In Kentucky, Rowan County clerk Kim Davis refused to issue marriage licenses for same sex marriage (SSM). To purportedly avoid legal charges of discrimination, she also refused to issue marriage licenses for anyone else too.
According to the US Census FactFinder, a search for “Rowan County, Kentucky,” reveals a population of about 23,000 in less than 9,000 households. Half the households earn less than $35,000 a year in Rowan County, Kentucky. Yet, Kim Davis – whose job is nothing more than a Clerk – lives off the backs of taxpayers with a fat-cat compensation that is more than twice that which half the taxpaying-households in her County even earn.
Kim Davis campaigned to be elected for her job as the petty functionary to enforce marriage control in Rowan County, Kentucky. To be clear: she campaign-promised to do her job, was elected to do so, and now lives off the backs of the low-income taxpayers of Rowan County, Kentucky, as she draws $80,000 a year.
In that context, this low-level Clerk does not have any authority to self-define her job. She is nothing more than a servant inside big government, with no latitude to do anything less than that which her public-sector job mandates.
Moreover, in this matter, she is not doing something that is a matter of her private life. She is not working in a private company. She is not even the owner of a company.
Rather, Kim Davis is but an employee of big government bureaucracy. Her function is to process marriage control, to expedite and issue marriage certificates as defined by the hierarchy of law.
Kim Davis asserted that performing her legally-required job would infringe her religious liberty rights, as she religiously opposes SSM and does not want her name associated with any County-archived record-keeping of same sex marriages. Rather than quit her big government job (so that she may still keep her salary, living off the taxpayers), she just refused to do her job.
Subsequently, ending up in court, a judge ordered her to fulfill her job duties, but she refused. By her own choice of refusal, the judge found her in “contempt of court,” sending her to jail until she would either agree to perform her duties as required or she would resign from the position.
Because Kim Davis still refused to do either option, the Judge found her in “contempt of court” in Miller v. Davis. She was then booked into the Carter County Detention Center in Grayson, Kentucky, on September 3, 2015.
She did not technically break a law (yet); rather, she was sent to jail for being “in contempt of court” for refusing to perform the duties of her big government job – as court-ordered. She always had the free choice to get out of jail at any time of her choosing when she would decide to no longer be “in contempt of court.”
On September 8, 2015, Kim Davis agreed to not prevent the deputies in her office from issuing big government marriage licenses. With that agreement, Kim Davis was freed from jail.
This whole debacle has raised the issue of religious liberty and the use of big government to impose its force against people’s free conscience. The connections – as well as hypocrisies – to the persecution of the religious liberty of UCAPs (unrelated consenting adult polygamists) are many. I will address these in an upcoming post.
Ultimately, I find the last words of Senator Rand Paul at the very end of the above-embedded video to be most relevant of all. Without even knowing it directly, Senator Paul correctly acknowledged the inevitability of the Polygamy Rights Win-Win Solution that States will have to take: Abolish all government marriage control for unrelated consenting adults.
Fifty-two years ago, on August 28, 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) gave his iconic speech, “I Have a Dream.” Therein, he set forth the profound standard for which he dreamed, that a person “will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
That standard – that people should only be judged based on the content of their character – applies beyond the issues of race.
In 2008, the United States elected our first African American President. Beyond disagreements of political views, the historical significance was not lost on unrelated consenting adult polygamists (UCAPs) at all. An op-ed was sent to the media explaining how – politics aside – that Historic Election Gave Hope to Polygamous Americans.
The article included the following statement and quote.
National Polygamy Advocate, Mark Henkel, has long shared Martin Luther King’s dream. Content of character is really what matters indeed. Henkel has said, “I have a dream that one day a man will be judged, not based on the number of consenting-adult wives who willingly marry him, but, indeed, based only on the content of his character.” For polygamous Americans, the dream continues.
