Dominionists run for highest office in US

[del]

this would be huge news if it was still 2008






but it's not

News stops mattering because time has lapsed? Huh. Interesting concept.

Here's current.

Rick Perry

it doesn't stop mattering; it stops being, say it with me, *news*.


duh

 

[Sky Dancer]

I got it.

For all you people who fear the big bad Apostolics and Pentecostals just try to get legislation pushed through to make it illegal to be one. Good idea?



Not really since the highest law of the land would protect them just like it protects all people of all faiths in this country.

You don't get it Tony. The Apostolic Reformation people aren't trying to make THEIR religion illegal, just everyone elses. Notice some of your Christian pals starting threads saying that separation of church and state is a "LIBERAL MYTH". Why aren't you tellling THEM how important separation of church and state is to you?

Their aim is to re-write all our laws from a biblical perspective. Bachmann went to a law school founded by a dominionist. They cranked out Christian activist lawyers to do battle with secular government.

I want the freedom to practice my religion in peace and I do NOT want to live in a theocracy, not even a Buddhist one.

I want the same right to take care of my family the way heterosexuals can take care of theirs. I do not want to be a second class citizen just because I happen to be a lesbian.

 

[Sky Dancer]

ZOMG! The dominionists are coming! The dominionists are coming!!!!!

Should I put a lantern in the tower of Christ Church? Is it one if by land and two if by sea? Or, two if by land and one if by sea???

Yes, put a lantern in the church...and then burn it down. It's too dangerous.

And YOU think I exaggerate. I'm not the slightest bit interested in burning down your freakin church.

Separation of church and state. No theocracy. That's what this is about. My right to practice my religion just like YOU get to practice YOURS.

 

[Dr.House]

this would be huge news if it was still 2008






but it's not

News stops mattering because time has lapsed? Huh. Interesting concept.

Here's current.

Rick Perry

it doesn't stop mattering; it stops being, say it with me, *news*.


duh

The whole "NEW" part of the word "news" probably sailed right over her pointy head...

Not the brightest troll here, is she?....

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Another Christian blowing it off. Did you go to Perry's prayer rally or watch all 6 1/2 hours of it on TV?

That's not true at all skydancer. I am not blowing "it" off.

Noticing only one of General Washington's moments of prayer for his barefoot troops at Valley forge you call blowing off "Dominionism?" Madam, I challenge you to read Washington's presidential papers. He references his omnipotent Christian God in most every one of his Presidential letters and papers. In fact he has defended God in most every way Newby has on this USMB board thread in his official acts. God is everywhere in Washington's papers. He encouraged others to honor God in just about everything he said or did by merely speaking his mind about how he felt about God's presence in his life and in America's life.

Not one single candidate on the campaign trail has mentioned God as many times as Washington did in a week in office, and the nation did not fall apart but in fact, was strengthened by George Washington out of sheer respect for this gentle giant who prayed for and wept at the sight of his troops' perilous worn-out clothing and shoes.

I merely shared a picture of Washington doing what he did every day--in his rising, in his each and every meeting, in his planning, in every paper he executed in office, and he remembered God to every one who faced him. Out loud and with a reassuring polite manner.

The recent competitors for the U.S. Presidency aren't a quarter as outspoken on religion as our first several Presidents were.

In fact the Founders were so religious they wrote the First Amendment about free speech in regard to Religion, that we shall not direct ANY LAW whatsoever with re to the practice of religion, including the Christian religion and those who practice speaking about it.
As for your query, "Did you go to Perry's prayer rally or watch all 6 1/2 hours of it on TV?"

I didn't go to and didn't see one minute of Perry's prayer rally. Someone told me our Church's pastor went to the meeting, but he did not incorporate any of it (to my knowledge) into his sermon because he is trained in our own church's seminary, not someone else's, and he follows a disciplined and trained analysis of New as well as Old Testament lessons according to translations from the Greek and Aramaic writings.

The reason I don't watch television too much is because my ministry is in sewing. I sew quilts for the poor that look like I made them for the rich, because my bible says when we help those who cannot help themselves, we are helping God's people. I believe it, too. It does not leave me the luxury of time to watch events on television. I'm the slave of the poor, skydancer. I do it because I believe it is my best way to serve the God of who I believes loves even such a one as me.

