Posted on 09/04/2015 9:57:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
We’re in a weird place as a party when Trump, the would-be strongman who’s going to smash sclerotic American government as we know it, is more of a “rule of law” guy than Ted Cruz is. And way, way more of one than Mike Huckabee is.
Trump prefers an accommodation in which gay couples can get their licenses, as the Obergefell ruling requires, and Davis can opt out so that she’s not involved in something that violates her religious beliefs. But she doesn’t want to opt out. She wants to force the whole office to opt out by forbidding her deputies from issuing licenses without her approval. As recently as yesterday, during her contempt hearing, her lawyers were warning people that marriage licenses issued today by her staff (there have already been two as of 10:30 a.m. ET) while she’s in jail won’t be valid because they lack her signature as county clerk — and she might not be wrong about that. What she’s doing, as Charles Cooke put it, isn’t so much seeking a conscientious objection for herself as demanding a right of secession for Rowan County from the post-Obergefell legal regime. Cruz and Huckabee seem okay with that. Trump evidently isn’t.
“The other simple answer is rather than going through this, [because] it’s really a very, very sticky situation, a terrible situation — 30 miles away they have other places, they have many other places where you get licensed, and you have them actually quite nearby,” Mr. Trump said. “That’s another alternative. I hate to see her being put in jail. I understand what they’re doing. It would be certainly nice if she didn’t do it, but other people in her office do it but from what I understand she won’t allow other people in her office to do it.”
Bottom line, host Joe Scarborough said, is that if Supreme Court makes a decision, that’s the law of land, right?
“You have to go with it,” Mr. Trump said. “The decision’s been made, and that is the law of the land.”…
“She can take a pass and let somebody else in the office do it in terms of religious, so you know, it’s a very … tough situation, but we are a nation, as I said yesterday, we’re a nation of laws,” he said. “And I was talking about borders and I was talking about other things, but you know, it applies to this, also, and the Supreme Court has ruled. It would be nice to have other people in her office do what they have to do.”
Smart point, but the Cruz/Huckabee take on this is that a “lawless” Supreme Court opinion doesn’t count as “law” the way a statute does. Cruz, at least, knows better, but it’s in his political interest to push that argument. I’m curious to see if he comes after Trump over this at one of the debates, sensing that it’s a rare chance for him to out-populist Mr. Populism. If he does, Trump should come back: Who gets to decide which court opinions are sufficiently “lawless” that they needn’t be enforced? We’re left with Trump, the alleged revolutionary, standing up for the long tradition of judicial review while more mainstream GOP pols argue that that tradition has been so discredited by left-wing double standards that conservatives should take the same a la carte approach to law enforcement. Let every county clerk go their own way. In hindsight, Obama should have cited his, ahem, deep religious convictions as grounds for granting executive amnesty.
Exit question via a Twitter buddy: How come no one’s standing up for the conscience rights of Davis’s deputy clerks? What if one of them enthusiastically supports gay marriage and wants to issue licenses in Davis’s stead? The state’s telling Davis that she has a duty to obey Supreme Court rulings and she’s telling her deputies that they have a duty to obey her personal religious beliefs. Why is the former less legitimate than the latter?
I'd look into the particulars of Federal courts mandating and, over years/decades, "managing" and fine-tuning, school "desegregation."
I sent Trump, whom I support, a Twitter message that stated...”The Holy Bible does not allow Christians to go against God’s Laws (Acts 4:19, 5:29). There is a war on Christianity.”
True. As a Democrat, does Ms. Davis support abortion! If so, she cannot cherry pick God’s Word, the Holy Bible.
I long for the day that you find Christ.
(and hold little hope)
Yes, my 2 recent college graduates need jobs more than anything else right now. Without a job, they have no place to live, no money to buy essentials. Ask people in Greece what they want...answer will be JOBS JOBS JOBS. Greeks can’t worry about constitution when stomachs are empty. Our national debt will soon reach $24,000,000,000,000.00 and we are not far behind Greece.
Wake up America! Without prosperity there is no freedom. Like that old song...Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose, I believe it was Janis Joplin.
You have no clue. Trump’s entire family loves him, even his ex-wife stood up for him! But carry on with your propaganda, because you have no other powers.
I suspect that you are ignoring the word of God as it is clearly written.
