For those of you who are unaware, Indiana State Senator Mike Delph, got himself in a bit of a kerfuffle on social media. There is no stronger advocate of HJR-3, an amendment to the Indiana state constitution that would ban same sex marriage, than Senator Delph. He went on an absolute Twitter rampage taking on anyone and everyone who dared disagree with him.
You see Senator Delph is what is known as an “empty suit”. His greatest legislative achievement to date was re-election. Unfortunately, for voters in his district, he is man without ideas. He has no vision for the Indiana Republican Party, nor is he qualified to offer amendments to the state constitution.
There is exactly one reason he is an elected representative: He is a Republican in Indiana.
That is the Hoosier equivalent of being a Kennedy.
Personally, I think Senator Delph is a good man. He appears to be a committed father, husband, and Christian. However, when he believes he can start deciding, via legislation, who Hoosiers can and cannot love, THAT is when I get pissed.
It is the height of arrogance to embed personal beliefs into law. Especially when you are an individual of zero distinction, outside of being an errand boy for the Indiana GOP. He paid his dues and went above and beyond for the party, but none of that allows him to force his beliefs down the throats of Hoosiers.
Senator Delph is exactly the type of individual former Oklahoma Sooners and Dallas Cowboys head coach, Barry Switzer, was talking about when he said,
“Some people are born on third base and go through life thinking they hit a triple.”
What would qualify Senator Delph to offer amendments to the Indiana State Constitution?
1) He could heed the advice of the singer/songwriter Joe South by “Walking A Mile” in the shoes of homosexual Hoosiers. How? He could attempt to fall in love with another man and see if the love he finds really is different than the one he feels with his wife. Experimenting with homosexuality is not entirely unheard of in the GOP, and in this case, it would be for a moral purpose.
2) He could take a class on the Constitution. His entire argument is based upon the 10th Amendment. He feels that because the US Constitution does not prohibit the states from legislating marriage, each state may enact the laws their citizens want, so long as they do not violate the Constitution. There is just one problem with that. The founders knew the Constitution may need to be amended in the future because they knew they were not perfect. Luckily, they created an amendment process.
If they had not done that, the African-American population of the United States would three fifths of what it is today. Due to the aforementioned amendment process, in 1868 the Fourteenth Amendment ushered in the Equal Protection Clause which states:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
I would be lying if I said I was the only one who believed HJR-3 would violate the Equal Protection Clause. Here’s just a brief list of legal minds who share my view:
–US District Judge John Heyburn
–US District Judge Terence Kern
–US District Judge Robert Shelby
–U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker
–US District Judge Arenda Wright Allen
I can assure you these individuals needn’t take the bar twice Senator.
As if his lack of legal reasoning weren’t enough of a disqualifier, his lack of biblical knowledge is damning. Senator Delph, no doubt, is a fundamental Christian. He believes the Bible is the word of God and that it is infallible. The Senator’s adherence to the scripture is clouding his judgment.
His God, got it wrong and admitted it. In the scripture, God makes multiple covenants with mankind. God made one with Adam, with Noah, with Abraham, and the new covenant which he sent Jesus to fulfill. Why did God have to keep making these new deals with mankind?
God is not as all knowing as Christians would like you to believe, because the Bible clearly shows God offering new deals and adjusting the terms due to mankind’s unpredictable nature.
If God is omnipotent then wouldn’t he/she/it have offered a deal to humanity only once?
Especially if God knows exactly how to structure the terms for acceptance in the first place?
How then can anyone be sure he or she is not following the terms of a covenant that will likely be changed in the future?
How can the word of God (The Bible) be perfect if its own author has a track record of changing his/her/its mind?
Shouldn’t that make Senator Delph nervous? What if God sends another son saying homosexuality is a requirement for eternal salvation? Butthole starting to pucker Senator?
I guess one could say there is precedent for an updated covenant between God and mankind with amended terms…
Christians may be reading this and screaming out loud, “But what if God knew all along his children would repeatedly be led astray, but let things play out because…(insert Isaiah 55:8-9).”
To that, I say, anyone who makes a deal on faith, when the other party works in ways you cannot understand, is a fool, and we know what the scripture says about fools…
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.” (Proverbs 18:2)
And so there we have it. If there is one thing the scripture and I agree on, it is that Senator Delph, is a fool.