I'm simply not critical of people who are open about their Christian faith. The First Amendment has only my admiration when it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech...etc."

I plan on supporting the First Amendment. People have the right to say what they think about their beliefs.

Not one of these candidates will be revoking any Gay rights. Not one. Yes, they have religious beliefs. No, they will not make religion into law. They cannot, firstly, because Congress makes the laws, and they cannot and would not establish a religious law according to the First Amendment out of respect for the founders who wrote the First Amendment clearly and in no uncertain terms.

Since I'm not blowing your deep worries off, I am wondering what purpose you have of accusing these candidates ahead of time of somehow endangering you by encouraging the passage of their religion. How would they force Congress to break the First Amendment?

I'm telling you, it ain't gonna happen. Do you see why this is so?

These people aren't dummies, they're Republican candidates for the highest office in the land. They're not going to erase Bill of Rights guarantees into some kind of a 3-ring religious circus. It wouldn't be fitting of them as persons voters entrust the defense of the Constitution. IOW: It ain't gonna happen.

We Republicans support the Bill of Rights. To the nines. You're completely safe.

I'm afraid I can't encourage you to not worry, because you're worried about somebody taking away what you feel was rightly granted to you. It won't be me supporting anyone who would do such a thing.

And there isn't one single candidate in any party who has the power to absolve the First Amendment of establishing a law about their religious beliefs from the Bill of Rights.

Two of these GOP candidates are dominionists, Perry and Bachmann. The GOP is now the party of religious extremism.

I want to keep separation of church and state. I do not want to live in a theocracy just because George Washington prayed. I hope all Presidents pray. That's not the point. The point is not making Christianity the official religion and the US a theocracy.

I do not want state sponsored organized Christian prayers in public school. I do not want religion taught in science class. I do not want to see Christian prayers plastered on every school and government building in the US.

I want to see all American citizens free to be atheists, theists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhist, LDS, JW etc etc etc.

Bachmann most certainly will revoke any gay rights. She wants to reverse DADT, and she wants to make sure that gay children and teenagers continue to be bullied in school, because she doesn't want gays to be considered "normal" or even citizens. She opposes marriage equality. That is CIVIL marriage. Marriage by a justice of the peace in a courthouse. It has nothing to do with her damn church.

Perry's whole prayer rally was funded by domionists. He is clueless about separation of church and state.

Both candidates have every right to run, I question their fitness to serve as POTUS. Having a dominionist President would be horrible for our country.

I'm happy for you, that you sew for the poor and that you consider that your ministry.

I don't agree with your assessment of the Founders. Christian reconstructionism is the re-writing of history to make it seem that the US has always been a "Christian nation". That is BS.

You live in Texas and don't watch TV. I don't watch TV either. Maybe you read newspapers. Do you have any idea what you Texans have done to the public school history curriculum? Completely rewritten it from a right wing perspective. Look into it.

Texas wants to reinstitute sodomy laws and start locking up gay people again. You execute more people in Texas than they do in many countries Perry is a strong supporter of this.

I am a second generation gay person. My father was gay. I offer my gay civil rights activism in memory of him. I know you don't share my concerns. That's ok. I have them nonetheless. I haven't walked in your shoes this lifetime and you haven't walked in mine.

Thank you for your post. I appreciate more than you can imagine your committment to separation of church and state.

Do you think atheists have a right to serve their country too?

Proof Perry is a dominionist, "Our friends in New York six weeks ago passed a statute that said marriage can be between two people of the same sex. And you know what? That's New York, and that's their business, and that's fine with me. That is their call. If you believe in the 10th Amendment, stay out of their business." Damn him and his attempt to let people marry whoever they want. He should know better!

 

[Sky Dancer]

That's not true at all skydancer. I am not blowing "it" off.

