Oklahoma Gubernatorial Candidate Says He’s Only One Running Who Will Abolish Abortion in State

Photo Credit: Dan Fisher for Governor Facebook page

OKLAHOMA CITY, Okla. — During his “The Time for Justice” rallies over the weekend, a pastor who is running for the governor’s office in Oklahoma declared that he is the only gubernatorial candidate who will abolish abortion in the state.

“All of the men running for Republican governor—you name them, Mick Cornett, the mayor of this city; Todd Lamb, the lieutenant governor; Gary Richardson out of Tulsa; [mortgage banker] Kevin Stitt; Gary Jones, the state auditor—all of them say that they are proudly pro-life, but not a one of them will call for the abolition of abortion. Not a one of them,” lamented Dan Fisher, pastor of Liberty Church in Yukon.

“But let me tell you who will and who is, at the top of his lungs: I am!” he declared, drawing enthusiastic cheers and applause.

Hundreds attended Fisher’s campaign rallies Friday and Saturday, many of them holding campaign signs that read “Abortion-free state.” One large banner held by a group of supporters read “The Supreme Court is not God.”

An estimated 200 volunteers also distributed literature explaining how Fisher plans to assert state sovereignty in ending abortion in Oklahoma. The pamphlet outlined that, if elected, Fisher will “call an emergency special session of the Oklahoma legislature to criminalize abortion as murder,” and will “instruct law enforcement officials to immediately close every abortion facility in Oklahoma in accordance with their sworn oaths of office.”

Fisher says that he will also call upon President Trump to stand with Oklahoma as he declares that the issue of abortion is out of the jurisdiction of the federal government, and will also urge Christians to actually be the Church in providing help and hope to mothers who would have otherwise sought out abortion.

A video posted to Fisher’s YouTube page further outlines his position based on the original intent of the Founding Fathers, as he noted in a recent speech that the 10th Amendment declares that “the powers not delegated to [the federal government] … are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

  • Connect with Christian News

Fisher also pointed to the Federalist Papers, which teach that the powers that belong to the federal government are few, and the powers reserved for the states are “numerous and indefinite.”

“Now do you think that the federal government today believes its powers and few and defined, and that the powers of the states are numerous and indefinite? No, it’s exactly the other way around,” he explained.

“Why do we have a governor if we (the states) are irrelevant?” Fisher asked, provoking thought. “We’ve changed the rulebook [as a nation].”

Fisher further noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has issued rulings that were wrong and immoral, and none would state that the nation is bound to follow evil declarations. He pointed to the court’s Scott v. Sandford ruling in 1857 that declared that blacks are property, the 1927 Buck v. Bell ruling that sanctioned forced sterilization, and the 1944 ruling of Korematsu v. United States that permitted the government to incarcerate Japanese residents.

“The Supreme Court is not infallible. They are not always right. So are we duty-bound to obey them when they are wrong?” he asked.

In contending that the answer is no, Fisher quoted from the Founding Fathers, who called government overreach an evil.

“When everybody says, ‘Well, you can’t just disobey the law,’ what do we say about the Hebrew midwives who disobeyed the law? What do we say about Daniel and his three friends who disobeyed the law? What do we say about Jesus, who dared to heal on the Sabbath, which was against Jewish law?” he asked.

And while he clarified that he is not an anarchist and supports law and order—and would like to see law and order as it pertains to murdering the unborn—Fisher proclaimed, “Nothing that is morally wrong should be legally right.”

View Fisher’s message, entitled “Do the States Matter?,” in full here.

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has ChristianNews.net been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Despite Facebook's recent algorithm changes, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational revenue, we continue to strive to bring you the news without compromise and to keep Christ in focus. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • manwithnoname

    Same thing as “gay marriage” as well. Fisher is absolutely right.

  • cap

    1. Declare that in OK life begins at conception and will be afforded all the protections of a person under the constitution. See Roe for reasoning.
    2, Roe is not the law but an opinion of the court.Attempts to codify it have failed in Congress.

    • ChuSez

      Roe IS the law, wishing that it wasn’t doesn’t change anything. Anyone who doesn’t understand that badly needs to take a U.S. Constitution 101 course.

      • Susan Perelka

        Laws in this nation can be repealed by due process. This is not a call to ignore the law, but to repeal it.

