Some of those folks out there are really arguing about Hillary, Trump, and the 2016 election, aren’t they? I’m so glad I’m not like those folks.
I’ve been amused recently in seeing posts denouncing political discussions. “It’s such a waste of time and I hate it.” There may be some truth in that, but without fail, those comments come from people who have lobbed bomb after bomb on post after post. I have dropped out of political discussions completely – about a dozen times. Then, “just when I thought I was out, they pulled me back in.”
Is there any sort of path to peace, short of one side or the other just knuckling under? I don’t plan to stop opposing the two major party candidates and stating my contention that each is disqualified as a potential president. I’m not yielding on this – it is a deep conviction. I’m willing to have people angry at me, but I’m not voting Trump. I’ve been called a baby killer, but I’m not voting Trump. But is there a path where we can hold and express our opinions while still seeking to “maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace?” Is it hopeless?
Here are some facts that I think everyone will agree with.
The Facts
1. We are more politically divided than we’ve ever been. Once, it was Liberals against Conservatives or Democrats against Republicans. But in this election, it is the evangelical church dividing and fighting over the candidacy of Donald Trump. There are several reasons for that. First, the GOP, which has been the de facto home of conservative Christians all my life, nominated a man whose profligate debauchery, extreme views that border on racism and xenophobia in some eyes, marriage history, vicious words, and many other issues have produced irreversibly split opinions. Some have supported him, others denounced him, and most have fallen somewhere in between. Second, there is such theological change in the evangelical church we don’t even know what an evangelical is! People who deny pretty much every doctrine we hold precious still self-identify as evangelical.
Social media has poured gasoline on the fire. Once, we could vent our opinions with family, friends, and co-workers. Now, anyone with a computer or smartphone can log on to Facebook or start a blog and fill cyberspace with his opinions, for good or ill. There are positives and negatives to this democratization of opinion formulation, but it clearly adds to the splintering of the evangelical world.
2. The divisions won’t magically go away after the election. This kind of bitterness is not going to magically disappear. Let’s face it, the horror is about 99% guaranteed – Hillary is going to win. Those of us who reject Trump say it was guaranteed when the GOP chose him. Others will blame us NeverTrump folks. But the animus of this election season won’t be gone on Wednesday morning after election day.
3. The election did not cause division, it revealed it. Some of the division is the result of bad behavior, poor communication, and over-exuberant social media posts, but by and large what this election revealed is a split that has been growing in evangelicalism. It is theological at root – the Christian’s relationship to his earthly government. A growing segment of the church is challenging the “God and Country” Americanism that has dominated the church in my lifetime. This divide is growing and that will not stop when Hillary takes office. There are significant generational, theological, methodological, and philosophical divides.
A Simple Proposal for Seeking Unity
I’m going to admit something right now. I’ve often been as much part of the problem as part of the solution. Since I first started blogging, I’ve admired David Rogers for his ability to state the same views I have in such a more patient and kind way. I tend to be a little more confrontational. But early on I felt a conviction that a Trump presidency was wrong and that I would stand against him and raise my voice against him. I’ve angered more than a few people as a result, but I do not intend to yield on that.
What I’ve noticed, though, is that both sides feel like victims. I’ve been attacked – “Hillary supporter!” I’ve heard that one 10,000 times. “Self-righteous” – that is a common theme. “How is it up on your high horse?” We NeverTrumpers must think we are better than those who support him. It’s an odd accusation for Christians to make, since standing on our convictions is foundational to our faith. “Don’t you care about abortion?” “There’s only two choices.” Jeffress called us “panty-waists” for not joining with him. The hits go on and on.
But Trump voters also claim to feel attacked as well. They feel judged for their decision to vote for Trump, as if they are denying the gospel by casting a vote for the GOP candidate. They feel that we are challenging their judgment, their sincerity, and their passion for Christ. I’m sure that has happened. I’m sure that in conversations, I’ve crossed the line – that’s the danger of Facebook and Twitter. You get in a convo and things get heated and suddenly you are overstating your position.
We likely are not going to close this gap, and the underlying theological issue of the relationship of Americanism and the Kingdom of God is going to take a lot of real biblical work. But there are some things we can do to do better, to live more peaceably as we work through some of these issues.
1. We need to work on our conversation skills.
I’ve had couples in my office with a wide variety of problems, but the root of almost every one is the failure to communicate well. We don’t speak accurately and for the love of all that is holy, we need to learn to listen.
A) We must learn to listen to what the other side is saying. I’ve come to the point where I just stopped conversing with people after I explained something two or three times and they continue with their self-deception. For instance, I’ve said that the quarrel we have is not with those who are reluctantly voting for Trump as the lesser of two evils, though I disagree with that choice. The problem is those who are publicly defending Trump, saying his behavior isn’t so bad, and generally justifying his actions. After I’ve explained that a couple of times, and someone continues to take offense as if our criticisms are leveled against everyone who decides to vote for Trump, I decide that conversation is useless. Again, I’m sure there is equally poor listening on my side.
We’ve just got to listen to one another, folks. Hear what the other is saying. Understand before you respond.
B) We must cease the absurdist responses. When I say I’m not supporting Trump and you say, “You must support baby-killing,” that is absurdist. I’m sure that a pro-Trump person could delineate equally absurd conclusions made about them because of their support for Trump. Trying to paint the opposition into an absurdist corner is bad form.
C) We need to avoid defining false options. I saw a tweet by Malcolm Yarnell yesterday. It said that there were three options in the race. Option 1 was to vote for Hillary’s despicable policies. Option 2 was to vote for Trump’s mixed policies. Option 3 was to waste your vote on someone else. That tweet is not giving options, it is telling us to vote Trump. He is accusing those of us who choose to vote for neither of the two main party candidates as “wasting” (a value judgment) our votes – it’s a pejorative, not simply defining options.
There are at least 5 options I can think of:
- Vote Hillary
- Vote Trump
- Vote 3rd Party (there are several options)
- Vote write-in
- Don’t vote
If anyone tries to tell you there are less than five options, they are trying to keep you from fully considering your options and making your own choice. They are attempting to control your decision by limiting your options. That really needs to stop.
D) In general, we need to tone down the rhetoric with one another. Politics is not an excuse to ignore biblical injunctions to be gentle with one another, to honor one another, and to demonstrate love. My guess is that we have all violated this if we’ve engaged in much political debate at all.
2. We need to accept that voting is a matter of conscience under the Lordship of Christ.
I wrote a post a couple of weeks ago which didn’t get much play, but which I consider one of the most important things I’ve written, “Lordship, Liberty, and License: Making Decisions that Honor Our Lord.” Based on Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8-10, I argue that many issues are left to the conscience of the Christian under the Lordship of Christ. We err when we try to force our individual convictions on these issues.
