Huckabee and the Law


Huffington Post Headline: “Mike Huckabee On Kim Davis: Obey The Law Only ‘If It’s Right'”
(The GOP presidential hopeful wants citizens to disobey the Supreme Court ruling.)

Mike (God is my Vice President) Huckabee, already out of the running for president, except in the eyes of the most other-worldly Evangelicals), has now effectively trashed his credibility as a presidential candidate.

“Only if it’s right,” Huck? In whose eyes?

There are many thousands of American’s who still think that, in spite of existing laws, openly selling highly-addictive drugs to all who want them is ‘right.’ Should they just go ahead and do their thing? Go ahead and break the law because they don’t think it’s ‘RIGHT?’

Of course not; and I know Huck would agree with me on that because that could not, even in a Disney movie, be depicted as a victimless crime. But neither is the crime that Huck is so readily encouraging his minions to commit, a victimless crime; the crime of taking away the legal rights of tens-of-thousands of gay Americans because HE and his church disagree with their lifestyle.

For everyone, except those with their eyes firmly closed, it’s obvious that the “Free Exercise Clause” of the First Amendment was being misinterpreted as permission to mess with the lives and Constitutional rights of those who fall outside of “accepted religious belief and ritual.”

When Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion was written into law, the Supreme Court was recognizing and responding to the fact that the clear majority of states (37 out of 50) had already legalized gay marriage; but it’s pure folly to hope that the religious far Right will ever agree with the clear (and growing) majority on the subject of religion.

Speaking of the Religious Far Right: Justice Scalia, in the meantime, is bouncing off the walls. Scalia’s dissenting opinion is a scathing attack; surprisingly not attacking the majority opinion itself, but attacking the right of the Supreme Court to write that or any opinion into law.

Following is an excerpt from “The Big Think” titled: “Scalia’s Dissent in the Gay Marriage Ruling is a Dangerous Attack on American Democracy Itself:”

“(Scalia) is rejecting the very right of the Supreme Court on which he sits to adjudicate disputes where the answer requires interpretation of the Constitution, (which is of course precisely what the court did when it interpreted the Second Amendment to enshrine the personal right to own guns, an opinion Scalia wrote), a role that has proven to be a corner stone of American democracy. Because he is upset by this ruling (legalizing gay marriage), Justice Scalia directly rejects the authority of the court itself.”

This is the equivalent of a judicial nervous breakdown, as is illustrated by this excerpt directly from Scalia’s minority opinion:

“… the Federal Judiciary, which consists of only nine men and women, all of them successful lawyers, is hardly a cross-section of America. Take, for example, this court, which consist of only nine men and women, successful lawyers who studied at Harvard or Yale law school. Four of the nine are natives of New York City. Eight of them grew up in east- and west-coast States. Only one hails from the vast expanse in-between. Not a single Southwesterner or even, to tell the truth, a genuine Westerner. (California does not count.) Not a single Evangelical Christian (a group that comprises about one quarter of Americans) or even a Protestant of any denomination. … To allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation.”

How about that as an example of allowing personal opinion to trash the rights of others and even the right of the Supreme Court to exist.

That said, I can’t help but agree with his unstated accusations that 1) The concept of Supreme Court Justice For LIFE is one that needs a closer look and 2) The Supreme Court inserting itself into the question of marriage is ludicrous.


Kentucky’s Mini-Gods


Rowan County, Kentucky

County Clerk Kim Davis was a “born again sinner” and claims that, since that day, she has “pledged the rest of her life to the service of the Lord.” To Kim Davis that pledge apparently means that she has become the sole arbiter, interpreter and executor of God’s word.

Kim Davis has apparently forgotten another vow that she made when assuming the position of Rowan County Clerk:

County Clerk Oath:

Did you catch that last sentence? “. . . ” will faithfully execute the duties of my office without favor, affection or partiality, so help me God!

Kim Davis is not only a Christian Bigot, she is a person who is willing to break an oath to God based on her own, amateurish interpretation of His word.

Does she hold a divinity degree? Does she have years of experience studying the works of biblical scholars? No, she’s just a reformed sinner who, like so many of her ilk, desperately wants to be a mini-God because she has no faith in her Creator’s ability to run His own show.

Hopefully God will reward her with just enough jail time to remind her of her place in the universe, enough of a fine to make her realize that “so help me God” means something and a period of unemployability that will remind her that she is the humble servant not anyone’s master.

The County Clerk’s oath (above) was borrowed from an article in the Daily Kos about another Kentucky County Clerk, Casey Davis (possibly a relative), who had the same hate-filled Mini-God complex that Ms. Davis has. Mr Davis, however, additionally, felt the need, as part of his position, to “remind” gay people that they would forever ‘burn in Hell.” His story and the above oath of office can be found HERE!

Speaking of Hell, where the Hell does Kentucky find these losers?

