FunkyTown Posted September 5, 2011 Report Share Posted September 5, 2011 While discussing church policy, there has been some considerable controversy over the church requesting that people leave their firearms at home. A few gallant individuals bravely came forward to show that the church is led by imperfect men in requesting this.I had thought it silly, but then I did some deeper investigation and discovered: The church has breached the Constitution at numerous times!Specifically: The 25th amendment, the important bits placed here for your perusal.Section 1.In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.Section 2.Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.I submit, for your approval: In 2008, Gordon B. Hinckley passed away. By Constitutional right, the Vice President should have taken over. As there are no Vice Presidents in the church, we have to assume that **** Cheney should be the head of the church.In 1995, Howard W. Hunter passed away. By Constitutional Right, Al Gore should have been made President of the church.Of course, as Al Gore is not dead, he would have maintained his Presidency to the current day. I invite all those who love the Constitution, who are fighting for the right to bear arms in church when they have asked you not to, to join in my crusade. Obviously, I'm not going to accuse any one of misreading the Constitution and picking and choosing what applies merely to the government and which applies to private property, so join in with me gun nuts!Al Gore for President of the church!Alternatively, we can either go to Bill Clinton and ask him who should have been made Vice President of the church, or if we're not going to retroactively do this, we have to ask Barack Obama who is Vice President of our church, destined to take over when the current President dies.I know I'm going to get just as much support for this as the 2nd amendment got when the church requested that you not bring your guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dravin Posted September 5, 2011 Report Share Posted September 5, 2011 Don't forget that the Church discourages Bishops and other Church leaders from breaking confidence, that there is just plain against the 1st Amendment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunkyTown Posted September 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 5, 2011 don't forget that the church discourages bishops and other church leaders from breaking confidence, that there is just plain against the 1st amendment.scandalous! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunkyTown Posted September 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 5, 2011 Don't forget that the Church discourages Bishops and other Church leaders from breaking confidence, that there is just plain against the 1st Amendment.I'm a sad panda, Dravin. Dozens of people have read this thread and only you and I are willing to stand up for Al Gore's Constitutionally guaranteed right to lead the church.I thought all the pro-gun people who are so angry about the Constitution being ignored by the church would be super excited about getting Al Gore as the President. Where is the 'The leadership is well meaning, but they're just men' that the second amendment got? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mysticmorini Posted September 5, 2011 Report Share Posted September 5, 2011 I appreciate your attempt at humor but you do realize you are comparing apples and oranges don’t you? I don't completely agree with those that think they should have the right to carry firearms on private property. That is a complete misunderstanding of what the constitution says and is for, to protect people from the government. Perhaps this is the genius of your satire, that the constitution is obviously referring to how the US President should be replaced and not every president of every organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunkyTown Posted September 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 5, 2011 I appreciate your attempt at humor but you do realize you are comparing apples and oranges don’t you?I don't completely agree with those that think they should have the right to carry firearms on private property. That is a complete misunderstanding of what the constitution says and is for, to protect people from the government. Perhaps this is the genius of your satire, that the constitution is obviously referring to how the US President should be replaced and not every president of every organization.Bingo. Obviously, the Constitution refers to limitations on the governments ability to regulate firearms. The church can regulate firearms on its premises, as can bars, private house owners or any individual who has private stewardship over an area.However, a strict word-for-word view of the Constitution supported those who said the church shouldn't be able to pass laws on their own turf have the letter of the constitution on their side.My intent was to lampoon that by pointing out that those same strict-interpretation people must accept that Al Gore is now Prophet, Seer and Revelator. Obviously that isn't true. Just like it should be obvious that the second amendment applies to government limitations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatLDSKiD Posted September 6, 2011 Report Share Posted September 6, 2011 If you weren't joking I would call you crazy and point out why people think we are "weird." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted September 6, 2011 Report Share Posted September 6, 2011 Hmmmm. Al Gore as president of the Church. Do you think he would claim that the Lord warned him about global warming, and that we all need to give up our cars? As for gun rights, don't you think that a president Al Gore would tell us to keep them away from our homes and kids, as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted September 6, 2011 Report Share Posted September 6, 2011 If you weren't joking I would call you crazy and point out why people think we are "weird." I still call him crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudoMinja Posted September 6, 2011 Report Share Posted September 6, 2011 What about- "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates. In obeying, honoring and sustaining the law." ? This means we support the laws of ALL lands... So is the church unconstitutional for supporting adhereing to the laws of other countries? (Sorry if this is a failed attempt at satire. I don't do it very much...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.