- A committed, gospel-centered, Christ-loving Christian should be able to decide not to vote for the GOP nominee without his or her faith and wisdom being called into question.
- A committed, gospel-centered, Christ-loving Christian should be able to decide to vote for the GOP nominee without his or her faith and wisdom being called into question.
- A committed, gospel-centered, Christ-loving Christian may decide to vote 3rd party, or write in a name, or not to vote at all, without having his or her faith and wisdom being called into question.
A man or woman should be able to make that decision as they see fit without being villified by other believers. There is no biblical command to vote. There is no direct biblical command how to vote. We might disagree with one another and even challenge one another’s logic and biblical reasoning, but in the end, there should never be a sense that voting a certain way is a test of faith.
Jesus died to be Lord of all and sent the Spirit to indwell each believer. When I try to be your Lord or you try to be mine, we err and we sin.
3. A plea from a Never-Trumper
I am not going to apologize for my opposition to Trump, because I believe real issues, significant issues, yes, even gospel issues are at stake. But I want to make it clear that when I speak against Trump and against his supporters, it is not against the person who has decided relunctantly that he or she has to cast a vote and Trump is less horrid than Hillary. I disagree with that calculation, but I understand it and I respect your right to make it. However, I would make this plea:
My criticisms are against the Trump apologists and justifiers, not against everyone who votes for Trump.
I don’t speak for the entire NeverTrump movement, but I think that most of us would agree with that. We don’t understand your decision to support Trump at the ballot box, but that is your choice. However, those who publicly support him, the Falwell, Jrs, the Robert Jeffresses, the James Dobsons, the Robert Reeds, Mike Huckabees, Ben Carsons, and others – these are the ones I have in mind with my critiques.
- Do I think you should vote for Trump? No, I don’t. But that’s your business.
- But when someone says, “Trump’s advocacy of sexual predation is no big deal” – that is a big problem.
- When people who once preached, “Character matters” because a Democrat was in the Oval Office and was misbehaving are suddenly changing their tuen and saying “God uses evil men” because an evil man is trying to get elected from THEIR party, I am offended. I see that as putting politics ahead of truth and conviction. It is pure hypocrisy.
But please, hear me – I am not calling every person who votes for Trump a hypocrite. I am calling out those who publicly flack for Trump, who use their status as Christian leaders to make it seem like Trump is a good Christian man. No doubt, Jerry, Jr. is the worst – I will never support Liberty University again as long as he is president unless he repents. Never. I am adamant and unapologetic. But that has NOTHING to do with you if you are simply a “lesser of two evils” voter. I may argue against that, but I believe that is your choice under the Lordship of Christ.
Please understand that. If you are a simple “Trump is better than Hillary” voter, don’t take every criticism of the NeverTrumpers as if it is a personal attack against you. It is not!
4. There are issues worth discussing.
The answer is not to just stop talking about politics. These are real issues, biblical issues. They touch on the gospel, the nature of the church, our purpose in this world – many key topics. We need to talk these things out. We just need to each do a better job than we’ve done. We shouldn’t be bullied into silence any more than we should be bulliers in our conversation.
5. Lean more on argument and less on memes.
Memes are cute and funny, but they almost never give the full story. After Trump’s recent scandal over his comments, this meme appeared quickly all over my friends’ Facebook feeds – a “Candidates Misdeed Comparison.” It was popular because it gave Trump a pass in that his crime was only that he “said mean things” while Hillary did much worse.
But this meme, like most, fails in many ways. It reduces Trump’s words to “saying mean things” and cheapens the impact of them to nothing more than hurt feelings. Beth Moore had a powerful tweet refuting this kind of weak response.
“I’m one among many women sexually abused, misused, stared down, heckled, talked naughty to. Like we liked it. We didn’t. We’re tired of it. Try to absorb how acceptable the disesteem and objectifying of women has been when some Christian leaders don’t think it’s that big a deal.”
There are thoughtful, pointed and powerful articles being written on all sides. Share those. Cause people to think. But be very careful about posting memes that reduce complex issues to simplistic platitudes. They seldom really give the truth. They tend to feed the prejudice of those who agree and offend those who don’t. They do not aid in the process of building unity.
Memes are not inherently wrong, but when we use memes to try to make our arguments, we are being intellectually and spiritually lazy and are likely adding to the division.
Conclusion
I realize that as a NeverTrumper my perspective may be slanted, but I think the advice is sound. We need to listen to one another, guard our conversation about one another, and seek to understand one another. We need to be careful to recognize the Lordship of Christ over the decision to vote.
I found two articles today quite helpful.
The first, as you requested, offers no less than FIVE options. It was written by Dr. Robin Hadaway, a brilliant Southern Baptist missiologist and professor whose recommendation for balancing the frontier mandate with the harvest mandate should be required reading for every Southern Baptist. The same clarity of thought and expression he brought to that discussion is present here: http://christianindex.org/response-presidential-debate/
The second is by Dr. Jack Graham, Pastor of Prestonwood Baptist Church, the church where I was saved when I was seventeen years old. My favorite line? “For me, it has always been about the issues — not Donald Trump’s past, but America’s future.” The entire article is worth reading: https://stream.org/199374-2/
Not sure why Dr. Hadaway ignores what I consider at this point the best options: Darrell Castle (I like him a lot better than I like his party) and Evan McMullin, who actually has a chance to do something Johnson and Stein do not – win a state! (Some polls have shown him leading Utah).
At this point, I would likely vote McMullin. He is Mormon and that would bother some of you, but he is a true conservative, a pro-lifer (for real, not like Trump) and he could actually catch fire and win some electoral votes.
Why ignore him?
And why is voting for a third party a “protest” vote, but voting for Trump isn’t? Frankly, most of you Trump voters say you are voting AGAINST Hillary – that’s the definition of a protest vote right?
And here’s the fact. Evan McMullin has JUST AS MUCH of a chance of winning this election as Donald Trump. Maybe more.
Evan McMullin (nor Darrell Castle) has not qualified in enough states to secure 270 votes in the Electoral College. Therefore, the only way he has a chance of winning the election is if no candidate gets 270, which then means the election goes to the US House to vote and select the next President. In that situation, It would be extremely more likely for the House GOP to either select Trump (as he is the party nominee) or select an established GOP name that could unify the party. Either way, the US House would not select McMullin. It is foolish to believe otherwise and only will set you up for disappointment.
Evan McMullin and Donald Trump have an equal chance at winning this election. McMullin may have more. Donald’s chances are ZERO.
And, I am not a constitutional expert, but I read somewhere that the House could only choose from among those who won electoral votes.
