Open and Closed

I have to say that I’ve seen an awful lot of pushback on Christian‘s being outraged over the Olympics opening ceremony. So many have made arguments as such so as to shame Christians for even speaking out against it. I can understand the need to be kind and gentle with people, certainly one on one, because we do need to make a difference in our lives. We don’t want to turn people off to Christ. At the same time, it is very unfortunate that some have significantly softened their approach to sin. I don’t think that there is an issue, spiritually or Biblically, with expressing outrage over such a blatant display of anti-Christian activity. I would say that it doesn't necessarily matter if they intended to parody the Last Supper. That's the perception, which is what does matter. And there's no doubt the ceremonies were hyper-sexualized, inappropriate for children, and have no place in a major international sports event that is supposed to have a broad appeal. We should rebuke sin and mockery. It’s righteous indignation. People have called out using Jesus overturning the money changers in the temple as “a poor proof text.” I have not seen anyone mention Jesus saying, “Let the children come to me…if anyone causes one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” (Matthew 18:1-6) No one is being hateful towards the messengers but towards the message. We know the enemy when we see it and we will continue to wrestle against it. This is the battlefield. There needs to be a balance…we can be outraged over such an event, but we can also ask the Lord, His Spirit, to help us to exercise the wisdom to know how to communicate about it in such a way that we’re not excusing sin, and that we are still able to be positive influencers for the cause of Christ.

Elections

Could a US President suspend elections indefinitely using emergency powers?

William Murphy, College Professor at the State University of New York at Oswego says — No. There is no such power. An election was held during the Civil War, and throughout the Great Depression, and in the midst of World War II. There is no possibility at all of suspending it. None.

Tom Conway, Author says — The short answer is “No.”. The President’s emergency powers don’t extend to ignoring the Constitution. The laws the President can ignore are few, and reasonably carefully circumscribed. That’s why several Executive Orders have been successfully challenged in the Courts, and been revised in order to take effect.

Elections for the President, Vice President and Congress are required by the Constitution every couple years. Congress has set dates for elections, and changing those dates would require new legislation. The actual work of elections is done on a basically County level around the country, and generally includes elections at lower levels, including everything from Governors to Dog License Clerk. (Really. There are jurisdictions where dogcatcher is an elected official.) The President has essentially no authority over those elections.

Restricting movement using some kind of war powers would also be dubious. The US had regular elections during both World Wars, and NYC had elections just weeks after the 9/11 attacks. It’s hard to imagine anything short of a large-scale nuclear attack preventing elections in the US.

More philosophically, after the 9/11 attacks several officials in the Bush administration said the President’s first duty was to defend the country. That’s not correct. The President doesn’t take an oath to defend the country, and neither do people in the military or police forces. They take an oath to defend the Constitution. The President’s oath is:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

And the oath of enlistment is:

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The people who designed our system of government thought how we lived was more important than whether we lived. The notion that the President could discard those institutions is a dangerous one that betrays the foundations of our democracy. 

Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard University, and co-author of “Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point,” also said that while he didn’t think Trump’s recent comment was “indicative of an organized plot to end elections in the United States,” it did represent yet another sign that “the guy has got authoritarian reflexes.” “Over the course of 10 or 15 years,” Levitsky added, a growing number of Republicans “convinced themselves that they weren’t going to be able to win elections in this new, multiracial America. I’m not so sure that’s true, but they were deeply fearful that was true. And so Trump, I think more than anything else, he senses … where they’re going and they’re feeling.” 

And concerning Project 2025 that a lot of people are so paranoid about — Trump has nothing to do with Project 2025!  That small organization only endorses Trump and that's all.  Trump does not recognize or accept their endorsement!

So, no…DT is not about to suspend voting. He has no legal or constitutional right to do so. What he can do, is speak ambiguously in such a way as to cause people consternation and fear, because he has a history of doing such, while most likely referencing what he believes was a stolen election in 2020…but also because he has deep convictions and concerns of his own concerning the Republican Party and the course of the country that he loves.