Virginia Rep. Denver Riggleman just lost his seat in congress during a GOP convention on Saturday. The shocking defeat comes after Virginia Republicans expressed outrage that Rep. Riggleman had officiated a gay wedding last summer, which prompted the Virginia GOP to begin, almost immediately, a takedown of Riggleman.
Other than his officiating a gay wedding, Riggleman’s your standard run-of-the-mill congressional conservative. He’s voted with President Trump 94% of the time, he’s a member of the House Freedom Caucus, and he’s an Air Force veteran. But that wasn’t enough to stop his own party from conspiring to take him down for the cardinal sin of celebrating LGBT love.
Congressman Officiates Vows, GOP Vows Revenge
The wedding came about when two of Riggleman’s former campaign volunteers - Anthony LeCounte and Alex Pisciarino - asked him to officiate their wedding, impressed with his support of the LGBT community. Riggleman said yes, and the backlash from party officials was swift and harsh.
The district committee chair wrote on the district’s website that marriage is between one man and one woman. Multiple Republican groups in the district condemned or censured Riggleman. One group passed a vote of no confidence against him. Travis Witt, a local pastor who serves on the Fifth District committee told The Atlantic that “The sanctity of marriage does not need to be redefined because it has been defined for thousands of years as one man and one woman. That’s a standard that I don’t think you can change, because that’s the standard that I believe the God of creation established in the very first chapters of the Book of Genesis.”
And in their final act of ballot warfare against Riggleman, Virginia Republicans opted to have a convention instead of a primary. Virginia law allows state parties to decide between a convention or primary. In conventions, delegates vote on the nominee, whereas in primaries the nominee is chosen by state voters. Republican party delegates tend to skew further right than average voters. To top it off, the single location delegates could cast votes for Virginia’s fifth district - a district geographically larger than 5 U.S. states - was in a Lynchburg-area church, close to Riggleman’s opponent’s home, and due to concerns of the spread of COVID-19 was drive-thru only.
LGBT Meets GOP
Despite his positive opinions towards gay marriage, Riggleman had support of the Republican party outside his state. President Trump endorsed him, President Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr. recorded a robocall for him, and even Jerry Falwell Jr., the president of Liberty University, endorsed Riggleman.
Ironically, with Riggleman’s opponent Bob Good as the Republican nominee, Republicans are less likely to retain the seat. Good holds very far-right views in a state that is slowly trending blue.
It’s an interesting case study in how Republicans can react politically as gay marriage gains nationwide acceptance. They can open their arms to the LGBT community, as Riggleman has done, or they can slam the door. What do you think? Is there room for LGBT support in the Republican party?
Riggleman is my congressman. He was very right wing, Trump-loving and hard-line, as far as I know. The GOP is just crazy. WHAT is so-called "Biblical Marriage," as the late Billy Graham exhorted us to vote "for" (and against any democrats, he intimated) in full-page advertisements in newspapers all over the US when he was alive. So.... Biblical marriage. Sister brides. That's not "1 woman." Your wife's servant girl. Concubines. In addition to your many wives. When I look through the Bible, I see a LOT of different ways in which A MAN married or had other sanctioned sexual/familial relationships with WOMEN PLURAL. And not clear about gay relationships at all, though some would have us believe. So what in Bible Hell are they talking about? The Bible was also used to outlaw interracial relationships--not that the slaves had any choice in the matter, just those that were consensual like The Lovings in Virginia. SHAME on the GOP for their insensitivity, persecution of and cruelty towards other human beings. They are what is wrong with 'Murikkka. Riggleman lost his primary. The GOP candidate will LOSE to a Democrat, because he is a vile and hateful piece of work. The Times, They Are A-Changing. Thank God.