When America was celebrating the 50-year anniversary of MLK’s speech on August 28, 2013, a meme-pic was created to reflect how UCAPs view it too. It included the above quote.
Today is August 19th in the numeric 15th year of the new millenium, the year 2015.
Ever since the first celebration in the year 2001, pro-polygamists have been celebrating on every August 19th of each year. That means that today is Polygamy Day ® 15!
Over the past year, a lot of significant events occurred, giving unrelated consenting adult polygamy supporters (UCAPs) many reasons to celebrate.
The PolygamyDay.com web-site details the important events that have happened over the previous year, as it reports how August 19, 2015, is Polygamy Day ® 15
Rather than having me duplicate them here, please do be sure to read those links from both Pro-Polygamy.com and PolygamyDay.com.
No matter who you are or where you are, if you support freedom for unrelated consenting adult polygamists, please do find some time today to reflect and celebrate.
As I write this, today is August 16, 2015. It is both staggering and humbling to realize that it has already been 10 years since one of the biggest achievements of my life occurred. But indeed, on August 16, 2005, the seemingly impossible had been overcome.
Ever since the Catholic institution first hijacked, overtook, and fraudulently dominated the faith of the original Christian martyrs in the 5th Century AD, and even after the Reformation a millenium later in which Protestants intended – but failed – to correct false doctrines invented by the Catholic institution, the very notion of connecting the two words of “Christian” and “polygamy” together would have sounded inconceivable.
Against that backdrop of extensive history, I knew – with eyes fully wide open – that it would be an uphill battle to be “Continuing the Reformation” when starting the modern Christian Polygamy movement on July 4, 1994.
Eleven years later, when I was asked to give an interview for the Christian Broadcasting Network’s show, The 700 Club, I anticipated that it would be a great challenge. After all, this was the decades-running show of renowned Christian leader, Pat Robertson. His show reaches 100s of 1,000s – if not millions – of fellow Christians around the world.
Mind you, I was both unwavering and fully confident in the absolutism of this new movement and our “sola scriptura” commitment to the 100% facts that, not only does the Bible never prohibit polygamy, but it also never labelled polygamy as any form of sin in any way either.
With compassion toward Robertson’s own political expediency, I realized going in to the interview to not have an expectation that the show would be positioned (yet) to rightly admit these 100% facts openly. My objective was a lovingkind hope that my leadership would gently lead them toward making a paradigm shift in the right direction toward these undeniable truths.
The paradigm shift that resulted ended up being vastly deeper and more profound than even I had expected!
Her bosses had assigned her project to be about disproving same sex marriage advocates who “deny that polygamy – and beyond – will be coming next.” As such, the segment had to additionally focus on the “and beyond” part: polyamory and group marriage. While I was “not happy” about the “and beyond” aspect having to be included, it was only in this context that CBN had assigned her this project at all. So it was what it was. As a colloquialism says, “You dance with who brung ya.”
After fulfilling her obligation to her bosses’ requirements that way, though, Kim Bonney finished the segment by turning to my portion and interview. In both the polygamy article that Kim Bonney wrote, and in the segue that their show’s TV reporter, Steve Brody, said out loud to introduce this last portion, the following was directly stated on The 700 Club.
Before all the world of fellow Christians, our then-only-11-year-old movement of “Christian polygamy” was rightly identified as “evangelical Christians.” No caveat, no disclaimer, nothing was added to imply or to even hint that we were anything but sincere Christians.
BAM! The two words, “Christian” and “polygamy,” were no longer a supposed “contradiction in terms.”
This history-changing moment is what catapulted me to the national stage as the overall National Polygamy Advocate ™ for all forms of unrelated consenting adult polygamy (UCAP) – in addition to Christian Polygamy. This empowered me with the ability to do what no other pro-polygamist could do.
For the first time in history, someone could stand on the national stage and not be dismissed by the stereotypes. Anti-polygamists could not dismiss me because I am provably not Mormon, Muslim, liberal, or lascivious. Not only that, but my biblical and limited government arguments not only refute such opponents but can actually persuade them too.
