Posted on 09/04/2015 10:37:26 AM PDT by Steelfish
Exactly, what we need is someone with both.
....”Trump has operated quite well without Cruz’s input. What alternative universe are you living in?”.....
Trump is the perfect target because he’s by far the most thin-skinned public figure on stage as he’s shown us time and again... A well-placed zinger at Trump always incites a promise of that which sends Trump into a tiz...and he swallows it every time the media hosts fling them.
Everyone has known Trump needed more stability and “become a politician” as he himself stated. So no wonder he “modeled” Cruz’s positions giving them enough twist to call his own. That’s because Trump knows Cruz is the most Conservative of the entire candidate field and as he says he will always look for the best. If you’re going to promote yourself as conservative then you hang with the best....Trump would do no less as we know.
You really have to read up on the whole situation to understand her position. In Kentucky, all marriage licenses must have the signature of the county clerk. The deputy clerks cannot issue the licenses without her signature. So even if the deputies were the ones to hand out the paper, it still would be here signature on the document. In her view, that makes her complicit in sin.
Now she did let the people know that they could go to another county clerk to get the license, and the county judge even offered to sign the licenses for the homosexual couples, which he could legally do. They refused. That showed that the issue was not about being able to marry, but about forcing HER to be a part of it against her will or be ruined.
Nope. Courts ignoring laws against gay marriage, and ignoring that the majority of the people believe marriage to be between a man and woman, is just an inaccurate decision and legislating from the bench.
It’s an abuse of judicial power - not law. Law is written by legislatures.
Marriage is a religious tradition between a man and a woman. Priests and Clergy can perform those ceremonies. The “State” recognizing the benefit, also passed laws to recognize Marriage.
Some people chose to get married by a Justice of the Peace rather than a religious ceremony. If the Government wants to allow civil unions between same sexes, it can pass laws to do so. Unless they do pass such laws, the courts should stick to the laws on the books.
However, under freedom of religion, the Government may not redefine what the various religious groups have stated as their beliefs. No preacher or priest or other religious person recognized by their group to perform marriages, can be forced to marry gays, if it conflicts with their beliefs and rules.
It’s a strange moment, isn’t it? I feel as though I’m living in a sci-fi movie!
>>Except it’s not a deal yet. Instead of acting like the vote already happened, I’d like to see Trump try to stop it. No one has a bigger mic.<<
Excellent point. But it sounds like Trump is focusing on the money involved, as I’d expect, instead of the principles involved.
Why all the so-called conservatives in here have decided to throw in with one of the bigger crony capitalists of all time is beyond me, but they have. Trump’s political positions have been all over the lot for one reason, and one reason only—he’s not a principled politician; he’s a businessman. If it takes adopting a liberal stance to get a deal done, so be it, as he’s demonstrated repeatedly in the past.
I get the fact that people are fed up with the open border policy of the last several administrations, but I’d lay odds that if Trump is elected, he’ll be coming around to the GOPe view within weeks of taking office. After all, as he said regarding the Iran deal, there’s a lot of money at stake, business money.
They’re both wrong. Neither one of them understand or care about the nature of freedom. Of the liberty to think and worship and express without fear of the power of the state being brought down on them.
And that freedom extends to jackasses I dislike and want to smack some sense into! They get to say what they think also.
I am going to need a neck brace if I read that again.
__________________________________________
Ain’t that the truth? These Trumpers can put a positive spin on ANYTHING.
Later, when Donald says he’s changed his mind on immigration; wants an open border, and no limits to illegals - I fully expect the Trumpers to continue to praise him and extol his wonderful wisdom.
You know that now Trumpers consider you GOPe. ;-)
The Kim Davis situation really involves two separate issues. The first is the lawlessness of the Supreme Court, and whether or not their lawless decisions should be honored, and if not, what is the best way to oppose them. On this matter, Trump was wrong to concede that a Supreme Court decision, no matter how lawless, becomes the law of the land. Hopefully he will evolve on this, the more he learns about it.
The second issue is the religious freedom issue. Judging by Trump’s comments, he was not unsympathetic to Kim Davis, but he did bring up a point that I hadn’t heard before, which was that Kim Davis wouldn’t allow any of the other clerks to grant the ‘marriage’ license. This complicates the matter in that she was not only following her personal religious conscience, but was also engaging in political activism.
I don’t disagree with her on either count, but by refusing to let other clerks grant the license, she has entered the realm of political activism. I don’t say that she was wrong to do this, but it changes the situation from a woman being punished for honoring her religion, to a public official being punished for interfering with the execution of the ‘law’. Of course the ‘law’ she refused to uphold is not a legitimate law, but rather a lawless Supreme Court decision. Nevertheless, if a person doesn’t realize this, then the court’s decision to put Davis in jail for not executing the law, seems more reasonable.
Grade A post!
STE=Q
“In Kentucky, all marriage licenses must have the signature of the county clerk. The deputy clerks cannot issue the licenses without her signature. So even if the deputies were the ones to hand out the paper, it still would be here signature on the document. In her view, that makes her complicit in sin”
Otherwise, she has to face the consequences.
I have been in similar situations.
As a young man I once had a job at a gas station; where everyone around — even the boss — was stealing!
They all tried to pressure me to steal too!
I refused to steal and was, consequentially, let go.
Sometimes one has those kinds of tests.
STE=Q
Could you please read post 44 again and then explain it to me? I don’t know if there is punctuation missing or what. Thank you.
I didn’t realize that. Thanks for the clarification. I was responding to the facts as I understood them, which was based on Trump’s apparent understanding of the situation, which he conveyed during his interview.
Freedom of religion has been the law of this land from the beginning. As a far as I know, no one has amended the constitution to change that or to give permission to the Supremes to change it.
I don’t care who likes it or not - religious freedom IS THE LAW OF THIS LAND. And it is being violated by amoral barbarians who hate Christians. I think they call them Marxists.
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.