At this point, it’s pretty safe to say that the former Representative from Texas Robert “Beto” O’Rourke will soon be out of the 2020 presidential race. It is clear he is losing both traction and votes. And so it comes as no surprise that he would try a few last-minute stunts to regain some of that and push his way even a few steps closer to the White House. However, so far all of those efforts have proved to rather abysmal failures.
Last month, during the September debate that he barely qualified for, he told America, “Hell, yes,” he was going to take your AR-15s and AK-47s. Naturally, his hope was to garner some much-needed support. But the plan backfired. Not only did his already lacking poll numbers drop even more, but he came the number one salesman for the very “assault weapons” and guns in general of the month. No one since Obama has inspired such a massive gun sale.
And since his plan didn’t work, he is now trying something else. He said last week during an LGBT-themed Democratic town hall on CNN that he would take your place of worship’s tax-exempt status if you don’t share his same beliefs.
He was asked if “religious institutions like colleges, churches, charities – should they lose their tax-exempt status if they oppose same-sex marriage.” His reply, without a second of hesitation, was “yes.”
He explained, “There can be no reward, no benefit, no tax break for anyone, any institution, any organization in America that denies the full human rights and the full civil rights of every single one of us.”
So basically, if your church, college, mosque, synagogue, or charity does not wholeheartedly agree with same-sex marriage and publicly say it is ok, your tax-exemption will be taken from you.
Talk about socialism. Punishing those who don’t believe exactly like you is the very definition of lousy leadership and one who cares nothing about his people or nation and only about the power he can abuse.
But we aren’t the only ones who disagree with this idea. Even the openly gay presidential candidate Mayor Pete Buttigieg says this is not the way to go.
He was extremely critical of the notion during a recent appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday.
He said, “The idea that you are going to strip churches of their tax-exempt status if they haven’t found their way toward blessing same-sex marriage, I’m not sure (Beto) understood the implications of what he was saying.”
And explained, “That means going to war not only with churches, but I would think with mosques and a lot of organizations that may not have the same view of various religious principles that I do.”
Buttigieg went on to say that implementing such a law would only cause more problems in a society that is already prone to prejudice based on differences.
“Going after the tax exemption of churches, Islamic centers or other religious facilities, I think that’s just going to deepen the divisions that we’re already experiencing – at a moment when we’re actually seeing more and more people motivated often by compassion and by people they love, moving in the right direction on LGBTQ rights, which is obviously extremely important to me personally.”
And he is exactly right. If we want to move in the direction towards nationally accepting everyone, regardless of race, religion, or beliefs, then we can’t punish those who simply take a little bit longer to come around to some ideas.
At its core, this idea is discrimination. It is a direct violation of the First Amendment and the rights of this nation. And we can’t abide by it, not at all.
And if he thinks this will be the push the gets his campaign moving again, he has got another think coming. This is precisely the kind of socialistic statement that will cause the exact opposite effect. It will rally those of just about any religion against him. If Beto somehow miraculously makes it to the next debates, he is going to have to take back those words if he hopes to have even the smallest chance at getting the support he needs.
Then again, who wants a president who could say such a thing with so little hesitation and so much conviction, only to renege on it later, just to get votes?