So, the house is not likely to pick Hillary. They might well not pick Trump – most of them don’t really like him. So, if there was another option – someone who won Utah, say, it might work.
But the scenario is false – Hillary will win by a landslide at this point. Trump has guaranteed a Hillary victory.
After rereading the 12th Amendment, you are correct. The US House could only vote for the top three electoral vote getters. Thus if 4 get EC votes, than only the top 3 would be eligible. I would still argue that the current US House would pick Trump.
Dave, with respect, historically a 3rd party, has never even come close. And Lincoln was not a 3rd party. The Republicans had destroyed the whigs by 1860 and actually held the most seats in the house. You may have known this but there are people claiming Lincoln was a 3rd party winner.
Don’t vote or vote someone else but to say a 3rd party has a chance is just not true.
Nate, you are exactly right. Indeed I would argue that the rise of the GOP in the mid-1800’s is the best example of how a “third party” can go from nothing to the Presidency in less than 10 years. How did they do it? Here is a hint, they did not treat the race for President as all or nothing. They focused on winning seats in the state legislatures and the US House/Senate. The first organizational meeting was in 1854, the first national convention was 1856, they had the majority of northern state legislatures by 1858, and won the Presidency and both houses of Congress in 1860. That is how you do “third party” right.
I think Robin Hadaway’s article misfires in several directions. For examples:
1. The choice to not vote at all. While some people may just stay home and not vote at all, there are others who are making a calculated choice. One philosophy is sending a message by the “Under Vote”. This is the total amount of ballots that were cast without a vote for a President. While Hadaway may argue “Staying home allows others to make our choices for us,” the person who deliberately stays at home is making his or her own choice. [Not sure why Extensivists would have any problem with that 🙂 ]
2. The second and third choices seem to mean Gary Johnson and Jill Stein. Strange way of counting, since there are fourth and fifth and sixth choices on many ballots. Plus, I suspect that the Christians arguing against voting third party are mainly doing so because they think voting for Gary Johnson takes votes away from Donald Trump and will cause him to lose. He says as much in the three examples he gives. A big assumption must be made here — that Trump had those votes in the first place. He never had mine.
3. “Evangelicals are in the unenviable position of either supporting a candidate whose views they despise but whose demeanor they like (or can tolerate) or supporting a candidate whose conduct they abhor but whose political and social views they basically share.” Though he began by saying we had five choices, he negates that with this statement which indicates he thinks we really only have two choices.
4. “…we can vote for the extremely flawed person who will best protect the values and interests of Evangelical Christians. Each voter must decide what are the most important issues for him or her. In other words, which candidate supports my pro-life, pro-marriage and fiscally conservative values?” I can appreciate folks choosing to vote for Trump because they believe he is pro-life, pro-marriage, and fiscally conservative. If you believe this, you may feel fine voting for him. Trump has done nothing to earn my trust that these issues are anything more than political rhetoric.
Several years ago we had a state representative in our area who saw the handwriting on the wall and switched from the Democratic to Republican party. When running in the primary one year he made the statement, “I’m a pretty conservative guy.” This gave the real Republican candidate some good cannon fodder for his campaign. They ran an ad that said, “Chuck, you may be pretty, but you’re not conservative!” For my money, Trump is neither conservative nor pretty.
I like and respect Dr. Hadaway, but his article was not just defining the options. It was trying to limit them.
By defining certain options as negative he subtly makes the point that voting Trump is the only real option.
Yarnell’s tweet was far more blatant about it.
I think, in general, there is a sense if of shame that attaches to voting for Donald Trump. People feel th ey have to provide some sort cover.
So, they:
1) use the “sky is falling” rhetoric. Hillary us going to go from house to house killing babies, will destroy America, appoint satan to the SCOTUS and repeal the constitution. I disdain and distrust Hillary, but the fear-mongering about her is a little overheated.
2) eliminate the other options. Trump supporters have been adamant the the election is binary an that a vote for someone other than a D or an R us wasted.
Why are they so forceful on that? It’s inherently not true and illogical.
They want you to think Trump is the only option.
When a Christian voter can ask “which candidate supports my…pro-marriage…values” and mean Donald Trump as the answer, we must consider how deep a hole we have dug for ourselves.
I hear you, Dave. I think Yarnell, Graham, Hadaway and yours truly do not consider our arguments to be “cover” so much as “rationale.”
We admittedly eliminate some candidate options that you keep open, although we view that as akin to reducing an equation in mathematics. For us, it makes perfect sense to discount what we consider to be unrealistic options.
Evan McWhatever is not going to be President.
Since we disagree with you about the extent of Hillary’s evil, we do not consider it fear-mongering at all. She will be weak on ISIS, strongly favor abortion, increase socialism, push the LGBT agenda, appoint liberal judges and basically run the country into the ground.
On the other hand, we believe there is a CHANCE of a better outcome with the Trump-Pence ticket. The platform and many of the appointments will be much less liberal than in a Clinton administration.
So, because the character qualities of Trump and Clinton are at a dead even LOUSY tie, we move on to compare their policies and appointments, which gives the Donald a slight advantage.
I, for one, do not think Trump is the *only* option, since there is always Hillary. I just think he is the best option.
As for the next election cycle, since this one offered us the worst choices ever in our nation’s history, I consider it highly unlikely that our choices are this bad in the future. This year was an outlier, in my opinion, not the beginning of a new trend.
An excellent article. The best I have read so far on this subject. I am grieved the Christian community is so divided . Brother against brother. A Christian Civil War. Thank you for a thoughtful, balanced commentary.
I think it is clear that politics didn’t CAUSE the civil war, it REVEALED it. And thank you, Leslie!
I find it curious that Hadaway suggests that protest votes don’t effect change, and then goes on to endorse Trump. How exactly is Trump “change”, other than that each successive Republican candidate is worse than the last. In this case Trump isn’t even on the scale. I suppose Trump is change in the sense that he is essentially a liberal Democrat disguised as a Republican. And I suppose he is change in the sense that rather being a flawed individual who regrets his lapses of morality, he is a person who revels in his immorality.
I think what this election has revealed is that, in my opinion, Christians have conflated their identity as Christians with their political identities.
I think going forward after the election won’t be that bad if Clinton wins. She will unit Christians in opposition to her. A Trump victory would likely continue the divide.
One thing that troubles me is that prominent Christians are using the concept of Christian forgiveness as a club to continue to support Trump in spite of the recent release of the pro-sexual assault tape. Even if Trump’s apology was sincere, unlikely as it is, forgiveness does not negate consequences. Repentance for a lifetime of smoking will achieve forgiveness but won’t prevent lung cancer. Forgiving Trump does not mean that video should be forgotten and have no consequence. It is a twisting of the concept of forgiveness.