        • ChuSez

          Once the SCOTUS has determined that laws making abortion illegal are unconstitutional only a subsequent SCOTUS can overturn that decision or it can be rendered void by a Constitutional Amendment.
          Passing a new law would be a waste of time.

      • cap

        Article 1 section 1 first sentence. “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress… “not a supreme court. So cite the LAW making abortion legal.

        • ChuSez

          The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. This was the basis upon which the SCOTUS found that laws making abortion illegal were unconstitutional.

  • Psalm 106:37-39 New King James Version (NKJV)
    They even sacrificed their sons
    And their daughters to demons,
    And shed innocent blood,
    The blood of their sons and daughters,
    Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan;
    And the land was polluted with blood.
    Thus they were defiled by their own works,
    And played the harlot by their own deeds.

    • Griffith C

      Every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn son of the female slave, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well.

      Your deity is not pro life.

      • God is not “my deity”. He is the one and only true living God. He is the creator of the universe and of mankind. He is the Father of Christ Jesus, born of a virgin, to set free all who will come to Him, from the guilt of sin and save us from the coming righteous wrath of judgement from God.

        • God is your deity, as that fits the dictionary description of the word.

          • He is the only one so by default He is yours also regardless of whether or not you believe in Him.

          • Sure, if Christianity is correct. But I don’t believe in Christianity. No worries.

      • Susan Perelka

        If you create something, do you then have the right to determine what will be done with your creation? We have things like copyright laws, etc… because people do believe the creator of something has the right over it. There were reasons for that decision God made. Read the entire book of Exodus, it explains why. The whole bible explains why. His creation has rebelled against Him. How would you like to make a robot that turns on you and starts to do evil? What would you do to that robot? Would you destroy it? Try and fix it? What if you had given it free will? How would you fix the problem then? Just something to ponder.

  • We do not need a Christian theocracy in this country. Church and State should remain forever separate to protect both. I suppose this whole Democracy thing is a failed idea after all.

    • manwithnoname

      Nothing in the article suggests theocracy. The article does state, and correctly, that the federal government is way outside of its Constitutional authority.
      The US is a Constitutional Representative Republic, not a democracy.

      • It doesn’t have to. The haphazard mixing of religious belief with political power, especially over those who do not share the same views, is a great recipe for peace and unity. It’s great that he is a pastor, too, running for political office. How does he feel about non-Christians? Nothing to worry about, nothing to see here, I’m sure. And yes, you’re right, but there’s nothing in the article that really hints about upholding a “Constitutional Representative Republic” for those who disagree with the esteemed professional theologian cum politician either.

        • manwithnoname

          What matters is what the Constitution says and the fact that it is being ignored not only by the federal courts, but by Congress as well. People’s opinions and disagreements about what others stand for are irrelevant. What matters is the people and the candidates that are supported for office are speaking in accordance with what the Constitution actually says and are willing to defend it, for that is the foundation and limitation of the federal government.

          • I’m somewhat sympathetic to your view being a political moderate of sorts. I lean towards a heavier Federal government in certain ways but there is always the problems not only of corruption but excess of power. I’m also very biased against pastors in political positions of power and as far as I am concerned, they are generally guilty until proven innocent. And no, I don’t even care if that’s fair.

          • manwithnoname

            I appreciate your honesty. But consider that if a theocracy were formed, it would also persecute other christian groups that are in disagreement with it? I think this fear is unfounded. See a more detailed explanation to Griffith C below.

          • You have a lot more faith in political Christians than I do. Then again, I am a skeptic. So I might as well be consistent, right? The fact of history is, certain Christian groups gained political power and persecuted other Christian groups. This happens in other religions, too, of course. Perhaps this is just the human condition, and there is no solution shy of species extinction, which will eventually happen as far as I can guess. I would just like it to happen later rather than sooner.

          • Susan Perelka

            Would you be happy if I thought you were guilty until proven innocent? It’s always a good thing to put the shoe on the other foot. I am a christian, I won’t apologize for it. However, not everyone claiming to be a christian truly is one. (The bible actually says there are MANY.) But God has taken that into consideration and has given us a character list (in the bible) to hold them up against to see if their actions coincide with what they are claiming to be. It’s called testing the spirit. Sadly, this truth isn’t being shared and I can totally understand where you are coming from in your statement. The hypocrites (A Greek word for “play actors” and Jesus called them out publicly in the bible) don’t want you to have this particular information because it would expose their deception, thus they tend to ignore these things. There are people of deception in every walk of life and yes in christianity also. They are called wolves in sheep’s clothing. Christians really need to start letting others know this bit of important information because the “play actors” are giving God a bad name. Just something to chew on.