The Supreme Court vs. The Constitution


Opinion among many news commentators as well as actual news reporters is that the Supreme Court will once again try to avoid making the difficult decision, as it did with the “Obamacare” ruling, by finding a technicality that allows them to do nothing about Proposition 8 or DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). As Sally Kohn, one of the ‘opinionators’ admits: “The Supreme Court will either ride the wave or try to block it or dodge it, but ultimately it doesn’t really matter. The tide has irrevocably turned.” (NOTE: The headline (see “Reference”) for this Fox News Opinion piece, because Fox News vocally opposes same-sex marriage, made no attempt to be fair or balanced by unfairly implying that because Chief Justice Roberts has a cousin who is gay it will sway his opinion.)

Ms. Kohn is right that the tide has turned. The majority of the public now supports the right of same-sex couples to marry and obtain all the benefits and rights that go along with a legal marriage but, at the same time, Ms. Kohn is very wrong! It does matter a great deal what the Supreme Court says when they make their ruling. Even the most Conservative Justice will have a hard time dismissing the FACT that to deny legal marriage based on gender, race or sexual preference is clearly unconstitutional. Not only is it unconstitutional now, because public opinion has turned to favor same-sex marriage, the opposing view has always been unconstitutional.

The argument used to be that because the majority of the California voters voted for Proposition 8, those who opposed it will have to live with it and because other states have adopted DOMA or DOMA-like provisions into their state constitutions, it is legal in those states to refuse marriage to same sex couples. Those were false arguments! Public opinion on this issue does not matter nor do biblical admonitions!

The U.S. Constitution overrules state laws that are unconstitutional at the Federal level and if our Supreme Court Justices have the intestinal fortitude to interpret the Constitution correctly they can do nothing but overturn Proposition 8 and DOMA.

This is not, as most media outlets have described it, a “gay rights” issue; this is an issue of equal justice under the law for all American citizens, without regard to their sexual identity or their choice of a marriage partner.

REFERENCE: Opinion: Marriage equality, the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice’s cousin

Sorry Rush, You’re Wrong About Chick-Fil-A Protests


Rush Limbaugh asserted today in a World Net Daily article that “CHICK FIL-A IS NOT THE REAL TARGET – IT’S CHRISTIANITY.” In particular, Limbaugh (and just about every other “Social Conservative”) claims that “all this stuff at Chick-fil-A: the target is Christianity, not Chick-fil-A. The target is freedom of religion.”

The way I see it, while freedom of religion is no doubt important, freedom FROM religion is the quest of the protesters and that quest is every bit as critical.

Chick-Fil-A, as a private enterprise, has every right to adopt any policy it wants and every right to tie it’s public image to any religious concepts it wants. It is a right to gay marriage that is the central/Constitutional issue on every protester’s mind; and since Dan Cathy intentionally offered his company up as a target (or sacrificial lamb) on the issue he’s getting his wish: Target Practice.

Enough talk of Chick-Fil-A

Rush, why don’t you and all the other Social Conservatives admit that you believe it is the Christian Bible that is the controlling document for our country, not the Constitution.

In 1996, when Bill Clinton and a majority of both houses had the gall to stick their noses in a strictly States-Rights issue by passing DOMA, it signaled to those of us who believe in the Constitution that Jerry Fallwell’s Moral Majority had finally and completely subverted our government. Presidents, Senators and Congressmen have every right to hold any religious beliefs they want but when their religious beliefs are primarily the same and they interject those religious beliefs into laws that change the meaning of any part of the Constitution, as DOMA did to the First and Tenth Amendments, they have gone too far toward making laws that establish their religion as the National Religion of an ‘all powerful’ U.S. Government.

I don’t believe that Social Conservatives have any problem with that, but there are millions of others who do have a problem with your ‘National Religion’ Rush. Perhaps you should try untying that ‘other half’ of your brain.

An interesting footnote is that Former President Clinton and key legislators involved in DOMA have since changed their minds and now want it repealed. Also, one section of DOMA has since been found unconstitutional in seven federal courts. That’s what happens when you allow religious fervor to overtake common sense or Constitutional intent.

Rush Limbaugh says: “I just cherish freedom. I cherish liberty.”

(Does that apply to all Americans Rush, or just Christians?)

Chick-Fil-A: Biblical Chicken Nuggets of Wisdom?


Well if you been off-planet and haven’t heard, Atlanta based Chick-Fil-A’s president Dan Cathy has turned his restaurant franchise into a religious organization that just happens to sell chicken and this religious organization has sent out a loud, clear message of intolerance toward the LGBT crowd; this is triggering both an avalanche of support from other homophobes and many colorful protests from those who feel that who marries whom is a personal decision that can be easily reached without the advise and consent of the church or the government (or the corner Chick-Fil-A).

Such a furor arose that Chick-Fil-A’s vice president of public relations had a heart attack this past week and died. Not surprising considering that Dan Cathy ‘napalmed’ the restaurant’s community image while dropping a bomb on the PR department.

There was quite enough intolerance in this country before Dan Cathy, in his company’s name, decided to air his holy underwear — we really didn’t need more.