As someone who STILL doesn’t know if I will vote for trump or not, I would simply insert one caution to you and Dave:
Not everyone who says that they are still voting of trump, despite the recording, is doing so because they think it’s ok, or even because they think Trump is a good candidate. They may simply believe Hillary is worse.
It is NOT invalid, or unchristian, when directed to Trump’s grossities, to bring the conversation back to Hillary’s unbiblical, pro-abortion stances. In the context of an election, and who to vote for, it makes a lot of sense.
I could come to this site and make such an argument, and I don’t believe it would in any way betray any Christian or gospel commitments, so long as I do not attempt to paint those who will not vote for trump as being “pro-abortion.”
That said, I don’t know if I will vote for trump or not. I will not vote for Clinton, and since I live in Indiana, I figure my state will go for trump anyway, and that Clinton will win anyway.
Andrew, did you read the article?
Hi Dave,
Yes I did, in fact I was thinking of a few specific parts when i wrote my reply, in which you seemed to draw a distinction between those who simply hold their nose and vote for trump, and those who publicly speak in favor of voting for him, despite his obvious lack of character.
It seems to me that when a Christian, either on facebook, or on this site, or elsewhere, “defends” Trump by saying his remarks are wrong, and yet they still believe we should vote for him for reason x….that the common response is to attack that person as if they have actually said trump’s remarks are not that bad, which in reality is not a position not held by very many people at all.
I’m not saying you have done that here, but that it is a common theme across the board, and can often be implied by those incredulous of their brothers and sisters who are “defending” Trump.
Well, as I said in the article, we’ve all strayed from principle on this at times.
And I will say this. I am thinking of a pastor who was a NeverTrumper until recently. He finally decided to support Trump (just before the video came out). Claimed the “I don’t support Trump but I want to defeat Hillary” mantra.
But then, during the debate, he posted a stream of insults, memes, and other nonsense that gave the lie to the idea that he was not “Pro-Trump.” He defended Trump and said the video wasn’t that big of a deal.
In other words, his actions and his meme-ography did not support his claim that he was only a “beat Hillary” Trumper.
And if you go through my posts and comments here and on Twitter and Facebook, you’ll find plenty of times when you could claim that I violated my own principles here.
Great article, Dave!
You’ve represented us nevertrumpers well in this article.
A little over a year ago I wrote Trumpty Dumpty. There was no way a man like Mr. Trump would survive the scrutiny that comes to any and all who would seek to be the leader of this country. And yet I am disappointed still. I wish that individuals possessing this much money could withstand its brutal force. It is a rare person indeed that survives prosperity and great wealth. (Sam Cathy among others) It requires the very same traits we as a people want in our politicians–character and integrity.
But as for me, I personally don’t have to be pure and upright—just decent will do, and I get to choose how to define “decent”. In this belief, we are willing to overlook many flaws in our political, religious, Hollywood and sports heroes. Anymore, we celebrate them as gods, no matter their many warts. This bogus parade atmosphere we live in is telling on us though.
WE don’t “NEVER FOOTBALL” when one of our boys, much less most of them, is found to be much less than pure.
I doubt that we will all rush to the banks and remove our life savings, NEVER to use a bank again because Mr. Stumpf was caught. (most have not been caught yet)
As a closet Deplorable who is considering going public, I wish Jack Graham and all his fellow spiritual advisers well, and I agree with him that none of them are responsible for the past, present and future actions of Mr. Trump.
Meanwhile, the spiritual adviser (I think she has one) for Hillary is assuring that Cecile Richards (how much does she prosper annually now?) and Miley Cyrus (latest PP spiritual leader) are in the drivers seat for the future of abortion victims. Tony Campolo, former adviser to Bill, wants us all to jump on the Hillary train with him.
A Pence Trump ticket could be a wonderful thing right now, but the Trump Pence is the best we have. Because of that I too believe Trumpty Dumpty is falling to the ground and we might just as well adjust to the one who has a host of soldiers sworn to her secrecy–devoted to concealing all of her cracks and propping her up on the wall.
Best advice for our future and Post Election Peace?
Invest in pant suits. Offer to take your mission team over to help put Trumpty back together again.
I’m not voting for Trump. There is no way I could ever preach on Holiness after voting for and support such debauchery. However, I do believe this election is the cause of the divide. The reason is those who are supporting Trump do so out of fear of what Hillary will do to this country. They are willing to set aside the character for the agenda because of fear. Fear of the last eight years, fear of what Hillary will do, fear of the further decline in our country. I do not wish politicians like Obama and Hillary on our country. They are the worst possible thing for it. I do believe that Hillary would be good for the church. Not because she would help it flourish intentionally but because she would help it flourish by opposing it. The American church is in a state of lethargy. We have forgotten our first love. We need a wake up call. Trump would be the worst possible thing for the church.
PMitch, I think the divide existed before the campaign and was exacerbated and highlighted by it. The campaign brought the issues into focus, but did not create them.
I just cannot agree with that portion of your post because of the main reason for the divide which is fear of Hillary.
I believe that any wounds will heal between friends. Fortunately, I do not believe I have made any enemies among my friends.
Jonathan Leeman had the best article on politics that I have read. He posted it on 9 Marks in the mailbag section.
I do believe that the press will not fully recover with this generation. It has power, but is not trusted. It has truly acted like a State run media. And if the FCC trend continues, alternative media (talk radio, a host of blogs, Christian radio, Fox News) are all in danger.
I also believe that some Christian leaders have lost some of their persuasive capital when it comes to politics, as they have been too strident and not careful with their language.
A pastor or Christian leader pays a price by going partisan or too public about matters of opinion.
Some issues are bigger that partisan politics and we must never be silent about those.
But we should be talking about those really important issues all year long anyway.
My pastor has not discussed this election once from the pulpit or in classes etc. One could attend our church for 20 years and not know for whom my pastor would vote. One could surmise based on some issues, but it would still be a guess.
I believe that is important for churches because it makes them accessible to people of all political stripes. So long as the issues are not so stark (e.g. burn down the churches).
It’s hard to know the future. If the GOP acts like an opposition party, it will have a bright future, if not in majority electoral success, at least in influence. The Dems seem to get this. Even when they are in the minority they are fearless.
If the GOP simply agrees with most DEM proposals, gives initial opposition but eventually caves due to donor or media pressure, the GOP will survive. It may do well during election cycles if it can demagogue effectively to get votes. But if it caves after the elections, the trajectory of policy will be the same as if the DEMS won, which is pretty much the way it has been.
I am very concerned for the state of our country. If the Supreme Court goes, which looks likely, many freedoms will be lost. The US will be run much more like Europe from a legal standpoint. More restrictions on personal freedoms- speech, religion, association, private property ownership, educational choices, employment success etc.
