![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Decision 2004 retrospect
Nov. 3rd, 2004 12:40 pmLooks like I called all the winners (see my post made on Halloween, eerily enough). But even though I didn't vote for Bush, in retrospect it feels as though Bush was destined to win; and it almost feels comfortable that Bush is remaining the President of the U.S.
Note that I say "almost" for a reason.
I suspect that many Christians -- especially fundamentalists -- are happy that Bush is in office, for Kerry has appeared to represent many things that are non-Christian, such as partial-birth abortions. Now, all rebuttals and discourses aside, the big question appears to be, can we stay true to the Constitution with Bush in charge?
I don't think so.
Some of the possible (and I stress, possible) events I see over the next 4 years (and to be honest, only time will tell):
Should we have something like the above? Absolutely not. While I make no bones about being a Christian, I also remember that God gave mankind a choice. If you go back to the Adam and Eve story in Genesis, God could have easily removed the Tree of Knowledge and/or its fruit, thereby removing the temptation to sin in the first place. But He did not, though once Adam and Eve ate the fruit, God prevented the tree from being approached again.
In much the same way, we need to have that choice. But we'll have to see, over the next 4 years, how much choice we'll really have....
Note that I say "almost" for a reason.
I suspect that many Christians -- especially fundamentalists -- are happy that Bush is in office, for Kerry has appeared to represent many things that are non-Christian, such as partial-birth abortions. Now, all rebuttals and discourses aside, the big question appears to be, can we stay true to the Constitution with Bush in charge?
I don't think so.
Some of the possible (and I stress, possible) events I see over the next 4 years (and to be honest, only time will tell):
- The 18th Amendment (Prohibition) will come back to life, but instead of prohibiting alcohol, it will instead prohibit abortion, homosexuality... in short, anything that does not adhere to fundamentalist Christian values. But whereas the 18th Amendment was repealed by an act of Congress, this one would have a provision added to where it could not be repealed. To make a historical/Biblical analogy, this would be like ancient Persia/Media, where anything signed by the king became a law of the Medes and Persians, which could not be changed (emphasis mine).
- Violating any of the above would be a misdemeanor or a felony, with punishment ranging from fines to jail to institutionalization. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw mental hospitals -- and possibly even churches -- filled with gays and lesbians -- trying to change them. Any kind of protest, demonstration or march would also be considered a felony. I don't think the punishments would go so far as to invoke the death penalty, but then again it would depend on how serious the offenses were.
Should we have something like the above? Absolutely not. While I make no bones about being a Christian, I also remember that God gave mankind a choice. If you go back to the Adam and Eve story in Genesis, God could have easily removed the Tree of Knowledge and/or its fruit, thereby removing the temptation to sin in the first place. But He did not, though once Adam and Eve ate the fruit, God prevented the tree from being approached again.
In much the same way, we need to have that choice. But we'll have to see, over the next 4 years, how much choice we'll really have....