Noticing only one of General Washington's moments of prayer for his barefoot troops at Valley forge you call blowing off "Dominionism?" Madam, I challenge you to read Washington's presidential papers. He references his omnipotent Christian God in most every one of his Presidential letters and papers. In fact he has defended God in most every way Newby has on this USMB board thread in his official acts. God is everywhere in Washington's papers. He encouraged others to honor God in just about everything he said or did by merely speaking his mind about how he felt about God's presence in his life and in America's life.

Not one single candidate on the campaign trail has mentioned God as many times as Washington did in a week in office, and the nation did not fall apart but in fact, was strengthened by George Washington out of sheer respect for this gentle giant who prayed for and wept at the sight of his troops' perilous worn-out clothing and shoes.

I merely shared a picture of Washington doing what he did every day--in his rising, in his each and every meeting, in his planning, in every paper he executed in office, and he remembered God to every one who faced him. Out loud and with a reassuring polite manner.

The recent competitors for the U.S. Presidency aren't a quarter as outspoken on religion as our first several Presidents were.

In fact the Founders were so religious they wrote the First Amendment about free speech in regard to Religion, that we shall not direct ANY LAW whatsoever with re to the practice of religion, including the Christian religion and those who practice speaking about it.
As for your query, "Did you go to Perry's prayer rally or watch all 6 1/2 hours of it on TV?"

I didn't go to and didn't see one minute of Perry's prayer rally. Someone told me our Church's pastor went to the meeting, but he did not incorporate any of it (to my knowledge) into his sermon because he is trained in our own church's seminary, not someone else's, and he follows a disciplined and trained analysis of New as well as Old Testament lessons according to translations from the Greek and Aramaic writings.

The reason I don't watch television too much is because my ministry is in sewing. I sew quilts for the poor that look like I made them for the rich, because my bible says when we help those who cannot help themselves, we are helping God's people. I believe it, too. It does not leave me the luxury of time to watch events on television. I'm the slave of the poor, skydancer. I do it because I believe it is my best way to serve the God of who I believes loves even such a one as me.

I'm simply not critical of people who are open about their Christian faith. The First Amendment has only my admiration when it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech...etc."

I plan on supporting the First Amendment. People have the right to say what they think about their beliefs.

Not one of these candidates will be revoking any Gay rights. Not one. Yes, they have religious beliefs. No, they will not make religion into law. They cannot, firstly, because Congress makes the laws, and they cannot and would not establish a religious law according to the First Amendment out of respect for the founders who wrote the First Amendment clearly and in no uncertain terms.

Since I'm not blowing your deep worries off, I am wondering what purpose you have of accusing these candidates ahead of time of somehow endangering you by encouraging the passage of their religion. How would they force Congress to break the First Amendment?

I'm telling you, it ain't gonna happen. Do you see why this is so?

These people aren't dummies, they're Republican candidates for the highest office in the land. They're not going to erase Bill of Rights guarantees into some kind of a 3-ring religious circus. It wouldn't be fitting of them as persons voters entrust the defense of the Constitution. IOW: It ain't gonna happen.

We Republicans support the Bill of Rights. To the nines. You're completely safe.

I'm afraid I can't encourage you to not worry, because you're worried about somebody taking away what you feel was rightly granted to you. It won't be me supporting anyone who would do such a thing.

And there isn't one single candidate in any party who has the power to absolve the First Amendment of establishing a law about their religious beliefs from the Bill of Rights.

Two of these GOP candidates are dominionists, Perry and Bachmann. The GOP is now the party of religious extremism.

I want to keep separation of church and state. I do not want to live in a theocracy just because George Washington prayed. I hope all Presidents pray. That's not the point. The point is not making Christianity the official religion and the US a theocracy.

I do not want state sponsored organized Christian prayers in public school. I do not want religion taught in science class. I do not want to see Christian prayers plastered on every school and government building in the US.

I want to see all American citizens free to be atheists, theists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhist, LDS, JW etc etc etc.

Bachmann most certainly will revoke any gay rights. She wants to reverse DADT, and she wants to make sure that gay children and teenagers continue to be bullied in school, because she doesn't want gays to be considered "normal" or even citizens. She opposes marriage equality. That is CIVIL marriage. Marriage by a justice of the peace in a courthouse. It has nothing to do with her damn church.

