What Hill Do We Die On, Then? (Kim Davis and Religious Liberty)

American Conservative ^ | SEpt 4, 2015 | Rod Dreher

[yongin]

have said these past couple of days that as gay rights and the ideology at its heart continues to conquer our culture, I expect us small-o orthodox Christians to have to take a hard, sacrificial stand against the state and society, for the sake of religious liberty. Kim Davis’s situation, I’ve said, is not the hill to die on.

The reason for this is certainly contestable, but here it is, in a nutshell.

1. Kim Davis’s position is unwinnable. Nobody seriously expects her to get gay marriage overturned, or even to succeed in carving out a special zone of protection for public officials who, for reasons of conscience, refuse to carry out lawful decisions of the courts. Even if we believe that the Obergefell decision lacks moral legitimacy, there can be no doubt that as a matter of legal procedure, the Supreme Court’s decision is the law. Our side lost that battle decisively. Kim Davis’s stance, while it may be personally courageous, is going to result in another defeat, because it cannot be otherwise in our system. The only point of backing it is to flip the bird to the state and to the broader culture — something I have great sympathy for, but it’s a pointless gesture that can only hurt us in the battles to come.

[trebb]

I hear you. I am starting to doubt we have the will to take our Nation back and will hit the final slide with some whimpers and wistful sighs. Too many have bought into the “play nice and don’t offend others” meme even as they rant and rail about how it could/should be - they will wait for Neo to show up and never realize that they could, and should, be part of an army of Neos....

[GSWarrior]

The political danger here is that when the public hears “religious liberty,” they will think about Kim Davis and her special pleading for a right that, if it existed, would mean anarchy."

The result would be chaos.. Not anarchy. Anarchy would be the elimination of government officials.

[Guenevere]

Indeed! It sure would!

[WashingtonSource]

Rod Dreher is pathetic with this stream man argument, with a false choice. No one is proposing we die on this Hill. We should, however, stand firm with Kim Davis. There are many battles to be fought to win a war. No need to surrender preemptively on any of them.