For Christians and churches this means issues like public evangelism, churches owing property, Christian schooling, home schooling, the ability to work at corporate jobs that may require open fidelity to policies on LBGTQ matters, exclusion from professions due to required fidelity to certain goals by the professional associations that govern entry to those professions, future service and promotion in the US military, all of these things are at risk. We see only shadows of trouble at this point. But it does not take much of an imagination to see how these issues get worse pretty quickly. The courts have been a buffer. But if the rules are changed, First Amendment protections will no longer be there.
And it is pretty apparent at this point that left leaning parties and elites (the Davos crowd etc.) really want borderless societies and more centralized economic and political control.
The debt is going to continue to spiral upward. Saving Obamacare (which the Repulicans will help secure), free college, green energy and the subsidization of other favored industries, and all sorts of centralized planning dreams will just take us further down a bad road.
I agree that “politics” is not worth the fight.
But when the church hypocritically changes its stands to support a candidate who is a shining example of everything we have preached against – that becomes a real issue.
Hypocrisy. The subjugation of the gospel and truth to political gains. Issues like that. That’s what concerns me.
I never wanted Hillary to win, but that ship sailed when the GOP nominated Trump. They were stupid to support a man guaranteed to lose. They chose the worst candidate in political history and the GOP voters have gifted us with President Clinton. There’s not much we can do about that.
My concern is with the witness and testimony of the church, and men like Jerry, Jr are, in my mind, embarrassing the church on a regular basis.
On this we have to speak.
I believe in the future we will have more elections like this where neither candidate is morally fit.
It seems that when those cases occur, some in the church will advocate that Christians should not participate in any elections where both major candidates are morally unfit, regardless of policy differences. The act of voting is the endorsement of the candidate personally.
Others in the church will decide to vote based on a comparison of policy that the candidates promise to enact. They do not see their vote as an endorsement of the candidate personally.
These two different views are never going away. Given our culture, this scenario is likely to occur again.
I hope that within the SBC and the broader evangelical world that both views would be seen as acceptable Christian alternatives.
If that is not the case, we are going to see more wars and name calling well into the future.
Yesterday, Al Mohler conceded that most evangelicals will vote for Trump, and I was pleased that he did not condemn them for it or imply that road was unacceptable for the Christian.
I believe that is the right tone to take.
Any other time is s recipe for battle.
I’m thankful for leaders with moral courage to stand against evil, even when that evil has the GOP nomination.
I’m glad the marriage between the SBC and the GOP is over. GOP is a corrupt and dying entity and we need to do God’s work, not serve the party.
I actually heard a well known pastor call other Christians not voting for Trump “panty-wasted weak kneed Christians.” It’s rhetoric like this on both sides that is not helpful nor is it edifying to the church.
Really good article!
That was a sad moment.
In fairness, there has been some over-inflated rhetoric by NeverTrumpers against the Trump voters too.
Dave, excellent argument and I agree completely.
Frankly, I don’t know how anyone has the time to sit around and argue about it incessantly. I don’t know how I’m going to vote yet. I don’t want to vote for Trump and I don’t want Hillary to win. She may win anyway by virtue of a rigged election, but that’s another matter.
So we have two extremes in church history. On one extreme we have the sacral-papal synthesis where the “church” has it’s hands directly in everything government. On the other extreme we have the Anabaptist separatists who have nothing to do with civil government at all. It’s almost like we are trying to marry up the two extremes – the church should stay out of government on the one hand, but we need to get Christians in every office possible so we can “take back the country.” That tension doesn’t work. Any Christian in office is to be held accountable by his or her church. That places that church in some way as being indirectly responsible for what their member does in office. Does the church member in office obey the church or the constituency? It’s easy if they largely agree. What we see mostly today is that church members in office use their church membership as part of their voting base and end up following the world in matters of civil governance.
My observation is that the church must hold that delicate balance. Our friends in Damascus have had a ministry there for years. They have operated out in the open under the watchful eye of the government… yes, THAT government. Since the fighting started a few years ago, much of the Christian presence has fled, but they stayed. In the middle of the fighting, their church membership has grown considerably with new believers. They have had to plant a new church and are now worshiping at over a thousand at each church, from what I’ve been told. You’d think these believers would be at odds with each other. From what I’ve seen, they aren’t. They are unified. They are an example to us. Yes, new believers who were Muslim only a couple of years ago are doing better than we are being unified, many of whom were on the cradle roll. We should be ashamed of ourselves for carrying on like we do. We don’t know how good we have it and if things were worse for us, we’d be more grateful to God for his sovereign provision in this world.
Dave you are right and I stand with your comments. This is a very complicated matter and in social media too many evangelicals are over-simplifying the issues at stake. I agree that this election cycle has uncovered the bitter divisions within the nation that have been quietly boiling under the cover and especially within the evangelical church. I would also add the racism prevalent in both Democratic and Republican camps has been exposed and sadly within our evangelical churches across the nation. Thank you for your irenic statements and for your truthful and rational remarks. I stand with you!
Sadly, I don’t get it…No one on this blog is more conservative than me….A generalization which I know will be challenged (GRIN)…For me, this election is about my children and grand-children. While we survived 8 years of a Clinton presidency, the consideration of any 4 years (let alone 8) of another round will destroy this nation.
In the first term we lose the SCOTUS. The 1st, 2nd, and likely 10th amendments will be the first ones to fall (I.E. replaced, deleted, or simply ignored – we must recognize from this past 8 years that ala Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, and Barack Obama, that written laws mean nothing to these guys). Besides that, when the first SC Judge is replaced, every ruling will swing left and defy the Constitution. This is just at home.
Furthermore, Mrs. Clinton makes no bones about it, she will continue and double down on the policies which are destroying the fabric of this nation. I don’t get how she can be considered for the Oval Office with her own list of corruption and coverup. Why is it that she doesn’t even get a slap on the wrist for things that you and I would spend years in Federal Prison for doing? From getting fired from the Watergate Committee and coming forward, everything she’s touched and done has been driven by about 2 priorities; 1) to make her and Bill rich at any cost, and 2) to conceal her actions so she can become POTUS.
While Mr. Trump causes anyone with a conscious to wince, cringe, shake our heads, and even pray for him, he is (whether I like it or not) the only candidate in the race who is at least has a possibility of keeping they Clintons out of the house that they think they own. Gosh, I read all of these other names; Johnson, Stein, and the rest, and these guys have the potential to put HLC in the position of “Commander in Chief” and “Chief Selector of the SCOTUS”. Regardless of any other issues, this frightens me for our nation and children.
