Exercising our religious beliefs is our right and no decison of a court should impact that right


The recent Supreme Court decision involving same sex marriage has been taken one step further than what the decision actually said. Exercising our religious beliefs is a right we clearly have under the Constitution and being arrested and jailed should not be involved when we make a decision to exercise that right. The recent case in Kentucky involving the arrest of a county clerk to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples is well within her rights to make that decision. Arresting this individual stomps on our Constitution but it is not the first time the government has stepped in to punish individuals and in some cases businesses who exercise their religious beliefs.

One of the interesting facts that have surfaced in the latest example of attacking our religious freedoms is that those wanting a license could go to a number of other locations and get the license. It appears they wanted to cause a problem and force action by a government entity. Expressing our religious beliefs should never be subject to arrest as in the example of this county clerk. We as a country need to start fighting back when attacks on rights under the Constitution are threatened.

Some say that refusal to issue marriage license in this situation violates individual civil liberties but no one says anything about violating the civil rights of the county clerk. There have been a number of individuals and support groups that feel she has every right to make this decision and I agree. Exercising or expressing our religious beliefs is a principle embedded in the character of our country but there are individuals and groups who want to curtail or restrict this basic freedom. In addition the philosophy of our federal government in contradiction to the Constitution has been a support resource to accomplish or attempt to accomplish the goals of these individuals or groups.

The Supreme Court makes many decisions but it does not mean that our government can take their decisions one step further. The decision that individuals who want to marry individuals of the same sex does not mean that those who on grounds of their religious beliefs must push those feelings aside. There are many issues on the table this election year but the freedoms we have under the Constitution though in some cases may not be directly connected they are also indirectly connected. The issues and in some cases the solutions being presented is all about honoring the Constitution and getting government out of our lives and let us make our own decisions not make them for us.

Expressing and exercising our religious beliefs is a critical aspect of our country. We as a country do not condemn individuals or groups if they do not believe and they should interfere without beliefs and the exercise of them. The philosophy of our federal government has become one of policy rather than of law and the Constitution. The activities and decisions being made by the Executive Branch and in some cases Congress are not in agreement with the responsibilities of the federal government as reference in Article 10. It states that responsibilities not specifically identified as a federal government responsibility are left to the states but this aspect has been ignored to a large degree by the federal government. There is a saying if you someone an inch they will take a mile. The more power or freedom we give to the government the more they want.

The situation with the Kentucky clerk must not stand for if individuals, groups or even the government win in this instance what other freedoms we have may be in danger. We have seen examples of attacks on the second amendment and our right to bear arms. We have also seen other examples through decisions being made to impose the current philosophy of the Executive Department and Congress on the American people even if they do not want what they are pushing. This election year is critical in addressing the path on which our country is headed. Government has become too big and overbearing with the laws, regulations and executive orders. The American public is fed up with the current function and decisions of government. This is evidenced by public opinion polls indicating how dissatisfied voters are with our decisions being made in Washington. Voters appear to be looking for someone who is not part of the political establishment or have no political experience. There may be a big shakeup in Washington after the next election and the leaders in both houses and those who consider themselves the establishment may be on the outside looking in. Let us hope the rights individuals are elected to serve us after the next election. Let us bring back the Constitution as the bedrock of laws and regulations to be created after the next election. We need a smaller government one that serves the people not the people serving the government which is now the case.


More by this Author


Comments 12 comments

Juno Smith 15 months ago

I understand you sir, but that is exactly what terrorists are doing all over the world: they force everyone to live according to their standards and beliefs or DIE. Now, I respect and understand your stance, but let's remind ourselves that we can't force others to live according to our beliefs it the law allows what they do. Imagine those who want to kill everyone in churches? i know, it is hard, these times are here and we can't control others.


Josh Ratzburg profile image

Josh Ratzburg 15 months ago from Indianapolis, IN

I understand where you are coming from, but what about the fact that she is imposing her religious beliefs on the other people that work there? None of the clerks were permitted to give out marriage licenses. In the same way that you say Mrs. Davis has had her religious freedom taken from her, is she not doing the exact same thing to her clerks?


