For me, I don't want someone relying on God to guide his decision making in running a country.
I just don't believe in theocracy.
Unless you can prove to me that God exists 100% and that you know His will 100%. Then I'm down with theocracy.
Nope, I'm just against anyone that can't make a secular decision. If you can't make a secular, rational decision, you're a religious nutjob zealot of the highest order.
So do you think Lankford is trying or wants to establish a theocracy? Or that 87 or I do? Or that him being Christian makes it impossible for him to make a secular decision? Or that being led by Christ makes him unworthy of being in government? I don't even know where you're coming up with the stuff. It's not like you moved the goal posts--you took them down and put up a taco stand. Relying on God to make decisions in your life is so far from being theocratic that it's getting hard to even respond to your points. Washington fit your bill of crazy nut. So did Lincoln. Are we now going to hear about how much better Christian you are than Lincoln b/c he fought vampires or something? The best I can figure is that 87 trolled you with his comment about God running a country.