Slavery in all its many forms has been a monstrous blight on human civilization and continues to be so even up the present day, where workers in third world countries are paid a mere pittance for their labour. Whilst the Bible has been well-thumbed to come up with quotations that apparently denounce homosexuality and support those who see it as a sin, what does it say about slavery? Basically, bugger all! When it comes to outright condemnation in both the Old and New Testaments – the answer is virtually nothing. When it comes to both tacit support and outright endorsement then try: “Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ” (Ephesians 6:5). And you might also consider: “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners since he is the one who broke the contract with her.” (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) The simple historical facts are that slavery in biblical times was the accepted norm. Whether the Bible refers to them as ‘servants’, ‘bondservants’ or ‘manservants’ they were all slaves – there to do all the hard yakka, the menial tasks, provide sexual favours and play an integral part in the economy. Whilst there is no evidence of Jesus ever campaigning against slavery, some defensive Christians will point to the fact that in the Old Testament, Israelite regulations freed slaves every seven years and ordered the death penalty for man stealing – however, not exactly what you would call abolition. Throughout history, the enslavers have regularly pointed to the Bible’s almost total lack of opposition to slavery to support their own slave holdings. This was often the case in America prior to emancipation where preachers held the good book high as a sign of God’s support for the inhuman trade and bondage. Somewhat ironically African slaves were introduced to Christianity by their white masters as a form of placation although they were often told that heaven was reserved entirely for the Caucasian. In fairness, there are millions of modern day Christians who don’t accept a literal interpretation of the Bible and are prepared to read between the historical lines to draw their spiritual guidance and inspiration. On the other hand there are still millions more conservative Christians who view every word as the absolute truth, particularly those who subscribe to a creationist view – like the Australian born preacher Ken Ham who runs the Creationist Museum in Kentucky, believes the world is only 6,000 years old and that dinosaurs roamed during the Old Testament (Hey, I fact checked the Bible and couldn’t find one mention of a Stegosaurus). Perhaps the Bible could do with a bit of updating and revision and some contemporary input from some of today’s more enlightened religious scholars. I tend to think that Jesus, given his empathy for the poor and down trodden, would have viewed slavery as vile and abhorrent. Maybe the status quo at the time and those that compiled and edited the Bible chose to conceal that concern to protect their own vested interests. Hundreds of years later slave masters in America issued a special ‘Slave Bible’ to their African captives, deliberately censored to remove any suggestion of the promotion of freedom or lack of obedience. Needless to say, history and religion go hand in hand when it comes to repeating themselves – ad nauseam!
Even if Jesus himself came down from heaven, wrapped in a rainbow to smite each, and every one of the elected republicans along side their head to knock some sense into them. The republicans still wouldn't change their greedy, selfish, narrow-minded, homophobic, bigoted, and misogyny views
Sadly, I believe you are right. The R's all lied to keep Trump from being outsted from the WH after being impeached. Most of them hold these old fashioned and hateful views.
That is such a crock. It is now the law. Marriage equality is the Law.
Um no sorry its not. The Supreme Court said that no state could ban a same sex marriage, but if you will read Article 1 Section 1 of the US Constitution; it clearly says that the only people who can make a law is the US Congress. NOT the US Supreme Court, and that is even stated in Article 3 of the US Constitution. So while same sex marriage cannot be banned, it also by the US Constitution which is the supreme law of the land, is not a law and never can be until Congress passes it and its signed by whatever person is sitting in the WH. Slept through Civics and US Government in school did you?
The Supreme Court plays a very important role in our constitutional system of government. First, as the highest court in the land, it is the court of last resort for those looking for justice. Second, due to its power of judicial review, it plays an essential role in ensuring that each branch of government recognizes the limits of its own power. Third, it protects civil rights and liberties by striking down laws that violate the Constitution. Finally, it sets appropriate limits on democratic government by ensuring that popular majorities cannot pass laws that harm and/or take undue advantage of unpopular minorities. In essence, it serves to ensure that the changing views of a majority do not undermine the fundamental values common to all Americans, i.e., freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and due process of law.
The Supreme Court functions as a last resort tribunal. Its rulings cannot be appealed. It also decides on cases dealing with the interpretation of the constitution (for example, it can overturn a law passed by Congress if it deems it unconstitutional).