Perry's whole prayer rally was funded by domionists. He is clueless about separation of church and state.

Both candidates have every right to run, I question their fitness to serve as POTUS. Having a dominionist President would be horrible for our country.

I'm happy for you, that you sew for the poor and that you consider that your ministry.

I don't agree with your assessment of the Founders. Christian reconstructionism is the re-writing of history to make it seem that the US has always been a "Christian nation". That is BS.

You live in Texas and don't watch TV. I don't watch TV either. Maybe you read newspapers. Do you have any idea what you Texans have done to the public school history curriculum? Completely rewritten it from a right wing perspective. Look into it.

Texas wants to reinstitute sodomy laws and start locking up gay people again. You execute more people in Texas than they do in many countries Perry is a strong supporter of this.

I am a second generation gay person. My father was gay. I offer my gay civil rights activism in memory of him. I know you don't share my concerns. That's ok. I have them nonetheless. I haven't walked in your shoes this lifetime and you haven't walked in mine.

Thank you for your post. I appreciate more than you can imagine your committment to separation of church and state.

Do you think atheists have a right to serve their country too?

Proof Perry is a dominionist, "Our friends in New York six weeks ago passed a statute that said marriage can be between two people of the same sex. And you know what? That's New York, and that's their business, and that's fine with me. That is their call. If you believe in the 10th Amendment, stay out of their business." Damn him and his attempt to let people marry whoever they want. He should know better!

Perry voiced support for a federal marriage amendment similar to the statewide amendment in Texas passed during his administration that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
"To not pass the federal marriage amendment would impinge on Texas and other states not to have marriage forced upon them," Perry said.

He wants to bring back the sodomy laws so gays can be locked up. Yeah, he really wants us to be happy.

 

[daveman]

We obviously have Dominionists in Lincoln Park.

 

[Newby]

careful!

sky gets really pissy if she has to share the drama

Maybe Newby should change his avatar to something more appropriate then. I seriously doubt he bears any resemblance to it now. He'd like people to think he MIGHT, though.

newby's a woman and a steelers fan

her avi is a pro football player for the steelers

you're an idiot

no need to thank me; virtue is its own reward

Okay, I missed that one... hilarious...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

ZOMG! The dominionists are coming! The dominionists are coming!!!!!

Should I put a lantern in the tower of Christ Church? Is it one if by land and two if by sea? Or, two if by land and one if by sea???

Yes, put a lantern in the church...and then burn it down. It's too dangerous.

And YOU think I exaggerate. I'm not the slightest bit interested in burning down your freakin church.

Separation of church and state. No theocracy. That's what this is about. My right to practice my religion just like YOU get to practice YOURS.

Once again for the truly SLOW and STUPID. There is no CHANCE of a theocracy in the United States. Even if Bachmann or Perry get elected there is not 218 Congressman or 51 Senators or 37 States that support the theocracy argument.

You claim you are protecting the 1st Amendment while DEMANDING certain religious people be persecuted for their religious beliefs, You demand that certain religions be denied the right to worship and run for Office.

You not they are threatening the Constitution.

 

[catzmeow]

Noticing only one of General Washington's moments of prayer for his barefoot troops at Valley forge you call blowing off "Dominionism?" Madam, I challenge you to read Washington's presidential papers. He references his omnipotent Christian God in most every one of his Presidential letters and papers. In fact he has defended God in most every way Newby has on this USMB board thread in his official acts. God is everywhere in Washington's papers. He encouraged others to honor God in just about everything he said or did by merely speaking his mind about how he felt about God's presence in his life and in America's life.

Again, because you apparently missed it...the moment of prayer you're referencing didn't occur.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...-for-highest-office-in-us-23.html#post4016812

 

[Newby]

Noticing only one of General Washington's moments of prayer for his barefoot troops at Valley forge you call blowing off "Dominionism?" Madam, I challenge you to read Washington's presidential papers. He references his omnipotent Christian God in most every one of his Presidential letters and papers. In fact he has defended God in most every way Newby has on this USMB board thread in his official acts. God is everywhere in Washington's papers. He encouraged others to honor God in just about everything he said or did by merely speaking his mind about how he felt about God's presence in his life and in America's life.

