)? I try to explain that, first, an ancient premise of law requires that those who take part in a trial have “clean hands” in the matter, i.e., no thief can take part in a trial for theft as a credible witness. Second, if no man can be a part of a trial unless he is sinless, then, since we are all sinners, there can be no law, no courts, no police, no penalty, for crime since we all are sinners. This does not seem to disconcert most questioners.

This means that contemporary antinomianism is moving logically and steadily into the thinking of the Marquis de Sade. Sade held that any act committed was a natural and therefore a good act. Theft, murder, rape, incest, sodomy, and all the sins condemned by God, being natural were therefore good. Only Christianity and its faith and law were evil because they were supernatural.

It is interesting that the first question is usually about homosexuality. In personal confrontations, such questioners commonly refuse to answer the question, “Are you a homosexual, or, Why are homosexuals such a key concern for you?” Homosexuality has become a central intellectual concern because it is a central offense against God, and the essential burning out of man in his hatred of and war against God. (In Romans 1:27 “burned” should be translated as “burned out.”) Questions about God’s law on homosexuality are ways of challenging God’s moral status! Some questioners insist that Jesus demanded the death of the law, despite His statement in Matthew 5:17-19. Such opinions reflect William Blake and ancient and modern gnosticism.

Another statement common to such critics is that to affirm God’s law is to affirm hate! But hatred of what? To affirm God’s law means that one wants to protect people from rape, murder, theft, and lawlessness in all its aspects. In the post-World War II years, I have unhappily known of many, many cases of rape, some of particularly vicious and sadistic character. Whom do these antinomians propose to love, the rapists or the victims? Some will insist on demanding that we “hate the sin and love the sinner.” But sin does not exist in the abstract; it is an act of men and an expression of their nature. Some rapists have laughed in the faces of their victims and have held that they did them a favor. A person’s acts do not exist in the abstract, in some strange realm, while he continues as an innocent man whom God supposedly requires us to love. The “love the sinner, hate the sin” idea goes back to Hellenic paganism and its virtual divorce of the body from the mind.

Modem man’s love affair with the homosexual is really a hatred of God and a love affair with himself. He will answer, when challenged about his “concern” for homosexuals, that he has no use for them; he is concerned about their civil liberties; he wants a “free and open” society, and so on and so on. Of course, there is commonly an insistence that the Biblical texts about homosexuality refer to male prostitutes. Implicit in their reasoning is the premise, “If God tolerates them, He must certainly tolerate me!” One man said that he would like to be on our side, and would be if our affirmation of God and moral law were a more general one! Men and women have often insisted that they love their spouse, and their adulteries must be understood in context!

The total context of our lives is the triune God, His law-word, His atoning work in Christ, and more. If we do not take His law in all its facets seriously, we cannot appreciate His atoning work.