If you wish to go further down your misguided path of the law Daniel Gray. I will more then happy to put you back on the right path, but I have to warn you it will a very long path.
And just how can it be misguided when it is quoted directly from Article 1 Section 1 US Constitution. That is unless you are saying the Constitution is lying
Likewise, christians and others can't stop me /my church from welcoming gays, and preforming same sex weddings, as our faith has no issues with , the first amendment protects mine and everyone practice of their religion
And nobody said they should. So why you posted this misguided post in the first place is known only to you
Um no sorry you're wrong Daniel Gray
Sorry chuckles, but Article 1 of the US Constitution clearly states only Congress can make a law or give weight of law
Article 1 Section 1 Powers of Congress All legislative power in the government is vested in Congress, meaning that it is the only part of the government that can make new laws or change existing laws. Executive Branch agencies issue regulations with the full force of law, but these are only under the authority of laws enacted by Congress.
next time know what you are talking about BEFORE your lips start flapping
You can keep quoting that all you like Daniel Gray. However it still won't change the fact that you are wrong and you know it. Just like ostrich you keep your head stuck in the Sands of denial.
whats wrong child? mad because the Constitution is calling you out for lying?
Since Article VI of the Constitution establishes the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land, the Court held that an Act of Congress that is contrary to the Constitution could not stand. In subsequent cases, the Court also established its authority to strike down state laws found to be in violation of the Constitution.
It protects civil rights and liberties by striking down laws that violate the Constitution. Finally, it sets appropriate limits on democratic government by ensuring that popular majorities cannot pass laws that harm and/or take undue advantage of unpopular minorities. In essence, it serves to ensure that the changing views of a majority do not undermine the fundamental values common to all Americans, i.e., freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and due process of law.
you can say whatever you want, but the fact remains that the ONLY people who can make a law or give weight of law to anything as per the Constitution is the Congress. Sorry if this destroys the fairy dust you hoped would be sprinkled all over the US after this decision and everyone would sing Kum-ba-yah. You have to live in reality no matter if it does not fit your agenda.
The best-known power of the Supreme Court is judicial review, or the ability of the Court to declare a Legislative or Executive act in violation of the Constitution, is not found within the text of the Constitution itself. The Court established this doctrine in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803).
In this case, the Court had to decide whether an Act of Congress or the Constitution was the supreme law of the land. The Judiciary Act of 1789 gave the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus (legal orders compelling government officials to act in accordance with the law). A suit was brought under this Act, but the Supreme Court noted that the Constitution did not permit the Court to have original jurisdiction in this matter. Since Article VI of the Constitution establishes the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land, the Court held that an Act of Congress that is contrary to the Constitution could not stand. In subsequent cases, the Court also established its authority to strike down state laws found to be in violation of the Constitution.
Before the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment (1869), the provisions of the Bill of Rights were only applicable to the federal government. After the Amendment's passage, the Supreme Court began ruling that most of its provisions were applicable to the states as well. Therefore, the Court has the final say over when a right is protected by the Constitution or when a Constitutional right is violated.
Congress cannot make any law related to marriage. It is a power reserved to the States (read more of the Constitution, including the amendments). The Supreme Court's decision turns on equal protection under the law (Federal or State), not one which branch of government can :make" law--and, a reminder, that applies only to Federal law. So let's focus on the right stuff--and that's a lot more nuanced than citing, incorrectly, Articles 1 and 3 of the US Constitution.
Article 1 Section 1 of the US Constitution is calling you a liar.
Congress can make new laws or change existing laws. However Congress can not make new laws or change existing laws that is found to be in violation of the Constitution.
