September 29th, 2015 by Mark Henkel

Kim Davis was given an award for her “unwillingness to accept rulings and statutes that conflict with the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” But do OMOWs (one man one woman supporters) really believe in such principles? Because Obergefell v. Hodges being allowed and imposed is the fault of Reynolds v. United States being allowed and imposed, will OMOWs learn from this in order to now get consistent with these principles?

This is the third part of a series of posts pertaining to the County Clerk in Kentucky, named Kim Davis, who refused to do her $80,000 a year government job to issue marriage control licenses after the Supreme Court decision of Obergefell v. Hodges (June 26, 2015) legalized same sex marriage in all States.

On September 25, 2015, at its annual weekend event of the Value Voters Summit (VVS), the Family Research Council (FRC) presented its “Cost of Discipleship” award to Kim Davis.

In presenting the award, the FRC’s president, Tony Perkins, (starting at 17:10 in the above embedded video), read the inscription.

Integrity is the alignment of conviction and action in the pursuit of truth and justice.

In the course of history, men and women of integrity, few in number but deep in character, have pursued justice at great personal cost.

Whether it was

  • Abraham Lincoln asserting the constitutionally unsettled nature of the Dred Scott decision,
  • Rosa Parks refusing to sit in the back of a public bus, or
  • Martin Luther King risking the fang and claw of police dogs to end legal segregation,

our nation has been ennobled and enriched by historic citizens who declare their unwillingness to accept rulings and statutes that conflict with the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.

Across the world, people of faith, the Yazidis, Baha’is, Jews, and Christians, by the tens of thousands, have borne mortal wounds for rejecting the demands of authorities to embrace a new system of belief, attack their neighbors, subjugate their wives, and pay taxes imposed on them on the basis of their religious heritage.

Hereto, people of profound integrity are standing against a tide of power that would attempt to make man-made law the source of all goodness and truth.

In today’s conflict over the meaning of the irreplaceable civil institution of marriage, one elected official, Kimberly Davis, of Rowan County, Kentucky, has inspired millions of her fellow Americans. As her words and actions attest, she has proceeded with an unshakable blend of humility and determination. Indsodoing, she has reminded us that we must remember to kneel before we dare stand.

In honor of the model of personal courage she has offered our nation, Family Research Council is pleased to bestow on Kimberly Davis the second “Cost of Discipleship” award, given in Washington, DC, this 25th day of September, in the year of our Lord, 2015.

Those are some truly lofty and uplifting words! It is unfortunate that the FRC does not yet really believe all of those words. A simple and straight-forward analysis of the text, the Bible, and history reveals the disappointing rejection of Jesus Christ as replaced with a worship of the false god of big socialist government. For these unrealized idolators, “religious liberty” means their man-made version of big socialist government versus the other man-made versions of big socialist government they oppose. Alas, they do so while blindedly oblivious to the cause and effect reality that their own idolatry of making “man-made law the source of all goodness and truth” gave birth to the new idolatry that merely copies them to the same, but which they now oppose.

For this post here, I will only address the reference that is the single truest statement in the entire text. (I will address the other issues in yet another future post.)

One very true line from the award citation jumps out and inspires us all, no doubt. To wit, “our nation has been ennobled and enriched by historic citizens who declare their unwillingness to accept rulings and statutes that conflict with the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” Truer words could likely not be said in this context.

So let’s look at that statement. As the context now pertains to big government marriage control, we must first look at “rulings and statutes” that empowered the false god of big socialist government to even be involved in anti-constitutional marriage control.

As I mentioned in my previous post (Kim Davis, Religious Liberty, and Polygamy – Part 2), OMOWs (one man one one supporters) concocted a subterfuge in the 1800s to get around the US Constitution’s self-evident prohibition of marriage control. The “liberal activist judges” of the 1878 Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decided the Reynolds v. United States decision, setting both the wholly anti-constitutional precedent and misleading rationale for marriage control to unconstitutionally prohibit polygamy.

In all absolute fact, and to quote the FRC’s citation above, Reynolds and the anti-polygamy marriage control laws were “rulings and statutes that conflict with the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”

A simple study of biology and zoology quickly reveals that polygamy is the leading form of reproductive bonding in all of Nature. In most examples throughout Nature, the females of a species choose the males. The concept of socially-imposed monogamy is mostly a man-made construct; it is a form that very, very rarely occurs in Nature.

As the citation also adds, beyond just Nature, then what about “Nature’s God?”

The fact is: anti-polygamy is 100% anti-biblical. Even in just one example, it is manifestly evident that “Nature’s God” of the Bible has never been against polygamy. To wit, here is a speech that explains it for both believers and unbelievers of the Bible,
“The Story of David and What it Shows (about God & Polygamy).”