Again, because you apparently missed it...the moment of prayer you're referencing didn't occur.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...-for-highest-office-in-us-23.html#post4016812

According to Professor Lengel at least. He's trying to debunk Washington's own biogrpaher, but doesn't really state anything to back up what he's using to do so though. I like a little more background and information than that before I take it as fact.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Noticing only one of General Washington's moments of prayer for his barefoot troops at Valley forge you call blowing off "Dominionism?" Madam, I challenge you to read Washington's presidential papers. He references his omnipotent Christian God in most every one of his Presidential letters and papers. In fact he has defended God in most every way Newby has on this USMB board thread in his official acts. God is everywhere in Washington's papers. He encouraged others to honor God in just about everything he said or did by merely speaking his mind about how he felt about God's presence in his life and in America's life.

Again, because you apparently missed it...the moment of prayer you're referencing didn't occur.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...-for-highest-office-in-us-23.html#post4016812

According to Professor Lengel at least. He's trying to debunk Washington's own biogrpaher, but doesn't really state anything to back up what he's using to do so though. I like a little more background and information than that before I take it as fact.

One, the moment of prayer referred to did not occur. Period.

Two, Washington believed in God but not in the sense evangelicals understand.

Three, Washington did not take communion after being challenged to do so by his Priest. Ever after, when at Arlington on Sundays, he walked in the church garden during Holy Eucharist.

Four, Washington would never support dominionism.

 

[Newby]

Again, because you apparently missed it...the moment of prayer you're referencing didn't occur.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...-for-highest-office-in-us-23.html#post4016812

According to Professor Lengel at least. He's trying to debunk Washington's own biogrpaher, but doesn't really state anything to back up what he's using to do so though. I like a little more background and information than that before I take it as fact.

One, the moment of prayer referred to did not occur. Period.
Two, Washington believed in God but not in the sense evangelicals understand.

Three, Washington did not take communion after being challenged to do so by his Priest. Ever after, when at Arlington on Sundays, he walked in the church garden during Holy Eucharist.

Four, Washington would never support dominionism.

And what are you using to back that up? All I asked for was some proof of some kind other than people just saying so.

As to point four, I don't think anyone was even remotely trying to make the assertion that he would.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What is required for the US to amend the US Constitution. Something that would have to happen in order for Sky Dancers Theocracy to even occur.

1) 218 members of the House would need to vote to accept the Amendment.

2) 51 members of the Senate would need to vote to accept the Amendment.

3) 37 States would have to vote to approve the Amendment.

So Sky and BD provide for us ANY evidence that any of those 3 conditions would be meet if Bachmann or Perry were elected to Office.

Again for the SLOW and Stupid..... The President can NOT change the Constitution, he can not create new laws, he can not create a theocracy.

Further the 1st Amendment Guarantees the RIGHT of any religious group that is not illegal ( as in calls for human sacrifice) to have its members run for public office, INCLUDING that of President.

Any call to prevent them running is Unconstitutional and Illegal. Anyone demanding that any religious group be made illegal or denied its rights to run for office is violating the 1st Amendment.

 

[catzmeow]

And what are you using to back that up? All I asked for was some proof of some kind other than people just saying so.

As to point four, I don't think anyone was even remotely trying to make the assertion that he would.

Lengel is the editor in chief of the Papers of George Washington project at the University of Virginia, having joined the project as a graduate student 15 years ago. The task, he suggests tongue-in-cheek, is “slated for ‘completion’ by about 2025.’’

The many myths of George Washington - Page 2 - Boston.com

I suspect that he has greater access to Washington's private papers than anyone in the U.S.

Here's a more lengthy article on the subject: http://www.pinstripepress.net/PPBlo...heme-on-the-myths-of-the-founding-fathers133/

 

[JakeStarkey]

According to Professor Lengel at least. He's trying to debunk Washington's own biogrpaher, but doesn't really state anything to back up what he's using to do so though. I like a little more background and information than that before I take it as fact.

