Yet another day has gone by where the state has used violence against its dissidents, in such a way that no other entity would be able to get away with. Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis was arrested earlier today for failing to comply with her duties to issue same-sex marriage licenses. This incident is coming just months after the federal government assured us that their unprecedented national ruling on same-sex marriage would not lead to religious persecution.
To understand the injustice done here, we must first compare the actions of the state to the actions of a private business. If I had a job at Macy’s and did not comply with my boss’ orders, we would all agree it would be immoral for him to kidnap me and lock me in a closet. Morality is therefore not subject to being flipped on its head when the state uses its enforcers to arrest and imprison Kim Davis for failing to obey her boss’ orders.
Common sense would say that the moral response of her employers would be to fire her if their opinions are at odds. By entering force into the equation, the state has exposed its true criminal colors, all while scapegoating Davis as the aggressor. I have seen many other libertarians on Twitter today sadly miss this and turn a blind eye to this tyranny. It is bizarre that they will support the persecution of Ms. Davis because she was an agent of the state while simultaneously standing against the persecution of Edward Snowden, who was also an agent of the state.
Whether or not they agree with her personal opinions, libertarians and conservatives alike should be applauding Ms. Davis for disobeying orders from the state and choosing to freely follow her conscience instead. To justify locking up Ms. Davis because she was an agent of the state would be dishonest, since this was obviously not why she was arrested. Intentions clearly matter. If a man kidnapped a thief because he didn’t like the color of his shoes, this man would still be guilty of crime.
The same principles apply to the case of Edward Snowden. While Edward Snowden did work for the state, they are after him not because of this, but because of his acts of civil disobedience. Libertarians that support Snowden while chastising Davis say that what he did was more important since he obtained vital information that Americans needed to see. However in principle, the two acts were no different. Both individuals acted in defiance of the state and chose to follow their own conscience instead of the dictates of their masters.
In the eyes of many, Kim Davis’ act of civil disobedience will unfortunately never be placed in the same category as Snowden’s. Personal bias will largely interfere with the principle of what she did, seeing as the masses are cheering on her incarceration. For any moral person to condone this injustice is an abomination, and I hope that those who are genuinely in favor of shrinking the role of the state will seriously consider the moral implications of this.
At the end of the day, we will now be forced to foot the bill for Davis’ imprisonment, a cost that I am sure many do not wish to pay. To justify this persecution is to demean civil disobedience and give tyranny a larger leg to stand on. Kim Davis is a brave civil disobedient, and we ought to stand with her instead of standing with those who imprisoned her for peacefully refusing to follow orders she disagreed with.
