Justice Antonin Scalia, as we all know, was very much against the Supreme Court's June decision on marriage equality. His scathing dissent was a veritable cornucopia of sarcasm, bewilderment and ire. But even he would agree that Religious Right poster girl Kim Davis should either do the job she is paid by the taxpayers to do or find another position that better fits her version of morality.
From The Washington Post:
"Now Scalia has not, to my knowledge, said anything directly about Davis’s actions, but he has addressed the question of what public officials should do when their official obligations conflict with their religious conscience. Writing in 'First Things' in 2002, Scalia explained that if he were to conclude that the death penalty is fundamentally immoral, he should no longer serve on the bench.
[W]hile my views on the morality of the death penalty have nothing to do with how I vote as a judge, they have a lot to do with whether I can or should be a judge at all. To put the point in the blunt terms employed by Justice Harold Blackmun towards the end of his career on the bench, when he announced that he would henceforth vote (as Justices William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall had previously done) to overturn all death sentences, when I sit on a Court that reviews and affirms capital convictions, I am part of “the machinery of death.” My vote, when joined with at least four others, is, in most cases, the last step that permits an execution to proceed. I could not take part in that process if I believed what was being done to be immoral. . . .
[I]n my view the choice for the judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted, constitutional laws and sabotaging death penalty cases. He has, after all, taken an oath to apply the laws and has been given no power to supplant them with rules of his own. Of course if he feels strongly enough he can go beyond mere resignation and lead a political campaign to abolish the death penalty”and if that fails, lead a revolution. But rewrite the laws he cannot do.
Davis is in a similar position. Her official position obligates her to take part in the state’s licensing and recognition of marriages. Insofar as the state’s definition of an acceptable marriage differs from her own, Davis is obligated to follow the state’s rule so long as she maintains her current office."
Kim Davis, yesterday you proclaimed that you would only answer to "God's authority". As a private citizen, that's fine. When you're beholden to the public for your position, however, your duty is to serve the state. That's why it's called being a public servant. If you're only interested in being God's servant, get a job at a church and let the taxpayers of Rowan County be served by someone else.