I understand the concept! The Religious Right feels that we can’t just have people willy-nilly falling in love with each other without the guidance of the church. That would almost be too . . . too American — and of course not at all compatible with far-Right Christian doctrine. To allow people to think and act for themselves is probably considered a sin . . . at least to those religious factions who have stopped reading the Constitution in favor of the Bible.

As I said, I understand the likes of Dan Cathy! These are insecure people with little real faith in God’s “plan”; this makes them (figuratively) reluctant to put their pants on in the morning without finding a supportive bible passage; these are people who try to make up for their lack of faith by acting so self-righteous that they have developed an actual addiction to the act of ‘straightening people out’ (even those who were born anything but “straight”).

Personally, I understand and support religious or other groups showing strong public disapproval of people who are doing harm to others — but to publicly disrespect a man or woman who has a legal, loving relationship with another person, really showcases the unhealthy, tyrannical attitude of many religious sects. If the torture rack was still an option it’s easy to picture attempts to ‘stretch the gay out of people’ in the basements of some churches.

Back to Dan Cathy; it tells a lot about him that it is much more important to him to bring his religion to work and mobilize the rest of the mindless, intolerant heard than it is to allow employees and customers to think for themselves. Independent thought can, after all, be dangerous to highly structured organizations.

I would be negligent if I did not point out that there are many good religious sects left in the world and many of them are Christian based. It’s all a matter of interpretation and realization — realizing the the Bible is a book of lessons, not a book of edicts; realizing that we human creatures have independent will, independent destinies and independent needs and realizing that the herd mentality may work for a while in human society but it slowly kills the human spirit and mind.


CNS News: Hollywood’s War on Chicken

CNN’s Belief Blog: Chick-fil-A wades into a fast-food fight over same-sex marriage rights

Gay Marriage in the spotlight


The chairman of the Republican National Committee, Reince (pronounced: Rence) Priebus stated on NBC’s Meet the Press Sunday:

“I think that most Americans agree that in this country, the legal and historic and the religious union marriage has to have the definition of one man and one woman.”

It seems to me that Mr. Priebus is being misled by his own prejudices and is misleading the Republican Party with those prejudices.

Obviously the legal definition of marriage does not HAVE to be one man and one woman. Several states have now proved that to be the case: States that allow Gay Marriage or some form of legal domestic partnerships.

This, of course, knocks the “historic” argument out of the box unless you don’t consider recent history to be part of history.

Even the “religious union marriage” argument is specious. Many religions and most individual churches have come to the unspoken understanding that marriage is not about procreation; if it was, post-menopausal woman and men with low or nonexistent sperm counts would not be able to get a church wedding. I’ve never yet heard of a church requiring a physicians certificate that states that the couple being married are ABLE to have children. Aside from that, basing marriage on the ability to bring a new life into the world discounts the fact that love and caring are actually the cornerstones of all successful marriages. That alone should be the deciding factor behind every church sanctioned marriage ceremony.

What Mr. Priebus is really saying is that HE doesn’t support gay marriage. That is, of course, his right and feeling like that, HE should never enter into a gay marriage; and if he has any children who turn out to be gay, it would be far better for he, she or them to be sent to live with a more understanding substitute parent; if not, they will be subject to a life of loneliness.

Gay is not a disease, not a disability, not a curse, not “curable” and not abnormal. Gay is the way that some people ARE and they can never be any other way! They were created by the same “force” (call it “God” if you like) that created everyone else. To deny a gay couple the right to marry and deny them the legal rights that go with marriage can be considered nothing but cruel.

At least Obama got SOMETHING right!


President Obama has “evolved” to the view that everyone really IS equal — including gay people who fall in love. I can understand why Americans would have to “evolve” to that position — the majority of Americans have been brainwashed by various religious institutions to believe in their irrational teachings. It takes something special (like a run for reelection) to clear their head.

The Christian bible has approximately 7 passages spread out between a few different “books” that seem to condemn homosexual relations. I could go into the arguments used to refute these apparent condemnations but there is no need to waste my or your time beating a dead horse. People who believe that homosexuals are inherently bad people who made a bad “choice” (the “choice” to be gay) are incapable of thinking anything else and are too brainwashed to understand that gay is not a choice or a disease or a mental disorder.

If there is anyone out there reading this who is capable of facing facts, here’s a documentary to watch: Fish Out Of Water; Fish Out Of Water is available at Netflix(R) (; just type the movie title in the search box and press the ENTER key). Fish out of Water is a partially animated documentary that interviews theologians, and ordinary people, refutes the biblical condemnations and, most interestingly, points out that the ‘Apostle Paul’ was the author of every passage that condemns homosexuality.

Since most (not all) homophobes are suppressing their own homosexual tendencies, one might conclude that Paul fits into that category … one just MIGHT conclude that!


CNN Politics: Obama announces he supports same-sex marriage

Fish Out Of Water: A documentary film by director Ky Dickens.