I was thinking today about the number of times that I raised
my hand and repeated the oath of enlistment into The United States Navy. Four times total I raised my hand and swore
the oath
"I,
Gary Fowler, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution
of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will
bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of
the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed
over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So
help me God."
Each
time that I swore this oath I had a deep feeling of patriotic pride. And never once did I take lightly just
exactly what I was doing. Every man and
woman that joins the United States Military must take this oath. Sometimes, although rarely, after a young man
or woman takes this oath and begins their training they come to the realization
that their personal convictions are actually very counter to what it is exactly
that we may at some point have to do. While
it is true that as a fighting man or woman in the United States Military we all
may have our specific job, (the military, just like everything else in life is
very specialized now), the simple truth is that when all of our jobs are combined
they form into a very well oiled machine, truly a force to be reckoned
with. So once in a great while a young
man or young woman will realize that in fact they are what is termed a “conscientious
objector”. Or in other words they cannot
fathom taking the life of another person under any circumstance. These individuals will be examined by
numerous psychologists and psychiatrists.
They will interview with military Chaplains. They will go before a board of multiple
senior military officers and be questioned and given numerous scenarios under
which they are asked “what would you do if……”.
The “if” here often includes things like what if your mother, or
daughter, or wife, or sister were being raped and beaten and you were the first
person on sight and could actually end it simply with the shot of a rifle, what
would you do? They are often tricked and
possibly confused. But it is in those
moments that the real individual and his true core will be seen. If he or she is truly a conscientious
objector it will be seen. He or she
will be allowed to leave the military still under honorable conditions. These people are often criticized by others
in the military and those that were never in the military. But me, I actually salute them. They stand by their convictions. Which brings me to this county clerk in
Ashland, Kentucky.
I
understand where she is coming from. To
her, marriage is between one man and one woman.
I get it. Totally. Really, I do.
She says that she just can’t issue marriage licenses to gay couples,
that it totally goes against her convictions.
I 100% support her right to have those convictions. But it is there that I draw the line.
She
is an elected official. After she won
her position in an open election I am almost certain that she took an
oath. While I do not know the oath that
she likely took, I am confident that it was about serving the citizens of and upholding
the laws of her county. She does not get
to choose which laws she upholds. She
does not get to force her convictions on the people of that county. No, she must uphold all of the laws. She must perform the job to which the people
of that county elected her to do. And I
get it that perhaps a large portion of that county prescribes to and supports
her convictions regarding this matter.
But that also is not part of the equation. It is the law of the land. Period.
She must perform her job. As
witnessed today her options were to perform her job or be held in contempt of
court. She sits in jail now upholding
her convictions. The judge in this
matter I suspect will find a way for those licenses to be issued. He will uphold the law.
I
know that some of you may be sitting there shaking your head in disbelief that
I could take this position. My only
comment to you is that if you really knew me, you would know that this is
exactly the position that I would take.
And my question to you is why do you also not take this position. Let me tell you the precedence that her
actions could set. Let me explain to you
the can of worms that could be opened by allowing her to operate under her
convictions versus the law of the land.
If
she is allowed to operate under her convictions what is to prevent a person,
any person that holds religious beliefs so counter to our Christian/Judeo
belief system that we would find them to be repulsive from seeking and perhaps getting
elected to local office. And then
operating that office built on the convictions of their beliefs. Simply put, would you want a truly deeply
convicted Muslim holding office and suddenly operating that office under the
guise of Sharia Law?
I
suspect not.
I do
realize what I just said. So to my Muslim
friends please read the whole of what I said.
I don’t apologize for what I said, but please don’t misquote me on this
matter. If you want to quote me, quote
all of me, not just part.
We
do not support Sharia Law. Sharia Law is
not the law of this land. But if this
clerk is allowed to operate under her convictions versus upholding the law of
the land this sets the precedence for what I just described to happen. And then where is your support going to be? Is this what you want? Is this the direction that you think our
great nation should take? Again, I
suspect not. Our nation is great because
of our constitution. Yes it is true, or
at least I believe it is true, that our nation and our laws were built on the
foundation of Judeo / Christian beliefs.
Still, the first amendment to the constitution was written, passed, and
ratified to prevent religious tyranny.
So
that I am understood I will repeat again what I have said here once
already. I absolutely, 100% support this
county clerks right to hold the convictions that she has. But she also has an obligation to perform the
duties of the office for which she was elected.
I understand that at the time that she was elected same sex marriage was
not legal across our land. But now it
is. She doesn’t have to like it. YOU do not have to like it. But it is the law of the land. If you don’t like it, then get it changed,
but do so legally, within the confines of the law, and do it as the Christian
that you say you are, which by the way includes that whole Judge not that ye be
not judged thing. It is not my job to
pass judgment on anyone for any reason.
I was taught and try to practice love as taught and shown by my Savior,
The Lord Jesus Christ. He sat and ate
with the tax collectors. He showed love
and forgiveness to the woman at the well.
He ordered an entire village “He without sin cast the first stone”. Personally, I do not qualify to cast the
first stone.
It
is my job to show Christian love. If judgment
is called for that judgment belongs to God the Father. The clerk in Kentucky simply needs to do her
job. She does have a choice. She can choose to stand on her convictions. But if this is what she chooses, she simply
needs to resign her position stating that the requirements of the job goes so
harshly against her personal convictions that she cannot properly perform the
duties of the job. There is no shame
there. In such a move is seen both
humbleness and it boldly proclaims where she stands and to what distance she is
willing to go to stand on her convictions.
But refusing to perform the job that she was elected to do. This is not noble, nor is it right. It is however illegal, and for that tonight
she sits in jail.
I
wish her luck. I pray for her.