Question for those of you with strong religious beliefs

Brilliant question!

I don't for a moment presume to be a theologian, however I have some knowledge of scripture.  God is pretty clear on our responsibility with respect to the law of the land:

Romans 13:1-7King James Version (KJV)

• 13 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
• 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
• 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
• 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
• 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
• 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
• 7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

That all basically says that we must obey and follow the laws of the land.  The law of the land - the Constitution - says:

• “ . . . the president shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint…Judges of the supreme Court.” 

It doesn't say "may" it says "shall," nor does the constitution say anything about waiting until the next president is elected.  Although I seriously doubt that ANY of our elected buffoons officials give a  rat's arse about what scripture or the law has to say as they harken to their own agendas.

All I really know is we are about to witness a political fight the likes of which most of us have not seen in our lifetimes.  The silly season of an election year was just supplanted by what will surely be open hostility between the two sides as they enter what is typically a contentious battle over a new Supreme court nominee.  This time around, with the balance of the court at stake, the battle is sure to be epic.

What part of this hasn't occured in 80 years? We have a vacant SCOTUS seat and a sitting president. It's really not that rare, tends to happen once or twice a decade. Despite what Ted Cruz says, Obama is not a lame duck president. That label doesn't kick in until after the elections are over. But even if he were, how does it matter. He's still the president until January whatever of 2017, and it's his constitutional right as president to appoint a justice to a vacancy right up until the day that his successor is sworn in.  I wonder, at what point in a president's final term does Mr. Cruz think a president should just quit doing his job and phone it in? 

The Senate is absolutely free to vote against any nominee as they see fit, both in committee and on the floor. And seeing as how the GOP currently holds the majority in the Senate Judiciary Committee as well as the Senate as a whole, blocking Obama's nominees is not a problem. So (in my opinion) the childish whining is to come out before Scalia's corpse is even cold and proclaim that Obama shouldn't even be allowed to do his job and make an appointment. Or to refuse to even hold confirmation hearings. Or to declare that they'll block any and all nominees without even knowing who the candidate is. Just as it's the president's job is to nominate a justice, it's the Senate's job to hold a confirmation hearing on that successor. I really don't care how they vote, but I do expect my Senate to do their job. 

And just an FYI, the 1960 Democrats didn't pass legislation prohibiting a late-term appointee, the passed a Senate resolution against recess appointees. A resolution that, ironically, the GOP at the time fiercly opposed and what Obama could very well end up doing this year. The full title was "Expressing the Sense of the Senate That The President Should Not Make Recess Appointments to the Supreme Court, Except to Prevent or End a Breakdown in the Administration of the Court's Business" . I't s contradicted, and therefore irrelevant, by the Constitution that states " The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."

What's funny is that I'm pretty conservative on most issues, but I'm more inclined to support liberal justices.
It's more of a political mess though because there are some issues I care a lot about that the conservative half supports and there are issues I care a lot about that the liberal justices care about.  So it's a toss up for me.

As for the "religious" argument about this...  #eyeroll 

lol, i feel the vibes....  :-D

In all seriousness, I'm not a religious guy at all.  I have a huge problem with religion because it's all man made.  What I do believe in is the Bible, which I believe is the inspired word of God.  Religion is man's various attempt to interpret the Bible, and man is flawed so therefore religion is flawed.  Hence the various train wreck churches around the world that claim to be Christian.

Believe it or not, according to the Bible we live in a fallen world that is ruled over by Satan not God.  (bet you never heard that in sunday school) There is a lot of evil (hard to argue) on this planet and all kinds of despicable things occur.  God gives us the free will to choose to follow him, or turn our backs on him and follow the world which will lead to eternal separation from God.  We are not robots predestined on a remote control path laid out by God.  He has set out a plan for us, but we choose to follow it or not.  Once we turn to God and accept him as a savior, then we are born again into the Spirit of God and no longer under Satans control.
That being said, we still have our free will choice and can succumb to temptation and still do bad things even as a Christian.
God doesn't want me to be unhealthy, but I can still eat like crap and not exercise as an example.  If I die of a heart attack due to my gluttony it's because of my freewill choice to not take care of myself, not because God wanted me to die of a heart attack.
We also still live in a sin filled world, so I could be living a sin free perfect life (not possible, but hypothetically) and some punk could gun me down on the street.  It's not Gods plan for that to happen, but due to the nature of evil in the world it unfortunately can and does happen.

There are those that believe that their life is predestined before them and they have no choice as to anything that's going to happen.  I counter that there's no Biblical support for this and it's just a man made thing to let people feel "special" because they were "chosen" and you "weren't".