So here's my philosophical treatment of the "false dichotomy". By rules of logic, of course anyone can favor their notions of personal "holiness" or "political correctness", or "science" as guides to the general claim of being "right with the world" somehow, and include notions of human rights in some kind of fondly embraced values.
Jesus had one way of figuring all that, Stalin and other statists have all had theirs. Churches are in the business of selling prefab schema of various kinds for doing all that.
In my view, supporting a statist like McMullin is actually inconsistent with supporting human rights. Of course, I think Hillary is worse by times ten or something, and it's questionable whether Trump will actually do better. As Mark Levin would say, a populist with big ideas claiming vast management prerogatives is inconsistent with US Constitutional notions of limited governmental powers.
My insults above to the LDS "managers" goes to the same point. An authoritarian "Church" exacts its glory from imposing power on its followers invoking claims of exclusive channels of divine guidance. In my world view, a God who places practically infinite worth on human beings must respect human choice..... and provide a personal channel of guidance.... which is in line with the whole idea of innate human rights.
While the modern LDS Church has some roots in the past religious fashions of top-down management like prophets and priests and written scriptural texts, I howl at the modern LDS managers, as I term them excluding the nice personal figureheads who read their teleprompters at Conference nowadays, simply because they have the rule that "authorites" must submit their intended remarks to the review committee and let them revise, and then read what they are handed.
To me, this is "common core" leadership not directed by "God" in any meaningful way, but by managers seeking to achieve public acceptance. That a modern Church should have any kind of central authority is not uncommon, and probably is the fact of every organized religion, means that religions generally do not respect human rights much better than governmental authorities with all their dreams of making the world better somehow.
Romney, Reid, Hatch, Lee, Chaffetz, Bishop, and the air force representative from the Ogden area, are all authoritarian and favor managed human affairs more than human liberty or human rights. It goes with their religion and their sense of LDS community. It is of course a lot to ask Colton to endure my insults to such systems of values. I was sorta expecting my blurbs above to get trashed clear outta JazzFanz community.
Trump has won support from a fair cross section of the United States community by taking exception to the way things have been handled, and with ideas of how to change them. He is it seems his own kind of man. I don't worry about him becoming a Hitler because he is all about free enterprise and prosperity that will come from giving people more choice in their lives, more latitude in their work, and no preaching about personal affairs.
McMullan, like Romney and other Bush camp followers, and the Clinton camp followers, are basically saying we're doing fine and nothing needs to change.
Just put me down as one who has had enough of that old path.
If Hillary "wins", I think this country will shake itself loose of that old path once and for all. The need for change will become overwhelmingly obvious.
