Darrell Trigg, the Christian Party’s Presidential Candidate, is Somehow Still Around August 24, 2015

Darrell Trigg, the Christian Party’s Presidential Candidate, is Somehow Still Around

We first posted about Darrell Trigg (below) last year, but he’s making the media rounds once again. He’s one of those no-name candidates who wants to become President, and his platform for the Christian Party makes Sen. Ted Cruz‘s version of theocracy seem downright subtle.

Separation of Church and State will be changed to the Union of Church and State. God will be asked to be an integral part of the government of the U.S.

The Bible will be a standard required subject in all public schools and universities, for all grades, the same as English and Math.

Each day of school will begin with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance.

Homosexuality will not be recognized legally, or in any other manner, by the United States government or any state, city, or county government.

The legal drinking age will be increased to 25 for any alcoholic beverage.

A couple wishing to get married must first attend Christian marriage counseling classes.

Divorce will only be allowed in cases of abuse, infidelity, or incarceration.

Married couples who become pregnant must attend Christian parenting classes.

No show or movie will be allowed on T.V. systems or computer systems accessible by homes that contain nudity, strong sexual content, excessive foul language, blasphemy, or any form of homosexuality.

Strangely enough, there are some issues that place him at a distance from the far-Right fringe. He offers limited exceptions on abortions, supports medical marijuana, and wants a $300,000 cap on athletic coaches at public universities.

I can’t tell if he’s a joke (at least beyond his platform). His Facebook page, Twitter account, and YouTube channel have no signs of life beyond the announcement of his campaign last year.

He’d be a disaster in office, his platform violates the Constitution all over the place, and no sensible person would ever consider voting for him. It makes you wonder why he didn’t just run as a Republican.

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
error: Content is protected !!