He doesn’t just “allow.” He promised to send strong delusion to all who refuse his Torah. They have no path to faith, since the Holy Spirit is sending the delusion that they follow, just as he writes Torah on the hearts of believers.
There can be no challenge to this; he knows their heart.
Re-read 2Peter a few times! (and Hebrews 6 & 10)
.
.
You are the most perfect example of what I meant!
Wallow in it!
.
Line his pockets like that’s a bad thing and you smear humanitarian Franklin Graham as a televangelist
Graham does a lot of good work in bad places and is above reproach on social issues
I’m disappointed you’re this misguided
I remember you tolerated zero dissent about she who never ran anyhow 4 years ago
And smear Franklin Graham again in from of the right mod
You should rethink that Norm
It’s not like you’re some dumbassed newbie
You are 100% correct. I’m not a newb. And I do my homework.
Humanitarians don’t provide ‘Christian’ approval for people that profit from BBQing babies, giving their cash to abortion causes or legislating on their behalf.
Frauds do
That’s a reach Norm
Let’s ban anyone ever rooted for BYU or The Osmands or stayed at a Marriott
I’m southern baptist with a dash of Pentecostal
What are you?
Sends it in the same sense that Satan was sent in the book of Job. Except Job was not such as to give in. Others, however, do give in. They welcome the delusion.
You try to imply here that God has some of the mind of Satan. That is a blasphemy. You are reading your own mind set into your eisegesis.
I have already found Him.
I perceive you are immersed in self proud, self congratulating religion that makes you perpetually uncharitable. I have seen a lot of that from Hebraists.
What you snidely posture that you long for, I genuinely do wish for you. But I can’t force it down your throat.
If Trump is BS, why do you wallow in Trump threads? Enjoy the warmth of fresh BS?
what we have here is a test case to determine the law
the woman is a lawsuit guina pig to determine if religious beliefs trump queer aspirations
Trump is also a member of First Presbyterian in Manhattan, a church he says he attends and “loves.” First Presbyterian is a congregation of the Presbyterian Church in the USA (PCUSA) which allows the ordination of gay ministers and supports gay marriage. It also is a major financial contributor to Planned Parenthood through one of its member organizations, Presbyterians Affirming Reproductive Options. Every penny Trump contributes to this church goes to the support of these causes.
If Trump were truly a conservative supporting conservative values, he would have left the PCUSA as a majority of the members of the Presbyterian congregation to which I belong did several years ago. Many in this forum are being sold a bill of goods by a fraud. Look at the facts and face the truth.
Well Trump is going to be in trouble when the folks realize that Trump is pro homosexaul and anti-Christian, his support will evaporate.
“He needs a Franklin Graham in his ear too”
+1
In detail, please explain to me and the rest of us which part is a reach.
The part where I called a man who ‘evangelizes’ on television? Because by definition that makes one a ‘televangelist’ whether it’s Swaggart, Baker, Roberts of Franklin/Billy Graham. Because you disapprove of the term does not change the fact that it’s accurate.
The part where I correctly and accurately pointed out that Frankie did in fact throw his ‘christian’ support behind a guy that has a long history of VERY anti-christian activities? A man who went so far as to give thousands of dollars to fight the very idea that life begins at conception? Because thats one of the things Planned Parenthood is 100% about. We don’t even need to get into the rest of his anti-christian crap but we can if you like.
Mitt, Donnie, Marie and Harry Reid can practice whichever bastardization of Christianity they want. Thats their free choice. But please don’t sit there and tell me a cult that has it;s own rewrite of biblical Christianity is in fact, christian. And please don’t sit there insulting the intelligence of anyone saying that a ‘Christian’ preacher that gives that nonsense his blessing is anything but a gold plated fraud. Words and terms mean things unless one is a liberal. And Christianity does not specify being your own God on your own planet when you join the choir invisible.
For the record, I was raised Roman Catholic and left the faith when their leadership decided that God didn’t know what he was talking about and they knew better. These days I consider myself a believer in the God of the Bible. Call that what you will.
i don’t claim to be pious, holy, free from sin or keeper of secret knowledge. Then again I’m not on TV trying to win converts to my wallet and liberal causes/people either.
I get that people that voted for Romney want to bitterly cling to any fig leaf to justify that decision. But facts are facts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.