See post 22.
> Here’s something to ponder. Kim is a Christian and acts upon her beliefs. What if next she decides not to allow Buddhists or Muslims to marry?
That would be a violation of law. Again, see post 22.
The difference here is the definition of marriage, understood for millennia to be a union of opposite genders, has been decreed to be something else.
Perhaps you think that this radical new definition is no problem and people should just follow orders?
So what is Kim's objective? To change that definition or change the law that requires having her name prestamped? If she's only fighting for her name not being on the form, that doesn't help Christians anywhere. If she's sitting in jail to change the new definition of marriage, then I'm fine with that.