      • Griffith C

        “Life begins at conception” is a religious belief. And for most protestant denominations, this belief is younger than the Happy Meal. The bible does not prohibit abortion.

        “God disapproves of loving relationships between persons of the same sex.” is a religious belief.

        “I am the Lord your god, and you will have no other gods before me.” is a religious belief that should not be graven into an image and planted on government property.

        Republicans are working to get christian beliefs enshrined in public law, with no concern that a good number of Americans do not share those beliefs. That is theocracy.

        • I’m an atheist so let me play God’s advocate for a second. I don’t believe in souls, but we’re certainly talking about human life here, from fertilization all the way to birth, and of course, everywhere in between. I don’t think you can avoid some recognition of that fact, especially as it has been the mechanism by which our species has propagated itself for untold millennia. I know there are all kinds of special cases with abortion, though, and the Christian God, if he even existed, would be the de facto greatest abortionist on Earth as a matter of course. But its the recognition of human life which bothers me, a very mildly pro-choice atheist. I do agree with everything you wrote above, however, without my caveat.

          • Griffith C

            For every fertilized egg, about 6 million sperm were also rans on just that day. That’s 6 million potential people who will never exist. If a woman becomes pregnant in January, millions upon millions of potential people won’t be conceived in February, March etc.

            But then again, if an egg is fertilized, there is a 30% to 40% chance it will miscarry, sometimes even before the woman knows she is pregnant. Think of the millions of “babies”!

            Where is your heartbreak for all of those “people”?

            Before there is a functioning brain and nervous system, there is just genetic material. That genetic material may grow into a person but the vast majority of human genetic material does not become a person. It is extra sperm or extra eggs, or fertilized eggs that never implant or embryos or fetuses that do not survive. This is happening around us every day.

            I believe every child born should be born to parents who have the physical, financial and emotional resources to care for them. They should be loved, clothed, fed, housed, and educated. They should have access to medical care.

            If a woman feels she cannot provide that for a potential person, I believe it is not moral to let genetic material grow into a person. It is not moral for an unwanted child to be brought into this world.

            If my mom had not carried her pregnancy with me to term, I would not know the difference. And that’s okay.

            When my grandfather was hospitalized with a severe and incurable illness in the late 1930s, my grandmother had to choose between keeping a menial job and feeding her two already malnourished children or continuing a third pregnancy. Without this successful abortion, my malnourished uncle would likely have died and my mother placed in an orphanage. If my mother’s life trajectory had changed, I would not exist.

            Abortion is not a happy event, but sometimes it is the right choice. The lives and health of the real people here and breathing matter too.

          • Susan Perelka

            This is something solely for you to ponder in your own heart. Are there con-artists in the world today? Do they pretend to be very caring loving people only to exploit another person? Did they deceive another? Is it possible that the information you have about God is not accurate? That someone told you wrongly who God is? How can you know? The bible does warn about those pretending to be His people, yet were not. They were false teachers and prophets and many of them have gone out into the world. They tell people inaccurate information about God. Is it possible, you may have wrong information about Him? I thought I once knew who God was by what others had told me, got me into a lot of trouble. Then I read the bible myself wanting to know who God is, what He had to say about Himself. A night and day difference. The God you are describing above is an inaccurate portrayal of what the bible actually reveals about Him. Is it possible that someone has taken verses out of context and given you their opinion. Is that possible? Only one way to find out for sure. Read it yourself, all of it , for a fair and accurate picture. If someone wanted to know all about you, wouldn’t you want them to come and ask you and then be willing to hear ALL about you. Not just a little and distorting it. I am just asking that you would be willing to just ponder this. Thanks

          • I have read the Bible for myself, many times. And sure, there are con artists in the world today. Many of them have pulpits and loyal followings (looking at you, Joel Osteen, Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, et cetera). And sure, I could be wrong and have bad information about God. I would love for God, if he exists, to give me accurate information. Please pray that he will, and maybe he’ll cause me to believe in prayer too. But I love this quote: “Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool.” -Mark Twain. BTW, I think he was overly cynical and at least partially wrong. I know several sincere religious people who are not fools. But I do like the humor of the quote.

