Natural law is also not a valid theory of law. Natural law is directly opposed to positivism. While positivists insist on a clear separation between law and morality, natural law advocates insist on a clear link between the two. They believe that the operations of law and legality should be informed by God-given values. However, this system is simply too morally based. There are so many interpretations of nature and we all have different sets of morals and values ​​(that we are entitled to). Regardless of our right to have a right to our morals and values, they should have no place in court. Although legal realism is also partly based on morality, it is not limited to natural law. Legal realists argue that to understand the legal process and make a decision, various factors (such as political, economic, and social) need to be taken into account. With legal realism, every little detail is considered, making it a reasonable legal theory. However, every legal theory has its pitfalls. There is always room for improvement, as no legal theory is perfect. With legal realism, judges are the authors of the law. There is a lot of responsibility and power in their hands when they are given the freedom to make their own judgments on cases. A great example of this is the case of Kim Davis. He attempted to deny marriage licenses to more same-sex couples, despite the