“When I read Bro. Jack’s first hand words about Trump, it strikes a nerve:
The addition of Evangelical Christian Mike Pence to the ticket, the pledge to nominate pro-life judges to the Supreme Court of the United States, the promise to defund Planned Parenthood, defend the sanctity of life, support Israel, defend the United States against terrorism, protect our religious freedoms, include all Americans in the prosperity of our country, and much more, are the reasons I will vote for Donald Trump.
I also believe it is a bad decision to sit out the election or write in a meaningless candidate. Elections are divisive by nature but necessary if we are to keep our freedoms. Voting is a right and a responsibility. Elections matter. Certainly, this one does. The choice our country makes between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton will set the course of our nation for a generation and beyond.”
For me, it is in the spirit that to “not vote” or to ‘vote for a 3rd Party candidate’ casts a vote for the Democratic nominee, that I pray every night for God’s people to see the future of this nation. We have a great nation because good and godly intellectuals framed documents that we selfless and, I would argue, spiritual. We are at a tipping point.
I have not and do not cast a cloud over those who disagree with my take…That is a right protected by the very constitution which is now in jeopardy. When I vote, I will vote my conscious, will vote to restore and protect the SCOTUS, will vote to strengthen the defense of this nation, and prayerfully bring some hope for the future of this nation (hopefully until Jesus returns). Being a good citizen means doing more than it did in Bible days because we actually have a voice. I pray we use it.
Trump has NO chance to win, and a vote for Trump is a wasted protest vote.
The Supreme Court has been lost.
The moment the GOP sold out its principles and platform, and gave in to the anger of the Trump folks, it lost. He never had a chance. The press pumped him up in the primaries then tore him down in the general.
Voting for an independent like Evan McMullin (or Castle) is a much better path for the future of America. The GOP is corrupt and collapsing in on itself. You have a GOP congressman (from Texas) on a national news program saying he’d have to know the details before he’d condemn Trump if he advocated rape. The party has no soul, no convictions. It has become as corrupt as the Democratic party has been.
We need something new. Holding on to hope from the GOP is a mirage.
Here’s what I don’t get (on the flip side): Why do you think a pandering, pathological liar will actually do what he says? Why do you not see the danger HE brings to our country?
I’m seeing on facebook constant reminders that I am a coward, carnal, an idiot, prayerless, biblically illiterate from “evangelicals” because of my #nevertrump. BTW, I swear I’ll puke if I hear another Trump is the new Cyrus prophecy! The kicker? Most of them aren’t even making their own arguments; they’re sharing or copying and pasting what some website has written.
The only optimism I have is that those in my local church largely leave the political broadsides in the electronic world. In person, we talk about our relationship with Christ, growing in grace, ironically, even our mission to refugees.
I’m sure that’s how it will play out in real life. Those who have real relationships will be able to live through it just fine. For the rest? If I don’t have the capacity to speak into your life, nor you into mine, I will shake the dust off my feet.
Dave,
Should a baker, who is a Christian, be required by law to bake a cake for either Hillary or Donald, or many of our politicians? (with or without sensitivity training)
?????????
A lose parallel stating how difficult it can be to determine when “NEVER” is a definite.
Like the cake-baker, how far off the Christian bubble do Hillary and Donald have to be before we say never?
They came into the Evangelical shop (both of them) asking for our product (vote)
Might we prefer a decent (on paper) professing non-Christian or either of these two who claim a familiarity with the Christian faith but deny it in so many actions?
We are all putting forth out best crystal ball in surmising which one might promise a better future for our country, knowing that crystal balls don’t really exist and neither does sufficient character in either one of these candidates.
Again I just don’t understand your point
This is an excellent post, Dave.
But, if I’m honest, I’m a bit disappointed that this post wasn’t the promised exposé exposing the Calvinist plot to assassinate Kennedy for his challenge to land a man on the moon. You better deliver on that promise.
I lied.
“I lied.”
Which I believe qualifies you for the presidency of the United States. Well played.
On an interesting note – for churches using the Lifeway pre printed bulliten covers – this Sunday is “anti gambling” focus.
I wonder how this impacts, if at all, pastors who are in the tank for Trump and routinely defend him.
I hope LifeWay puts a picture of one of Trump’s casinos on the bulletin.
Dave Miller, I just emailed you the cover and back of the bulliten.
Is it not strange to anyone besides me that James Dobson, Tony Perkins, and even Jerry falwell, jr. have for many years (rightly and helpfully) railed against situational ethics are now arguing that we give into just that.
Is it not situational ethics to defend and endorse a braggadocios casino running playboy who has celebrated his having committed sexual assault, has made his wealth off the backs of the poor working people, not to mention his exhibiting classic authoritarianistic mistreatment of women and minorities?
Every conservative on this forum would, and indeed likely has
used any one of these immoralities as a battering ram of steadfast “principled” opposition to a democrat running for the same office.
But the situation calls for something different – so let’s do that.
(BTW – The endorsing of (a particular person) is exactly what one does with a vote when that vote is announced and a candidate is championed)
It may be strange…but this is a strange election.
I think those men are torn between (a) a CANDIDATE who does not represent the best of their ideals, and (b) a REPUBLICAN PARTY whose general platform planks and policies DO best line up with their ideals. Also, the people who would staff the administration spots are more acceptable on the Republican side than on the Democrat side.
So looking at TEAM and POLICIES makes the choice clear, while looking ONLY at the character of the two candidates results in a dead even tie, with both of them being unacceptable.
This is not moral relativism, by the way. It is looking at all of the facts. Every time, no matter who the leader is, if the two candidates are immoral but one of their platforms is deemed more ethical than the other, then the absolute morality of voting for a platform rather than a person prevails.
Come to think of it, I believe the Pastor’s Conference voted for a platform (smaller church Pastors, book study, etc.) rather than a name (Dave Miller.) That election was a referendum on an idea…no offense to Dave.
Yep. Situational ethics. What’s disqualifying in the minds of evangelicals for a democrat is overlooked and rationalized when the culprit is a republican. Smells like situational ethics to me.
I would call it absolute ethics, not situational ethics. The details of the situation do not result in the change—only the principle that platform and administration ALWAYS break a tie when character is a dead heat. That’s not situational ethics. It is absolute ethics applied to the entirety of the facts.
To disprove situational ethics, consider the hypothetical scenario that immoral Hillary had a party platform that was more holy, had selected a conservative Christian, pro-life Vice Presidential running mate, and had a team of leaders ready to serve in her administration that better lined up with godly values. The vote goes to her.
In such a scenario, we would not be excusing Hillary’s immorality on the basis of situational ethics (eg. it’s okay to leave those guys in Benghazi and lie about emails under these unique circumstances.) Rather, we would be admitting the character flaws completely, not rationalizing them, but taking into consideration additional information that does not justify what she did, but instead informs the larger amount of information to be considered in making the decision to vote for one person of bad character over against another person of bad character, when practically speaking, those are the only choices we have.