Dennis AuBuchon profile image

Dennis AuBuchon 15 months ago Author

Juno Smith

Thank you for stopping and providing your input.


Dennis AuBuchon profile image

Dennis AuBuchon 15 months ago Author

Josh Ratzburg

Thanks for responding. Mrs. Davis actions are related to her religious beliefs not the others in the office. As another point the individuals wanting a license could have gone elsewhere but they chose to make an issue of it. This type of combative action by those who want to force others to accept their principles is wrong.


Ruth Angel profile image

Ruth Angel 15 months ago from New Mexico

Exercising your religious beliefs is everyone's constitutional right. Unfortunately a lot of American citizens while fighting for their own constitutional rights, often void the right of differing beliefs. For instance an article I read on Yahoo a while back, stating Muslims were seeking to build a mosque on land that they purchased. In retaliation, Texan citizens threatened to desecrate the land with pigs blood knowing it would be offensive against that religion.

People assume because someone is of that religion, they must have bad intention. That's like repealing gravity because you gained 10 pounds.. Unless you really understand something, it's not within your right to judge the individual. I've honestly met more welcoming and polite atheist and rude judgmental Christians. But that doesn't mean that I would assume all Christians are that way.

If I really wanted to add insult to injury, I could point out that more than 80% of all convicted murder's, proclaim their faith to Christianity. But I see no one protesting that faith.


Josh Ratzburg profile image

Josh Ratzburg 15 months ago from Indianapolis, IN

How is preventing others in her office from giving out marriage licenses not forcing her religion on them? That is what's happening and it is wrong. In America we have religious freedom, and because of that we cannot force our own personal beliefs on other people.

The national law is that a couple, straight or gay, can get a marriage license, so why should they be forced to go elsewhere? Why shouldn't they bring national attention to someone who is openly discriminating against them?


nan4wrtng profile image

nan4wrtng 15 months ago from Riverside, CA

Kim Davis was not jailed for her religious beliefs, she was jailed for breaking the law. Ms. Davis is holding a public office and as such she is mandated to follow the letter of the law. I myself do not agree with some laws, but I must follow them until a revision is made. Now if Ms. Davis is such a follower of scripture, I am sure she is aware of Romans 13:1-5, and it reads:

"Obey the government, for God is the one who put it there. All governments have been put in power by God. So those who refuse to obey the laws of the land are refusing to obey God, and punishment will follow."

So who is in the wrong here, and who is in the right? Until the laws change, Ms. Davis is wrong.


Dennis AuBuchon profile image

Dennis AuBuchon 15 months ago Author

Josh Ratzburg

I again thank you for commenting on this hub. Kim Davis is not forcing her religious beliefs on others. She is not saying that they cannot get a marriage license only that in good conscience should could not grant one. The issue is about knowingly putting someone in a situation where it would violate their religious beliefs. We as individuals must have the freedom to exercise our religious beliefs as granted in the Constitution.


BlossomSB profile image

BlossomSB 15 months ago from Victoria, Australia

Thank you for putting some sense into this. I was horrified when I saw on TV what is happening. It makes a joke of the freedoms that those who first formed the laws had left their homeland and stood for.


Dennis AuBuchon profile image

Dennis AuBuchon 15 months ago Author

BlossomSB

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this hub. One thing I did not include is that the state of Kentucky amended their constitution to block issuing same sex marriage licenses but the media never mentions this in their reports. Basically Kim Davis is honoring the constitution of her state. While the Supreme Court gave the right to marriages it cannot overturn the constitution of a state only Congress can do that by their action.


Josh Ratzburg profile image

Josh Ratzburg 15 months ago from Indianapolis, IN

She will not allow anyone in the department to issue marriage licenses... that IS happening. This is just the first source that I found online, there are many, many more. http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/09/kentucky_...


Dennis AuBuchon profile image

Dennis AuBuchon 15 months ago Author

As I said before the Supreme Court decision does not overturn a state constitution. She will be returning to work on Monday so it is not known what she will do at this time. We will have to wait and see.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working