One, the moment of prayer referred to did not occur. Period.
Two, Washington believed in God but not in the sense evangelicals understand.

Three, Washington did not take communion after being challenged to do so by his Priest. Ever after, when at Arlington on Sundays, he walked in the church garden during Holy Eucharist.

Four, Washington would never support dominionism.

And what are you using to back that up? All I asked for was some proof of some kind other than people just saying so.

As to point four, I don't think anyone was even remotely trying to make the assertion that he would.

The points are factual and easily checked.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

One, the moment of prayer referred to did not occur. Period.
Two, Washington believed in God but not in the sense evangelicals understand.

Three, Washington did not take communion after being challenged to do so by his Priest. Ever after, when at Arlington on Sundays, he walked in the church garden during Holy Eucharist.

Four, Washington would never support dominionism.

And what are you using to back that up? All I asked for was some proof of some kind other than people just saying so.

As to point four, I don't think anyone was even remotely trying to make the assertion that he would.

The points are factual and easily checked.

Then provide links.

 

[catzmeow]

Then provide links.

Based upon these quotes, I find it highly unlikely that Washington would have supported dominionism:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..." - text from Article 11, Treaty of Tripoli, signed preliminarily in 1796, by George Washington at the end of his last term as president

Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society. [George Washington, letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 726]

I beg you be persuaded that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution. [George Washington, to United Baptists Churches of Virginia, May, 1789 from The Washington papers edited by Saul Padover]

 

[Sky Dancer]

Yes, put a lantern in the church...and then burn it down. It's too dangerous.

And YOU think I exaggerate. I'm not the slightest bit interested in burning down your freakin church.

Separation of church and state. No theocracy. That's what this is about. My right to practice my religion just like YOU get to practice YOURS.

Once again for the truly SLOW and STUPID. There is no CHANCE of a theocracy in the United States. Even if Bachmann or Perry get elected there is not 218 Congressman or 51 Senators or 37 States that support the theocracy argument.

You claim you are protecting the 1st Amendment while DEMANDING certain religious people be persecuted for their religious beliefs, You demand that certain religions be denied the right to worship and run for Office.

You not they are threatening the Constitution.

This is ridiculous. Perry and Bachmann are running for POTUS, as is their right. That makes them open to criticism. I am pointing out that both are dominionist. If you think that in itself constitutes "persecution" then you give me far more credit than I deserve.

I am ONE person who opposes dominionism. You don't seem to mind it, that's your choice.

I am NOT denying Bachmann nor Perry the right to run for POTUS. I am warning people about what dominionism is, and that I consider it a grave threat to the United States.

I am DEMANDING nothing. I am saying I don't think Perry or Bachmann are good choices for POTUS. That is MY right as an American citizen.

It is YOU who wish to silence me. It is YOU who are slow to understand my position.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And YOU think I exaggerate. I'm not the slightest bit interested in burning down your freakin church.

Separation of church and state. No theocracy. That's what this is about. My right to practice my religion just like YOU get to practice YOURS.

Once again for the truly SLOW and STUPID. There is no CHANCE of a theocracy in the United States. Even if Bachmann or Perry get elected there is not 218 Congressman or 51 Senators or 37 States that support the theocracy argument.

You claim you are protecting the 1st Amendment while DEMANDING certain religious people be persecuted for their religious beliefs, You demand that certain religions be denied the right to worship and run for Office.

You not they are threatening the Constitution.

This is ridiculous. Perry and Bachmann are running for POTUS, as is their right. That makes them open to criticism. I am pointing out that both are dominionist. If you think that in itself constitutes "persecution" then you give me far more credit than I deserve.

I am ONE person who opposes dominionism. You don't seem to mind it, that's your choice.

I am NOT denying Bachmann nor Perry the right to run for POTUS. I am warning people about what dominionism is, and that I consider it a grave threat to the United States.

I am DEMANDING nothing. I am saying I don't think Perry or Bachmann are good choices for POTUS. That is MY right as an American citizen.

It is YOU who wish to silence me.

You have made demands they be prevented from running, you have based that on the argument that somehow electing them President will create this supposed theocracy. I have pointed out you are simply ignorantly wrong.