The disagreements come from an outside source. We shall not have peace until we recognize the truthfulness of what Mr. Trump said today, namely that there is small coterie that runs the whole nation and even the whole world, and their aim is to establish a global society, socialism , which according to one former Communist was invented by capitalists to control the poor. I recommend the following books: Tragedy and Hope by Carroll Quigley, The Naked by Cleon Skousen,, C.s. Lewis who even names one of the conspirators of note in history, Cecil Rhodes in his book Perelandria, . These works would be a start. A lady looked at me like I was crazy, but she really flipped out when I said I had 8 shelves of books on the issue. In any case Trump said there was one and that he had been an insider in his speech today (9-13-2016) at West Palm Beach to his followers, something I never expected to hear in public. Of course, this ties write in with the biblical theme of a struggle with an evil organization that has in a secretive,and serpentine way, a work of more than 200 years, infiltrating every part of society. I could say more, but in closing I will point out that this groups has had Christians fighting and killing each other
It was bad enough when we were being asked to vote for a narcissistic, misogynist bully and vice-peddler. Now we are being asked to vote for a probable sexual predator because he has the “right policies”.
The bottom line is that very high profile Christian leaders are shilling for a sexual predator and that is painting all of us in the worst possible light. Russ Moore is doing his best but he’s far outnumbered and it is bringing shame on all of us.
Rick,
Thank you for assisting the Never Trump – Never Hillary Debate with some fine rationale indeed.
I agree with you all the way up to your last paragraph:
“As for the next election cycle, since this one offered us the worst choices ever in our nation’s history, I consider it highly unlikely that our choices are this bad in the future. This year was an outlier, in my opinion, not the beginning of a new trend.”
Too much empirical evidence stating otherwise. Our nations youth who have been hoodwinked leftward are amassed in numbers that deny your hope and mine that we are not trending away from Judaeo Christian life for good in this country.
But we fight on anyhow, not because we are in a hopeful majority, but a determined minority band of Christ-followers.
Situational ethics.
It’s bad enough that he’s bragged about sexually assaulting women – but let’s not forget that he also bragged about going into the changing room and watching the TEEN pageant girls change clothes because he’s attracted to beautiful.
I guess those “right policies” trump everything and there’s nothing – absolutely nothing – that will give some people pause.
I keep being told I’ll have to “own” not voting for him – I suppose it’s true – but those evangelical pastors and leaders who advocate for him, rationalize his behavior, and endorse how he’s acted by publicly rewarding him with a vote – will have to own that.
I think what this election will be seen to truly reveal is the extraordinary difficulty Christians are having dealing with a post-Christian culture. For most of our nations existence we’ve been the majority, and have to a certain degree been able to influence the nation through politics. That influence is at an all time low as the nation is no longer nowhere near a biblical POV. If the SCOTUS does see multiple appointments under a Clinton presidency, a real possibility with 3 “conservative” justices in their 80’s, we will see not just a cultural shift, but a pretty radical legal one away from our values.
We face the future in a position we here in America as Christians have never known, the enemy. It will probably be disastrous for our nation, but could be a refining fire for the church, which has clearly grown as worldly as the nation in many ways. I simply view it as even the “gates of Hades” will not prevail against His church. But there is a high probability, however this election turns out, that as Christians, our lives are about to get far more biblical in regards to the hatred of the world than they have been for most of American history.
Jeff I think you are correct. It will get harder and harder to live out the Christian life and our churches will be more and more shackled and muzzled. Or attempts will to toward that. Not unlike much like in biblical history, world history, and actually in much of the world today.
All the more reason we should be praying for revival like Dr. Willingham often reminds us and go forward knowing that ultimately Jesus is victorious and one day we (well our descendants) will actually see all the nations bow before Jesus as King of kings and Lord of lords.
Oh please. You guys have the freedom and chance to live it out now, yet in my opinion are already caving in. It’s not difficult. We aren’t an influence because of “leaders” and I use that term loosely, like Jeffress, Falwell Jr. and those who are defending Trump’s actions and words as no big deal.
I agree with Russell Moore in that this is what is hurting the church’s influence and causing it to dwindle. Don’t blame it on the world this time fellas. The only one’s you have to blame for the dwindling influence are yourselves and it will be as hard to recover from this as it was the fiasco of the 80’s. Even more so because the numbers in the fiasco or insanity, whatever one labels it is many more.
Caving in what way exactly Debbie?
The (appearance at least, of) caving in to the pressure to put the lure of political power over principle. To suggest that there is any reasonable defense for seeking to put a sexual predator in the Oval Office and make him leader of the free world. Falwell and Jeffress are a blight on evangelicalism right now and they are doing their best to drag the rest of us down with them.
Bill Mac, this may be a surprise to you in this situation, but someone voting for DT can at the same time be trusting in God and His sovereign rule over the affairs of men. It may not at all be caving to the lure of political power.
And though these accusations against DT may in fact be true, Christians of all people should not jump to the conclusion that they are in fact true simply because they have been made (see Duke Lacrosse team), and speak of a fellow human being as if they are. And no, “locker room” talk is not the same as being a sexual predator. Well for you it may be, but then a lot of men and women you are around every day are thus sexual predators (even though you yourself have never heard it).
Les: Are you seriously going to defend the language on that tape as “locker room talk”? He described sexual assault, and now women are coming forward to accuse him of the very thing he confesses to doing on that tape! It doesn’t take Nostradamus to have predicted this. Helen Keller could have seen it coming.
Debbie, the churches influence has been declining steadily for years. It’s not a new development
Bill, I’ve been in many a locker room, men fishing and hunting trips, etc. If you haven’t heard this before, well you haven’t been out enough I suppose. Now, I’m sure you’ll say you have. But this is not uncommon.
And as I said, they MAY be true what he’s accused of. But you certainly don’t know.
Surely Les, you would agree that the things which come out of a person’s mouth, especially in unguarded moments, reveals their character. Right?
OK, scenario #1: what Trump said on the tape, in an unguarded moment, was truthful. He is therefore a sexual predator, and that is his character.
Scenario #2: what Trump said on the tape, in an unguarded moment, was not true. He is therefore a braggart and a liar with little or no moral sensibility, and that is his character.
Which do you prefer?
Personally, I think that Donald Trump’s sole core value is: to do anything that bring pleasure to Donald Trump, sexually, emotionally, financially, or politically. That explains why he can lie so easily, be a bully to those under him, stiff those to whom he owes money, have affairs and multiple marriages, attack those who dare to disagree with him, and praise anyone who compliments him. And don’t you or anyone else dare to say I am saying this to support Hillary, because I am NOT. But right now, Trump is the subject, not her.
