One of our country’s great strengths is the rule of law. We enact laws and rules that are applicable to all, and through a fair and impartial legal process we hold individuals and organizations accountable.
The fact that we must comply with laws that we don’t like or agree with provides consistency and reliability. That notion is particularly important for public officials who take an oath to uphold the law.
Rowan County, Kentucky, clerk Kim Davis is in jail for contempt of court for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled same-sex marriage is legal, but Davis has refused to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples because to do so would violate her Christian belief that homosexuality is a sin.
This is a clash of fundamental principles—the right of an individual to marry the person of their choice versus the right of a person to practice and follow their faith. Whose right prevails? America also has a strong tradition of accommodation; we try to find ways to co-exist that protect individual rights without making every disagreement into a federal case.
Charles Haynes, director of the Religious Freedom Education Project in Washington, D.C., believes there are examples set by other states that could be used in Kentucky. In Utah, for example, “A clerk may opt out of performing gay marriage if, and only if, other clerks are readily available to issue the license and perform the ceremony.”
Religious freedoms are protected and so are the rights of same sex couples.
“Ensuring that all couples seeking marriage licenses are immediately served while making provision for individual clerks to opt out on religious grounds is a compromise that upholds both marriage equality and liberty of conscience,” writes Haynes.
However, compromise may be difficult. Davis has become a symbol. To supporters of marriage equality she is a bigoted obstructionist, but to religious conservatives she is a hero. Once that die has been cast it’s hard to find common ground.
That’s unfortunate because reconciliation is within reach.
Davis, as an officer of the state, cannot block same-sex couples from getting a marriage license in her county any more than the Rowan County Commission could pass an ordinance prohibiting the First Amendment rights of Greenpeace or the Ku Klux Klan.
However, Davis is also entitled to some reasonable accommodation for her religious beliefs, which are also guaranteed in the First Amendment. We should be able to craft a solution without sending Davis to jail or denying a same-sex couple their marriage license.