        • manwithnoname

          Your fear of theocracy is unfounded. Consider that any Christian theocracy, if it were to come to pass, would also be a vehicle for the persecution of other christian groups that would be in disagreement with whatever christian denomination that was the controlling power, and not just non-christians? Most Christians in this country would be opposed to such a happening. It is also contrary to the Gospel that Christians preach. So, a Christian Theocracy would be a no-starter on scriptural grounds.

          The founders admired the ethics of religion (Christian). You cannot seperate religion from the human moral Conscience, which resides within every human being. This is so because God put it there and reflects the very image of God himself as stated in the beginning chapters of Genesis. Though this conscience is corrupted by internal sin, that which opposes the will of God for our lives.

          Homosexual relations are not just founded in religious belief, but also in the human conscience. It is also founded upon the function and purpose we see in nature. That a woman is made for man and man for woman in that sexual union. “It is not good that the man should be alone” God gave man his sexual compliment. A woman, not another man. Or two woman. see Romans chapter one. A man and woman in marriage function as a sexual whole. Two men do not.

          You could say the same thing about abortion. At conception, a human life is made with a unique dna all its own. The fact that the baby is not fully developed is irrelevant. Even after the baby is born, he/she continues to develope through many years until adulthood. This is a human being from the beginning and has value, especially in God’s eyes if not yours.

          • Griffith C

            Most of European history involved christians dominating and killing the wrong kind of christians. The founding fathers left god and religion out of our Constitution intentionally.

            My fear of theocracy is well founded.

            I can certainly separate ethics from religion. Every human culture creates a morality just like it creates a language. These moralities vary greatly. Is it murder to wage war? Is it theft to own people and take their labor without compensation? Is it moral to sacrifice war captives to a deity to prevent drought? Some behavior of other cultures we understand, others we find repugnant. Is it okay to eat beef? Pork? Horse? Dog? No deity is needed for morality to exist. Every human culture creates a morality, and the vast differences are an indication that there is no one single source of morality.

            There is nothing inherently immoral about who consenting adults find attractive. Homosexuality exists among animals too.

            Miscarriages happen all the time. Non viable genetic material without functioning brain and organs is not a person. It is not immoral to trust a woman to decide whether to remain pregnant.

          • manwithnoname

            If there is no objective morality than you shouldn’t worry about a theocracy. The next crop of tyrants to take control of you are only doing what they think is right in their own eyes as you also decide based on the same premise of relativism of right and wrong. So, who’s to say that there wrong, since there is no objective standard to compare to?

        • Susan Perelka

          There are people in this nation who are not christian, yet are pro-life. Life begins at conception is an observable fact with all our advanced scientific tools. DNA makes a unique individual as soon as the egg and sperm combine. Everything there to program a unique human being. This is not just a religious belief. It is people standing up and saying that person deserves the right to live just like you or me.

        • cadcoke5

          Human Life, as far as the Constitution is concerned, is what it meant when that article was written into the Constitution. And, at that time, the right ot life included those in the womb.

          Note that ALL moral beliefs can be considered a religious belief. Why is killing one of the so-called inferior sub-human creatures not moral? In the past, a black man, or Jew, was considered sub-human on the basis of “science”. Darwin strongly supported that idea. That is why Hitler wanted to dedicate his “Mein Kampf” to Darwin (Darwin’s widow, a Christian, declined the request). Was it moral to eliminate the “sub-humans” at the time, because the most popular view of science said they were spoiling the more evolved species?

          Yes, there were some who claimed the name of Christ, and supported such abominations. But, if you look at Scripture, you will see that it asserts that all men are descended from the same people from a few thousand years ago. There is no justification in scripture for their acts.

        • LynnRH

          and democraps are working to get far-left liberal beliefs enshrined in public law, with no concern that a good number of Americans do not share those beliefs. That is theocracy.

    • Theo

      Go back to your video games, let the adults discuss the serious issues. Someone with no chance of every having children has no business offering advice on abortion.

      • LOL! Wow, you must have typed that rather quickly, with grammatical typo and all. No, you can dismiss me all you like, but I am an adult, and I will comment as I please. Deal with it, or go shopping at an adult sex store and find a toy you can shove in an orifice and make yourself feel better about your world.

  • Griffith C

    Fisher will not end abortion. He is lying or deluded. Wealthy and financially secure women will get in a car or on a plane and fly to another state. Poor and financially insecure women will turn to bleach, coat hangers or unlicensed, back alley butchers. Abortions will continue.