Moreover, this happened in 2005. At that time, there were no TV shows about polygamy – not even fiction. The only times when the manufactured-news media reported about polygamy was when it sensationally involved real criminals and/or cults.
So, I confess, I am deeply humbled. I feel profoundly blessed to have been part of something so significant. Moreover, it is so challenging to believe that it has indeed already been ten years since this history-changing pivot. WOW!
It is my hope that in 10 years from now, UCAPs (unrelated consenting adult polygamists) will be finally fully free.
“In everything you see me do, my vocations or avocations, I view things through this lens of being The Anti-Socialist.” I make that concluding soundbite during my speech, The Anti-Socialist.
Although the speech is not specifically about polygamy, it succinctly provides background-insight into why I so passionately advocate for the unfettered Constitutional freedom of unrelated consenting adults to choose polygamy if they would so consider.
Incentive and choice are essential elements for the betterment of humanity – both for individuals and for larger society as a whole. Socialism removes incentive and interferes with choice. The result is mediocrity due to fewer “good” options remaining from which to choose.
Advocating for UCAP (unrelated consenting adult polygamy) is not about suggesting that everyone would, could, or even should choose polygamy. Not at all. Rather, the use of big government marriage control to forcefully impose OMOW (one man one woman) is what I have identified as marital socialism. It effectively mandates a Karl Marx style of socialist cry, “One for each so that each might have one.”
The result of that marital socialism is that men have little incentive for self-improving to become better husbands. Women are left with choosing lesser men who had no incentive to try to be better. Because of these results from this unnatural and anti-free-market imposition of OMOW marriage control, society has consequently become what I call “the era of dumbed down males,” with marriage-phobic males and abandoned single moms.
As such, it is insanity to be criminalizing the men who would self-improve to become better husbands for the women to choose, and to thereby deny women those choices of better men.
Contrariwise, I rationally advocate for UCAP for the betterment of individuals and society. By abolishing marital socialism and returning to true Constitutional freedom, people will again have incentive and choice.
Even if most men still would not seek to be polygamous husbands themselves, all men would still have incentive to self-improvement. To wit, because women would thus have freedom to choose the truly better men (even when such men could already be proven-good husbands), the lesser men would immediately see their urgency to self-improve (else go without) if they wanted women to choose them at all. In the end, it would equilibrate anyway.
Yes, I am an Anti-Socialist because I genuinely care about people. Whether with work or hobbies, vocations or avocations, I care about the human spirit and society. In all things, I see and know that our betterment and self-improvement are only made possible with the human necessities of incentive and choice.
Hence, it is precisely because I view all things through the lens of being an Anti-Socialist that explains why I so passionately advocate for unrelated consenting adult polygamy.
As part of the overall project to produce tools of shareable memes to polygamy supporters, the pic for this sound-bite has been posted on Pinterest.
These three links (one to Youtube and two to Pinterest) are offered here as tools for supporters to use when working to persuade and encourage others to allow freedom for polygamists.
If you consider yourself a UCAP polygamy activist, the movement needs your help here.
Please follow/comment/share these three items on social media.
“That’s why I am an Anti-Socialist. I care about people. I care about the human spirit. I genuinely care.” I make that important soundbite during my speech, The Anti-Socialist.
This speech provides an education by providing clarity with the following three insights.
Socialism
Incentive
Choice
Those three insights form the foundation and basis for why I am an Anti-Socialist.
Socialism is about creating an equality of outcome that proverbially says that we’re all “tied scores.” But as I literally alliterate in the speech, “Socialism Seriously Stomps Special Skills.”
Incentive is essential for humanity. As human beings, we have to have the hope of reward (to inspire us to self-improvement) and we have to have failure (to teach us to abandon foolishness).
