I'm going to do my best to avoid discussing anything political or even moderately relevant here, but sometimes I just can't help myself. This is one of those times.
I'm talking about this story right here. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family and general d-bag, is accusing Obama of skewing the Bible in a speech Obama made two years ago, in which he questioned the wisdom of governing with the Bible when considering some of the silly laws in the Old Testament that have no practical basis any more. Firstly I'd like to recognize the brass tacks it took for Obama to address that in a public speech. Second, I'd like to state that I think Dobson actually has a point about Obama's theology.
Theology aside, Dobson says this: "What he's trying to say here is, unless everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe. What the senator is saying there, in essence, is that 'I can't seek to pass legislation, for example, that bans partial-birth abortion, because there are people in the culture who don't see that as a moral issue. And if I can't get everyone to agree with me, than it is undemocratic to try to pass legislation that I find offensive to the Scripture. Now, that is a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."
Yes, Mr. Dobson, it is indeed undemocratic (not to mention unconstitutional) to pass legislation that not everyone agrees on. Actually, we need at least a majority vote on almost any bill/law, if not 2/3 or 3/4 depending on the circumstances, so if something were to get passed with a minority in favor, you would be violating not only our laws but the foundational principles on which those laws were built. That's sort of the whole purpose for the structure of our government.
It's also unconstitutional to govern based on Scripture. First amendment, jackass.
How do people say things like this without getting laughed into submission?
No comments:
Post a Comment