    Meanwhile, accurate sex ed, access to contraception and effective social safety nets are proven to reduce abortion. If he cuts those things, the number of abortions, legal or otherwise, will increase.

    • SFBruce

      And some of those women without the financial means to leave the state will die, if this were to pass.

      • Griffith C

        And their children orphaned and their families in grief. Those people matter.

    • ChuSez

      He won’t even end it in Oklahoma. Nothing he can do changes a decision of the SCOTUS.
      He’s lying if he claims otherwise.

  • Theo

    Am I the only one who noticed that people who support abortion got all weepy about 17 deaths in a school shooting? Do they not know who many deaths occur every day via abortion?

    • SFBruce

      That’s because we understand the difference between gunning down teenagers at school and a woman who makes a difficult, but legal decision about ending her pregnancy.

      • Theo

        Homosexuals always side with the abortionists. You hate and envy normal people because we can have children and families, and you cannot.

        What a sad way to live, hating and envying normal families. We can create children, and you can only create viruses that cause death.
        One group creates life. The other creates death. Not even remotely equal.

        • Griffith C

          Wow. Where do I sign up to be a kind and loving christian just like you? (Snark.)

          SFBruce shows compassion you can’t even fathom

          Proof again that morality is unrelated to deities.

        • LOL! The homosexuals I know neither threaten heterosexual marriages nor find themselves envious of them. There sure is a lot of Christian hatred for homosexuals, though. And it is so funny to watch the loudest religious homophobic bigots get caught with their pants down… in decidedly non-heterosexual pursuits. For example, I am just waiting for the day that people like Peter LaBarbera come out of the closet, as he seems to be so fascinated by homosexuality he cannot seem to help himself.

        • Susan Perelka

          As one fellow christian to another, the below poster is right. Calling people names isn’t the way God wants us to handle telling truth. They too are created in His image and deserve some respect. Respectfully respond. Treat others as you would want them to treat you, that’s the commandment of love. Speak Gods truth, but with gentleness. One of the problems in our nation is we can no longer have civil conversations with one another. We are all people, none of us is without error. We are all capable of mistakes. We (christian’s) were once as they (non-christian’s) are now. God had compassion on you, please I beg you have compassion on them. Harsh words will only stir up more anger, we have enough of this in this nation. A soft answer turns away anger (proverbs). Remember why we share Gods truth, because we want them to know the freedom God gave to us, how His love transforms us. We are simply one beggar showing another beggar where to find bread. God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble. Speak His truth in love. Don’t compromise either.

    • ChuSez

      You mean you weren’t all weepy about the 17 dead kids? What do you use in place of a heart?

    • Griffith C

      According to Johns Hopkins, 30 to 40% of fertilized eggs miscarry.

      Where’s the outrage?

      Where’s the demand for medical intervention?

      Where are the days of prayer pleading with god to save those “babies”?

      Christians only care about fertilized eggs and zygotes and embryos when they can be used to make a political point.

      When christians extend one ounce of care for real people, may be I’ll believe they actually care about anything but scoring political points. Until then, it’s just noise.

      • LynnRH

        Talk about noise! You are really good at it. True Christians don’t care about unborn babies to make a political point. We care about them because they are human beings with a soul and was created by God. When an unborn baby is lost by miscarriage it is a very sad time for many couples who had wanted that baby. We don’t always know what causes it. And I think their has been and probably still is medical research that tries to figure out why it happens sometimes. Sin in this world causes many bad things to happen. When a miscarriage happens that unborn baby goes straight to Heaven. The difference between a miscarriage and an abortion is that with abortion someone killed that baby. And what an idiotic statement to make, “when Christians extend one ounce of care for real people”! Christians do a lot of good works for society. The most important one is the sharing of The Good News of Jesus Christ to all who will listen.

    • Susan Perelka

      The word to describe this is “double tongued”. Say one thing over here, say something different over there. They are not consistent in what they say. A modern day example would be seen in many politicians. But don’t confuse it with a “hypocrite”, that is a Greek word for a play actor who is pretending to be someone they are not. They say one thing, yet do something different. Again, many politicians are also guilty of this one too. Yet again, so are we all.

    • LynnRH

      Yea but in their thinking a person is not a person until AFTER they’re born.