Exactly, and The Supreme Court cannot make a law at all, nor can they "interpret" anything (Article 3 US Constitution) as all that says is they have to go by what is written. Otherwise any future court could re hear the case and decide differently. Thats why it takes a 2/3rds vote by both houses of Congress or a 7 vote by SCOTUS to overturn a previous ruling. But a law it isnt and can never be
The Supreme Court functions as a last resort tribunal. Its rulings cannot be appealed. It also decides on cases dealing with the interpretation of the constitution (for example, it can overturn a law passed by Congress if it deems it unconstitutional).
I see you failed history. SCOTUS decision CAN be overturned and it takes 2/3rds of a vote of BOTH Houses of Congress to do so. Heck even SCOTUS themselves have overturned their own decisions 10 times in the last 240 years. And yes they can overturn a law, BUT they have to have solid footing to do so, they just cant come along and decide that it does not meet the Constitution because they say so. Even former Justice mashall stated that the roe v wade and the prayer decisions were a massive over reach of the court. Thats why Montana just got slapped upside their heads when they denied the private religious school a grant. Scotus settled this on the 1st Amendment which says that no government can pass a law that would violate a religion and that if you are going to give one private school grants then you have to give all of them the grants. You really need a refresher course is Government
VP Pence is gay, right?
I don't know. I thought Trump was gay. But then I looked again, now I think he is just a loony toon. 🤣🤣
I don't know about Trump being gay, but I do know he's definitely not straight because, Trump and his whole family are as crooked as you can get.
You are judging what kind of man are you. Are you Mr. perfect. no manner if you like or do not like Trump weather you like it or not respect your president. If you have any class.
Dear me, Lauren..skipped those high school English and spelling classes did we? But to refute your message; are you seriously supporting the Orange Cheeto and simultaneously questioning someone's class or lack thereof? Trump is the most crass, undignified piece of trach to ever occupy the White House. Try another approach.
And how do you know this? First hand experience? I doubt it. When you demean someone in a public forum, at the least you should have proof. Unfortunately, I don't care for people who love to cast stones with no regard for the truth or common decency.. We are on "themonastery.org" are we not? Making fun of VP Pence because of his beliefs? Really low class and sooo angry. and sooo political. I noticed you comment frequently, why not just say " I see nothing wrong with gay marriage" and be done with it. You're entitled to your opinion as well as is everyone else. I also noticed you've lumped all Republicans/Conservatives as having one mindset. So because I'm of Asian decent I can't drive well? Try looking at people as individuals capable of having their own opinions instead of Democrat = Dumb, Republican = homophobic, bigoted, etc.. Your name is probably really "Mr. Chips" and you wear blazers with leather patches at the elbows and spew your brand of logic, the logic of "single mindedness". Make love, not war.
Of what part of what I wrote about Trump, VP Pence and the Elected Conservatives /Republicans Party that isn't true? If you have seen, hear and read what Trump, VP Pence and the Elected Conservatives /Republicans Party have said and done you would know this to be true.
`When you wrote "why not just say " I see nothing wrong with gay marriage" and be done with it" what if I wrote the all gays are sinner and should burn in hell for all eternity . Would you have been okay with just that statement, without wanting to know what my reasons were or my justification of having made that statement If someone made a statement or argument , don't you think that they should give a reason or justification to back up their state or argument.
Do you not see the error in that example...once again you're making a blanket statement and then I would say you're being hateful rather than saying something about an individual you know who is gay and he's led you to your statement. Generalization is what's creating hate, mistrust, and division.
As far as Trump, etc., etc. I do read and research what is said and done. All I say is back your opinions with facts or just say you don't agree with the views of Republicans/ Conservatives.Once again, you make generalizations which some Senators/House don't thrill me either but there are some who have done a good job. That's why I'm an Independent and make my decisions on merit or potential. We're all individuals and should be treated as such. Keep generalizations to a minimum and this country would be better for it.
I have post my reason more then once but they won't show them
– May 28, 2020 – Following up on his threat to punish Twitter for tagging warning labels to two of his tweets, Trump signed an executive order to “defend free speech from one of the gravest dangers it has faced in American history.”
