Sunday, April 1, 2012

Citizen Dispatch: God & Mammon -- A Conflict of Interest?

If you're a 'minister', or a 'priest," and you win election to a law-making body, who do you serve? The "People," and the Constitution, as you are sworn by oath and affirmation to do. Or does you loyalty to your faith, and your "God" take precedence?

Case in point: Kansas State Legislator Pete DeGraaf? Along with being a first-term Kansas legislator, he's ALSO an associate pastor of some god-walloping, bible-smacking, theistic funny-farm out on the endless, tornado-ravaged plains. He recently got himself installed in Topeka, whence he has been a reliable source of the kind of bullshit that gives 'religious' legislators a bad name by the simple expedient of opening their mouths and flapping their tongues.

Item: The other week, in the midst of the hype and hoopla hysteria surrounding the newly re-activated, hot-button issues like contraception and abortion, and the (entirely valid, imho) comparison of the transvaginal sonogram probe with rape, State Rep. DeGraaf joined the debate over banning health insurance coverage for abortions of rape pregnancies, saying flippantly, in effect, that no such procedure should be included because bearing the child of a rapist might be inconvenient to the mother, but no worse than a flat-tire...No, really. He said it. There's a link on my blog.

It's the cavalier attitude, the almost disdainful disregard, verging on contempt, for what must be a horrible and horrifying event crystalized something for me, why and how deeply I truly, truly, deeply, and wholly detest these pious mountebanks.. They make my skin crawl.

What I see in this christarded, god-bothered, bible-babbling wackloon crackkker, DeGraff, is the STRONGEST POSSIBLE argument imaginable as to why preachers shouldn't be elected to representative office (pace, Berrigan freres).

Like all other elected officials of the "several States" take an oath to faithfully uphold the Constitution. But their behavior often seems to me to suggest that they swear--with reservations. They appear to me to invoke 'faith' as excuse for betraying the laws, and institutions they swore, when elected, to uphold. Who was it noted, they place their hands on the "Bible" and swear to uphold the Constitution, not the other way round?

The most irritating thing is that these miserable miscreants and charlatans fucking ADMIT their competing loyalties. Most of them proudly fucking DECLARE, that their FIRST fucking loyalty is to their fucking GOD. Not to their District they represent, not to the Constitution, fer fucks' sake, not to their consituents, nor to the State to the governance of which they pretend to want to contribute.

You would think that some vestigial sense of integrity would hint to them that, by seeking and accepting public office, their first duty would be to the PEOPLE an their institutions. But for fucknozzles like this asslicking shitwheel, their ELECTED office is not, and never will be, their highest, dominant concern. IT is NOT their FIRST loyalty. Their "faith" is. Their fucking GOD is. And that just ain't right.!

And, for me, that disqualifies the fuckers from EVER representing ME...And that includes the likes of BISHOP/ELDER Willard "Mittens" Romney. Whose side is he on? Mine? Ours? of some imaginary "God's?" To me, they're not interchangeable.

Time was, if you were talking to "God" and happened to be pushing a shopping cart down the street in MANY cities, it 'd getcha 3 hots and a squat, a shower and someplace to refresh your meds, while they deloused ya.

Nowadays, talking to God gets you a parish, and a seat in some corn-pone legislature, and mazbe even a place in the presidential debates. If they ARE talking to "god," it sher hasn't improved the quality of the discourse.

We can swap horror stories about wackloon relatives when I see you at the beach, hippies...

No comments:

Post a Comment