  • ChuSez

    This fraud promises what he cannot possibly deliver. Until a future Supreme Court decides to overturn Row v Wade, or a Constitutional Amendment is passed, abortion will be legal in this country. I don’t like that either, but that’s the law.

  • Brian Curtis

    Soooo… .this guy running for public office is promising to ignore and undermine the law in favor of his personal religious beliefs? Great qualification! He should do well in establishing Sharia.

    • Susan Perelka

      In our nation, laws can be repealed by due process. Just because it was made law, doesn’t mean it can never be terminated in the future.

      • Brian Curtis

        Yes, ‘due process’… the thing this jerk is promising to ignore.

      • ChuSez

        “Due process” in this case means either the Supreme Court reversing itself or a constitutional amendment.

    • cadcoke5

      He is defending the U.S. Constitution. The right to life, is written in there, and abortion is not in there. If the words the authors wrote, have any meaning, it is what they meant at the time it was written. They cannot be re-defined without amending the Constitution.

      At the time, abortion was considered murder… the taking of human life. The right to life extended to those who were still in the womb.

      Any other interpretation is bypassing the process of amending the Constitution, and is itself illegal. The Supreme court is not the highest law in the land… it is the Constitution itself. Any judge that seeks to bypass it, and seeks to redefine the words should be impeached.

      • ChuSez

        The Supreme Court decides what laws are constitutional and which laws are not. It’s embarrassing to have to inform you of this.

        • cadcoke5

          How about if the Supreme Court rules that a black man cannot be a citizen? In the Dred Scott case, Judge Taney wrote the majority opinion, saying that blacks were “an inferior order and altogether unfit to associate with the white race”, that “they had no rights that the white man was bound to respect,” and that all blacks were to be treated as merchandise and therefore had no standing to sue.

          So, they simply excluded all Negros as being human being, for which the right to life and liberty should be recognized. The Constitution did, and still does permit slavery (as punishment for crime). But, the Constitution did not say a black man was not a human being. The judges simply added it.

          Some hold to the idea of the “living constitution”, where the Constitution only means what the Supreme Court says, and they are completely free to re-define words as they will… well at least as long as they have enough supporters in legislature to prevent loosing an impeachment trial. So, by their thinking, the Constitutions right to life may one time reject Negros or children in the womb. What it meant when written has no bearing on the decision. Thus, a living Constitution is actually dead, and meaningless.

          • ChuSez

            The Dred Scott decision was overturned by the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868. I never said that Roe v Wade was correctly decided, only that to reverse it will take either a constitutional amendment or another SCOTUS decision overturning it.

          • cadcoke5

            Perhaps we are not so far apart in our views. Do you feel that, at the time of the Dred Scott decision, that the Constitution said that a free black man could not be a citizen and had no rights?

          • ChuSez

            That was the way the Supreme Court ruled, and I think it was a bad decision. Saying that the SCOTUS is the final decider in our system of government of what is constitutional or otherwise does not imply agreement with their decision, it is simply stating a fact. As it happens I also think that Roe was wrongly decided as well.

          • cadcoke5

            Another way to reverse the incorrect decisions, Is to impeach the judges who want to legislate from the bench. Though, to do that, the citizens of the U.S. would need to elect representatives that will also uphold the Constitution.

          • ChuSez

            That’s not happening. The realistic option is a shift in the present SCOTUS by replacing 1 or 2 of the current justices thru normal retirement. There’s quite a bit of age there.

    • ChuSez

      He’s standing at about 5% in the polls and trying to generate some interest in his candidacy by making an outrageous promise he can never fulfill. Politics as usual.

  • Susan Perelka

    In this nation we have the power to vote. Each one of us. I don’t care who a person is claiming to be. Con-artists are “pretending” to be someone they are not. (I am not saying this man is one or not, I have not tested his character and it would be unfair or me to jump to conclusions) We all live in the same nation, we need to learn to disagree respectfully. That doesn’t mean we can’t defend what we believe, by all means debate it, just please I beg of everyone, do it respectfully. That person is a person too. They hurt and bleed just like you. They have fears and concerns just like you. All of us are wrong at times. We are a nation of many different religions. Someone may not agree with you, it may even go against what you believe, but that does not give any of us the right to harm that person, to destroy their body, or property, or business, etc….. We wouldn’t want them to do that to us, so we shouldn’t do it to them. Please, some people are stoking the fire to get us to fight amongst ourselves, but a nation divided cannot stand.