7/1/15

Twisting words

For some reason, The Hon. Doug Lamborn has been sending me his newsletters.

I don't know why; I'm not in his district. Attempts to unsub have proven fruitless.

In any case, here is his latest:

 Dear Friend, It has been a consequential week in the history of our nation. However, as a conservative who has battled Obamacare every step of the way and as a Christian, I am personally troubled by the recent Supreme Court rulings on healthcare and marriage. Yet again, the Supreme Court has twisted itself into a legal pretzel in order to uphold Obamacare. When words are no longer taken at face value by Justices, it is a disturbing omen for the future of judicial activism. We will continue to try to repeal and replace this disaster and fix the flaws that we can. However, it is patently obvious that, even with compelling Constitutional arguments to the contrary, the American people will have to wait for a Republican president to eliminate Obamacare from our lives. It was a stunning disappointment to me that the Court chose to utilize its power to disenfranchise millions of Americans with valid moral and cultural concerns via the marriage decision. By undertaking this staggering judicial overreach, the Court, in its very finite wisdom, decided to throw out thousands of years of tradition and societal structure. Decisions of this magnitude should absolutely be made on a state-by-state basis with local and individual citizen involvement. The decision was a slap in the face to all Americans who value this tradition of local government." Please let me know if you require any assistance with a federal government agency by contacting my local office at (719) 520-0055. I am honored to serve as your Representative in Washington.

We are in agreeance on one thing: The Robed Ones certainly did twist themselves into a pretzel with some of their logic - on Obamacare. Mr. Justice Scalia has hammered that one fairly well, so we'll leave commentary on that one to him.

But then, Doug gets into the gay marriage decision.

He notes that he is a 'Christian,' so I am assuming that his view on this will be more in line with that of the General Superintendents of the Church of the Nazarene, who cited Matthew rather than the venom of Leviticus. So far, however, very few 'Christians' have displayed that much understanding of Christ's teachings, behaving in a more Old Testament manner instead:


But here's the thing:

It was a stunning disappointment to me that the Court chose to utilize its power to disenfranchise millions of Americans with valid moral and cultural concerns via the marriage decision.

That's some interesting hyperbole. How have 'millions of Americans' been 'disenfranchised' by the Robed Ones?

Is my marriage to Leece no longer valid? Are hetero couples no longer allowed to apply for or receive marriage licenses from Sharon Sisenroy over at the court house? Will I no longer be allowed to shop at Hobby Lobby? Am I banned from Chik Fil A?

How have I been 'disenfranchised?'

Doug believes that 'Decisions of this magnitude should absolutely be made on a state-by-state basis with local and individual citizen involvement.'

And what if a state had decided to go gay? What if that state had been Colorado? Would Doug use the same arguments, that the decision somehow 'disenfranchised' millions of residents of the state?

I wouldn't pooh-pooh the idea of Colorado going gay on marriage. It wasn't that long ago that the idea of the state becoming a haven for the Cheech and Chong crowd was considered fairly far out, man. What then?

Doug's going to have to do better. But of course, since I don't live in his district, what I think doesn't matter.

Further of course - even if I did live in Doug's district, what I think wouldn't matter.