No matter how one might try to suggest otherwise, the above speech is the exactly, honestly, spiritually, and intellectually correct rendering of what the entire story of David does show. The reason why few know about the entire story is that few Christians have been brave enough to share it all in one context. Regardless, though, the story is what it is, and I neither added nor deleted anything from the story, as any clear reading of 1 Samuel 16 through 2 Samuel 23 of the Bible will prove.

In that story, we see the irrefutable proof that God Himself said that He had given David his wives – and that same God said that He would have given David more if David had only asked!

But we do not have to stop there with only David; other great heroes were also polygamists – and they were never called sinners for it in the Bible.

The author of the Adam & Eve story as well as the “one flesh” verse of Genesis 2:24, Moses was a polygamist. So were Abraham and Jacob (aka, Israel). Indeed, anti-polygamy laws are actually anti-Semitic because they are expressly anti-Israel; the 12 tribes of Israel were born of his four wives. To support anti-polygamy is to say that the Jews are supposedly “illegitimate.” (To that, I say, God forbid.)

Moreover, Jeremiah 3 and Ezekiel 23 show that God the Father self-described Himself as a polygamist. And so did the Son and Savior Lord Jesus Christ proverbially self-describe Himself as a polygamist Bridegroom in Matthew 25.

As if all that was still not enough to prove that anti-polygamy is anti-biblical, the four major reasons/exegeses from the Bible are explained in this speech (embedded here below) that I presented a few years ago, titled,
“Bible NEVER Created One Man One Woman Doctrine.”

What we therefore see is evident. The 1878 SCOTUS decision of Reynolds v. United States and the anti-constitutional anti-polygamy laws were “rulings and statutes that conflict with the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”

UCAPs (unrelated consenting adult polygamists) have been perpetually pointing this fact out to OMOWs. But OMOWs stiffneckedly turn a deaf ear and continue to willingly embrace the anti-constitutional “rulings and statutes” of big government marriage control that neither “Nature nor Nature’s God” have ever forbidden.

Yet, after the Obergefell v. Hodges decision by SCOTUS on June 26, 2015, OMOWs are suddenly giving an award to Kim Davis for supposedly “standing boldly” for “religious liberty.” If what Kim Davis did is even worthy of such an award, then my work for over 20 years of standing against anti-constitutional “rulings and statutes” of big government marriage control could be the very definition of such an award.

Yes, Obergefell and laws forcing imposed-SSM (same sex marriage) on others are simply more unconstitutional “rulings and statutes” of big government marriage control. Likewise, Reynolds and the anti-polygamy laws forcing imposed-bans of UCAP (unrelated consenting adult polygamy) are also every bit as much more unconstitutional “rulings and statutes” of big government marriage control too. Indeed, Obergefell being allowed and imposed is the fault of Reynolds being allowed and imposed.

The truth of this indisputable hypocrisy is so important to see that I will re-state it, just to make sure it is not misunderstood. OMOWs being forced to accept Obergefell and SSM marriage control have only themselves to blame. That is because OMOWs started it all when they (themselves) forced UCAPs to accept Reynolds and OMOW marriage control.

There is more to say about this in a future post.

Ultimately, OMOWs, Kim Davis, the FRC, and their big-government-idolatrous apostate “Christian” followers, really have no true insight about being persecuted for “religious liberty” in America when it comes to big government marriage control. If they really want to now believe what they say about anti-constitutional SCOTUS decisions and legalized laws, then their wannabe “integrity” would self-require them to likewise work to end the real persecution of the “religious liberties” of unrelated consenting adult polygamists (UCAPs) too. Government has no Constitutional authority to impose big government marriage control on unrelated consenting adults.

If opposing the unconstitutional SCOTUS big government marriage control ruling of Obergefell is a “religious liberty” right, then opposing the unconstitutional SCOTUS big government marriage control ruling of Reynolds is a “religious liberty” right too. In fact, the latter is even moreso.

But will one man one woman supporters (OMOWs) now really stand up for those ennobling principles? The test of proof of their “integrity” on this issue is simple. Regarding both Obergefell and Reynolds, will they truly…
“declare their unwillingness to accept rulings and statutes that conflict with the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God?”

If they do, the solution is easy and a “win” for everyone.
Let’s bring an end to the idolatry with the Polygamy Rights Win-Win Solution:
Abolish all big government marriage control for unrelated consenting adults.

OMOWs are you REALLY unwilling to - National Polygamy Advocate blog - 700x400

Posted in Articles Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,