Choice – the amazing human power of choice – can change our lives and can change the world. But socialism interferes with the choices of others.
By the premise of these three foundational insights, “That’s why I am an Anti-Socialist. I care about people. I care about the human spirit. I genuinely care.”
As part of the larger project to provide tools of shareable memes to polygamy activists, the pic for this sound-bite has been posted on Pinterest.
These three links (one to Youtube and two to Pinterest) are offered here as tools for supporters to use when working to persuade and encourage others to allow freedom for polygamists.
If you consider yourself a UCAP polygamy activist, the movement needs your help here.
Please follow/comment/share these three items on social media.
“Socialism interferes with the choices of others. “ I make that important soundbite during my speech, The Anti-Socialist.
With every choice we make, we must face the consequences – whether they be good or bad. When we do not take responsibility for our choices, the burden of any negative consequences will inevitably fall onto others instead.
When we thereby burden others, we become the direct cause of reducing/harming the range of criteria by which such others may more freely make their own choices.
Socialism seductively misleads human beings into thinking that we may supposedly be free to make choices without having to take responsibility for negative consequences. Yet, that allure is a siren song to lead us only to destruction.
In truth and in fact, socialism does not actually prevent negative consequences, nor does it prevent responsibility for negative consequences. Rather, socialism merely re-distributes the burdens of those negative consequences onto others.
The consequence of that re-distribution of negative consequences is the imposed interference for others to more freely make their own choices. Before such others may determine the criteria by which they would make their own choices, they are first faced with the imposed burden of responsibility of the re-distributed negative consequences.
Indeed, the very burden itself of taking responsibility of such re-distributed negative consequences can even hinder, thwart, or outright prevent such others from making the choices they would otherwise choose to make for themselves.
As socialism thereby forcefully interferes with the choices of others, it prevents humanity from more freely using the amazing power of choice to accomplish even greater things which we humans could otherwise truly achieve.
For that essential reason, I am an Anti-Socialist.
As part of the over-arching project to create tools of shareable memes to polygamy activists, the pic for this sound-bite has been posted on Pinterest.
These three links (one to Youtube and two to Pinterest) are provided as tools for supporters to use when working to persuade and encourage others to allow freedom for polygamists.
If you consider yourself a UCAP pro-polygamy activist, the movement needs your help here.
Please follow/comment/share these three items on social media.
Whenever I share my belief in the power of choice, I also always add, “But with choice, we must take responsibility.” Indeed and to wit, I made that very soundbite during my speech, The Anti-Socialist.
It is that corresponding issue of taking responsibility which sometimes complicates how some people perceive the power of choice.
If we fellow human beings had the anarchy to make choices without consequences, the laziness aspect of our human natures would certainly succumb to that. But we must remind ourselves that, if there are no consequences, then that also means that there would be no positive consequences either.
As such, because we do have hope for positive consequences, we must make our choices with the expectation of consequences, no matter what. Alas, that expectation does simultaneously risk the possibility of negative consequences too.
If we choose to not take responsibility for our choices, any negative consequences from our choices will fall onto others. Thereby, the consequences of our choices become the consequential burdens imposed on others, diminishing their range of choices for their own selves.
Socialism pretends to “backstop” the negative consequences of our choices. But the actual consequence of that pretended “backstopping” is that it simply re-distributes the burdens of those negative consequences of our choices onto others against their own preferred choices.
For the true freedom of all of us to maximize our human power of choice, we must each take responsibility for our choices – whether the consequences are positive or not.
For that powerfully important reason, I am an Anti-Socialist.
As part of the larger project to develop tools of shareable memes to polygamy supporters, the pic for this sound-bite has been posted on Pinterest.
These three links (one to Youtube and two to Pinterest) are provided as tools for activists to use when working to persuade and encourage others to allow freedom for polygamists.
If you consider yourself a UCAP polygamy activist, the movement needs your help here.
Please follow/comment/share these three items on social media.