– May 29, 2020 – Trump said he would end the country’s relationship with the World Health Organization. He had warned of the action since the early days of the pandemic. “Countless lives have been taken and profound economic hardship has been inflicted all around the globe,” he said.
– May 29, 2020 – Grief-stricken and angry, many people in Minneapolis took to the streets to protest the killing of George Floyd, an African American man who was killed by a white police officer who pressed his knee into Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes. On Twitter, Trump responded by calling protesters “THUGS,” a racially loaded term. For the second time in a week, Twitter attached a warning label to his tweet, in which the president seemed to condone violence, writing, “Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts.”
– May 30, 2020 – For the second day in a row, Trump condemned people across the country who protested the killing of George Floyd, threatening them with “vicious dogs” and “ominous weapons.” In a tweet that seemed to welcome a confrontation, he wrote, “Tonight, I understand, is MAGA NIGHT AT THE WHITE HOUSE???” He later suggested he didn’t mean to incite any violence. “I was just asking,” he said. “By the way, they love African-American people. They love black people.”
– May 31, 2020 – Following days of unrest and rioting, Trump stayed silent — except for tweets that he composed from within a White House bunker while fires raged outside. “Get tough Democrat Mayors and Governors,” he wrote in one of them. “These people are ANARCHISTS. Call in our National Guard NOW.”
Trump’s first 100 days have revealed that his true policy priorities are benefitting corporations and the wealthiest few at the expense of everyone else. His actions and those of his administration have been characterized by broken promises, gross conflicts of interest, and a stark erosion of transparency, ethics, and other democratic norms. As a candidate, Trump promised the American people that we were going to “… win so much, we’ll be sick and tired of winning.” But it is not the American people who have been winning—it is Wall Street, private prisons, the oil industry, and Trump’s own family. Trump does not keep his promises and is unable to effectively manage the government. And The Conservative Republicans have backed Trump all the way, they done nothing to stop him at all. So they are just as bad and guilty as he is.
By the way there some Democrats that would like to see out of office as well. But on a whole I am more in favorite of Democrats then the Conservatives/Republicans Now for Bernie Sander great senator I love his ideas, but I feel he wouldn't be a great president. I think he should stay where he is. He would more effective.
"Mr. Chips" and you wear blazers with leather patches at the elbows
hmm I kinda like the sound of that name Mr.Chips it has a nice happy Chippy sound to it, don't you think. I don't wear blazer with leather patches at the elbows, but I think I just might try that out and see how it looks on me.
Wouldn't surprise anyone. Most, if not all, gender straight-arrows are actually closet something - usually the something they oppose most ardently. No verifiable evidence to refute it.
If by gay you mean that ,VP Pence is happy to be a totality narrow-minded, homophobic, bigoted religious zealot, and a complete whack job then yes he is gay.
Perhaps the Gay Couple was a relative of his. I don't feel he should have lost his seat for Officiating their wedding.
Yes I believe there is room for the LGBTQ support in the Republican Party.
Are you talking about the Republican Party that here on earth in the USA? Or are you talking about some fantasy Republican Party, on another planet in a faraway galaxy, that only exist in another time and dimension.
I seriously doubt I’m talking about the party of the planet you are on, which is obviously not the same planet most everyone else is on looking at the replies that you’ve started leaving. You wouldn’t by any chance happen to be a Democrat would you? If you are, that would answer a lot.
Metaphorically speaking we're not on the same planet, as far as politics goes, you have your views and I have mine, and never the twain shall meet. As for everyone let's leave them out of this, since neither one of us speak for them.
By their own narrow-minded and bigoted reaction to Riggleman’s officiating a gay wedding, They may have just cut their own throat and lost Riggleman’s former seat to a Democrat.
Never forget that God created one man and one trans gender clone. Genesis 2:23 The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man."
I guess you can refer to her as being a spare rib.
I'm not against gay people or them being married.However being a Minister according to the gospels and the Holiness code.We as representatives of God are not able to officiate at a Gay marriage.
