Tuesday, May 16, 2017

Mike Huckabee: gay marriage bad, sharing classified info with Russia good

Earlier today, I posted a video of  Mike Huckabee going on a ridiculous tangent about the SCOTUS decision which legalized marriage equality. He was completely on his high horse talking about how "God wouldn't be mocked" and how the ruling turned the country away from "holiness" and "righteousness." and how we supposedly don't have a nation of law:

It's sad that he doesn't feel the same way about a president (in this case Donald Trump) who shares classified information with Russia:

Let's recap that again in it's totality:

 Huckabee thinks that the lgbtq community winning marriage through the correct process in which our government functions reduces America to less than a country of laws. However he sees nothing wrong with defending a president who gives up classified information to a nation which, amongst other terrible acts, oppresses it's own people, thereby scaring the living crap out of our allies and possibly putting people in danger.

Huckabee has to win the award for self-righteous hypocrite of the year.

I wonder what Franklin Graham will say about this . . .


John Powell said...

Let me apologize up front for the tone of this rant. After all, his blog belongs to Alvin, not Bobby. There are times, however, when the obvious needs stated. Restated?

We don't have a nation of law? Correct me if I am wrong, but, every bill that is passed by Congress and signed by the sitting President becomes a law. States follow a similar process, such bills becoming a law of that state when signed by the Governor. The one overall mandate is that all laws must conform to The Constitution of the United States. Enter SCOTUS.

As evidenced by the existence of huge libraries of law, we have a lot already. This, then, implies that Huckabee is bemoaning the fact that we don't have a nation of God's law. A different matter entirely.

The first ten words of Amendment One of The Constitution is the Fly-in-the-Ointment for Huckabee's want. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,..." (Adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.)

Our Government, then, by Constitutional Law, can not recognize one religion over another. Can not declare a new, single religion to enact such laws. No amount of legislative cherry picking will change that. Besides, can you imagine the linguistic gymnastics required just to attempt to combine the tenets of all religion?

Oh, and on that final note: I can envision Franklin Graham denouncing Governments that embrace systems of Sharia style law, all the while decrying the lack of such, however modified, here.

Okay. I'm off of my soapbox.

Anonymous said...

^^^This... perfectly