AND WHY NOT PRAY TELL DONNA CHRIST ???
AND with the NAME of CHRIST, JESUS !
Gee, Donna....so much for 'love thy neighbor', tossing that first stone, etc. You sound as bigoted and backward as that book you quote.
Curious as to why you became ordained, if you are a minister. You seem angry and discontented. 'that book you quote' was what I reference. I am not one of those who believes that every word in the Bible is accurate, but your comment leads me to believe that your ordination, if you are a minister, doesn't mean much to you. Am I incorrect?
NanC Aren't we being arrogant,combative,self-righteous, presumptuous, judgmental, narrow-minded, and alienating. Aren't such attitudes divisive and dysfunctional? Don't they disrupt harmony and peace and lead to conflict.
Interesting name you have Donna Christ. Is that Donna as in Madonna and Christ as in Jesus Christ You wouldn't by chance have a halo or two lying around the house, maybe sometime go for a walk on water. or perhaps change water into wine now and then.
I really dislike when people, say we this or everyone that, as if some how they think in their own mind, that they have the right to speak for everyone else. Far as I know, I never voted nor elected you or anyone else as my spokesperson. These are your views your beliefs. Maybe not everyone share your distorted views or beliefs And by the way which "gospels and the Holiness code", are you taking about that say that "representatives of God are not able to officiate at a Gay marriage."
SHAME ON YOU HATERS. It saddens me to read the above comments. We are ministers, right? So many un-informed comments, prejudices, negativity. I'd prefer to pray for our President, Vice President, and all people running our country, including those who are filled with hatred for our glorious country. That prayer will include ALL religious/spiritual leaders, and every citizen. I realize it's easy to spew venom when you are anonymous, and I'm tempted myself to throw a few of those comments your way, but I am choosing to stay in the Light of the Universe, and to pray. Rev. NanC Hensley
Comment has been removed.
Wow. And you are sitting in judgement of anyone? Comparing your ego's point of view to that of Jesus'? I doubt you are in a Divinely Perfect State where you can compare your earthly judgements to that of our Perfect Christ. As I said before, shame on you haters.
AS USUAL with IGNORANCE such as YOU WRITE and SAY, I PRETEND NOTHING, I READ the BIBLE, and YOU NANc
NanC Get down off the cross, honey somebody need the wood.- Dolly Parton straight talk 1992
Any political party and its supporters that protest wearing a face mask during a deadly global pandemic and claim it's a 'hoax' should all gather in one spot to protest....and let Darwin's theory of evolution wipe out that gene pool once and for all.
I think the good Congressman should run as an Independent, and embarrass the GOP at the ballot box on Election Day.
I'd like all people to just have the right to live in peace. That includes myself. I am so over having special interest groups have a voice 50 times bigger then my own when it comes to pretty much anything. When I work for Verizon my assistant was gay. I loved him he did a good job. Next thing I know he has the right to tell me all about his sexuality how he likes to do it and wanted me to come see him participate in a naked bike Ride. he was so offended at my declining the offer he reported me to HR. I've had enough. When the rights of a few impede the rights of anyone, you have to ask if we've gone too far.
THATS the B S of POLITICs
It saddens me when our religious forums turn into insulting, ill-informed, political bashing. Maybe we need to pray for ALL politicians instead of the negativity and anger offered here. As our ULC motto states, 'We are all children of the same universe.'
Cynthia Jean Parker, well said. Shouldn't we consider respecting each other regardless of preferences. That goes both ways. We can honor each others right to be different without imposing our choices on someone else. It should be easy, right?
NO LADIES thats WHAT GOT US tRUMP
The blog is called "Posted in: LGBTQ & Human Rights" therefore it is a political forum and not a religious forum.People will have difference of opinion. You can call it insulting, ill-informed, political bashing if you want, but they have the right to express their opinions in ways you might not like
"We can honor each others right to be different without imposing our choices on someone else. It should be easy, right?" Then you can start practicing what you preach and stop being such a judgment hypocrite. You are not really honoring others right to be different. You are imposing your views on others.
The Universal Life Church’s Stance The Universal Life Church has long championed the cause of religious freedom, but it has also stalwartly admonished against the folly of religious tyranny. True religious freedom means the right to exercise your religion in peace and harmony while also respecting the freedoms of others. It does not mean steamrolling over their freedoms; it does not mean controlling every aspect of their lives; and it is not a free pass to do whatever you want on the grounds of personal faith. Religious freedom ends when it seeks dominion over the basic freedoms of others.
Nice about the COVID-19 virus it will kill off those over 60. I wonder how many in the GOP of Virginia are within that age group?
It isn’t exactly our job to judge people OR their sexual orientation. Love is love. If two people can love, embrace commitment, be kind to one another, and find happiness together in this life together, surely we can celebrate that. JMHO.
The voters voted for someone else.
Comment has been removed.
Not voting is also an option.
Actually, the GOP changed from The People voting to the delegates going to The Church at Liberty University of the person running against Riggleman, to show their support for one or the other. This ensured Riggleman would lose. It was rigged by the GOP.
The majority of people who vote, that I know from personal experience, vote a few "only" for or against issues, and otherwise ignore some issues. Some voters simply won't vote if they contain some issues, which don't have the same impact as "not voting for a Rep/Dem" AND voting for the opposite party.
Comment removed by user.
you demeaned the President. didn't you just write "And how do you know this? First hand experience? I doubt it. When you demean someone in a public forum, at the least you should have proof." you should practice what you preach. it doesn't feel good to be put down by someone who doesn't know you does it? so why do you think its ok to do that to the President who you don't know, but it's not ok to do it to you. you should perhaps pray over this.
Trump is now a public figure as President and not a private citizen, therefore he is fair game to public criticism.
These are just a small number Trump has insulted since declaring his candidacy. I can come up with thousands of insults that "YOUR man child PRESIDENT" has made.........But I guess that okay because he "YOUR man child PRESIDENT" What is good goose is good for the gander. He can mock and insult others, but cry foul like spoiled little child that he is when people speak the truth about him
He mock a 16-year old girl with Asperger syndrome ,Trump flailed his arms and mocked Kovaleski, who suffers from a chronic condition that limits the movement of his arms.
On a day in which North Korea issued a fresh threat and a House committee set the stage for his impeachment, President Trump on Thursday found time to insult 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg after she was named Time’s Person of the Year, an honor he has coveted for years.
How stupid are the people of Iowa?" Trump said at a local event.
During his campaign launch in June, Trump labeled Mexicans "rapists" and drug runners -- statements he has not backed down from.
Trump’s mocking of Thunberg, who has been diagnosed with Asperger syndrome, as having an “Anger Management problem” drew widespread umbrage from Democrats who accused the president of bullying a teenager. His tweet came just a week after Republicans cried foul when a university professor made a joke referencing Barron Trump, the president’s 13-year-old son, during impeachment testimony.
“So ridiculous,” Trump wrote in a tweet about Thunberg’s Time honor, suggesting that one of the world’s most powerful voices for the environmental movement “go to a good old fashioned movie with a friend. Chill Greta, Chill!”
The disabled While on the campaign trail, Trump cited a Washington Post article from days after 9/11 to undergird his claim that Muslims in New Jersey celebrated the attacks. But when the reporter, Serge F. Kovaleski, who now works for the New York Times, corrected Trump, he took aim. At a rally he flailed his arms and mocked Kovaleski, who suffers from a chronic condition that limits the movement of his arms.
There's room in the Democratic one! I think it's awesome that Riggleman set aside HIS beliefs and convictions and did this for this couple! I Applaud him!!! We all know only one being can judge, and NO REPUBLICAN/PRIEST/PASTOR is high enough to ! Judge ye not lest YOU be JUDGED! No one's perfect and MANY have SECRET SKELETONS under their capes....