And by the way, while I have heard men brag about their sexual exploits, most of them were in high school, and neither then or since have I heard men brag about sexually assaulting women, which is what Trump did.
Les, John Farris makes a good point!
let me ask you this though – you say that these are common occurrences on fishing trips and in locker rooms – maybe it is you who needs to find new friends if the conversation is so normally on bragging about sexual assault.
You and Ben Carson keep saying that this is normal among guys who are friends – the bragging about sexual predation – if that’s true it is y’all who need to find new friends.
Yes, I’ve heard plenty of sex talk from teenage boys. I’ve occasionally heard grown men engage in it as well, but I’ve never, ever heard any of them say the things Trump said. Trump, who was 59 at the time, didn’t say “this is what I’d like to do”, he said “this is what I do”. He basically confessed to doing the things these women are accusing him of doing. He has a nearly two decade history of talking about women in the most demeaning terms on Howard Stern. He has an absolutely sick record of talking about his daughter in sexual terms, even indicating that he desired her sexually. Even now he is trying to defend himself from these allegations by suggesting these women are too ugly for him to assault them. Can anyone seriously say they didn’t see this coming? It’s one thing for the world to hate us because we are Christians, it is quite another for them to hate us because many of us are defending the indefensible Donald Trump.
John Farris, of the two scenarios you used, I prefer #2.
And of course Hillary is not the subject here. She’s never the subject here. That in spite of a well known regular and sometimes author of posts here supporting Hillary and hardly a peep about it. Oh, but Trump. How dare anyone come on here and say that he is going to pull the lever for that vile, wicked man. Oh a regular here and author here plans to vote Hillary the socialist and known baby killing lover? Yawn.
Right. Get back to me when there’s even similar outrage and comment after comment chastising that regular and author here. Then I can take you guys seriously.
Bill Mac, John, Tarheel…see my other comment about the Hillary voter. His name is Dwight. As I said, get back to me after you guys have spent, oh let’s say, half the time back and forth with Dwight that you have spent with me and other DT voters. Where is your ferocious questioning and outrage with Dwight who plans on voting for a woman who absolutely LOVES babies being slaughtered? Noooo. You want to go on and on about words. Offensive words. Bragging. And maybe even sexual assault. But babies’ getting their brains sucked out, and a regular here and author here plans on voting for her? And you all are where? Crickets, that’s where.
Les: I know you’d like to believe that Trump was simply lying on that tape. The question is: Do you really believe it? Do you believe all these women are lying, that Trump is in fact not a sexual predator? This is not a court of law, this is the court of public opinion. Do you think he’s innocent of these charges, and if so, why do you think so?
If you think these women are not lying but the fact that Trump is a sexual predator does not disqualify him from being supported by Christians as president, I’d like to know that too.
Bill Mac, did you even read my last comment? I’m searching in vain for your ferocious back and forth with the Baptist pastor, blogger, and author on this very site sometimes. He plans to vote for a lover of baby slaughter. Help me find your expressed moral outrage at his decision. Please help me. Or maybe explain why you have not taken him to task here like you have Trump voters. Are you as incredulous at that?
OK. We’ve explained this any number of times, but here goes. Most people here are not even close to considering voting for Clinton. I know Dwight is, but he is clearly an outlier. There are not high profile evangelical leaders standing up and saying voting for Clinton is the morally good choice. They aren’t calling people fools and pantywaists for not voting for Clinton. We don’t have members of our own denomination shilling for Hilary Clinton. We don’t have members of our own denomination excusing or explaining away the egregious things Clinton does, or spinning them like a professional pundit. When you dismiss the Trump tape as locker room talk, that is what you are doing: spinning.
Trump is going down in flames, and he is taking the reputation of the Christian church down with him, thanks in part to those Christians who ignore the innumerably despicable things he says and does and throw their support behind him anyway. We are losing what is left of our moral authority and prophetic voice in this country. You want to save babies but supporting Trump may cost us the white house for a generation or more.
Lol! Oh Les! I am betting our brother Dwight would disagree that he’s not been strongly engaged by me on various and sundry issues. 😉
Bill Mac, not buying it. If that’s your argument, then your beef isn’t with a few if us on here (and it’s not many) who have said we are reluctantly voting for Trump in the general. Your beef is with high profile SB and other evangelical leaders. Post away at and about them.
But if you are coming hard after me and a few others, and you have, then go hard and unrelenting after a high profile Baptist named Dwight who has announced his intention to vote for a blood thirsty, blood of babies, woman for president. Now don’t hear what I’m not saying. But as bad as sexual predation is, and it is horrific, the victim still breathes. Babies who have their brains sucked out or are cut into pieces don’t get to breathe.
I’m not shouting Bill, but I’m getting a little tired of the double standard here. As soon as Dwight announced he plans to vote for the baby killer, ALL your focus should have shifted there. Baby slaughter is worse than unwanted advances. All day, every day!! You want to debate that Bill?
Tarheel, but not on this issue and his intention to vote for the lover of baby killing.
Bill in fairness to Les’ . There are a number of “evangelical leaders ” who have indicated they’re voting for hillary. It’s a small number – but there are some.
I didn’t even know Dwight had committed to vote for Hillary until very recently when I saw it on his personal
blog – but he doesn’t and hasn’t come on here touting the worthiness of Hillary Clinton – should he do that I would expect that there would be intense pushback.
Tarheel, it follows right after you and he were joined together condemning Trump and his voters.
Bart Barber says
October 11, 2016 at 2:19 pm
And following on the “Are We Being Played” post.
He got a little mild pushback from Bart, and then…oh not much to see here. Just a high profile Baptist pastor condemning Trump and incredulous that Christians could vote for him, but all the while planning to vote for the candidate that loves baby slaughter, up to full term. Oh, but Trump says demeaning things. Cry me a river about that in comparison.
Also, Tarheel, I haven’t come on here touting the worthiness of Trump. I’ve said it is the lesser of the two evils. I voted for Cruz. I’m a reluctant Trump voter. He’s just not as bad as Hillary.
Les: I used to say I understood people who were going to reluctantly vote for Trump. I understand it far less in light of the tape and accusations. But never mind. But the characterization of what Trump said as “locker room talk” just infuriates me, using the same language he and his pathetic TV surrogates are using a hundred times a day.
If the great majority of the evangelical world had abandoned Trump at that point and called for him to step down, he might have done so. Pence would have been elevated and probably would have won the election. But we didn’t, he didn’t, and he won’t. Democrats may have a lock on the government for decades and our reputation may take fully that long to recover, if it does.
Bill Mac, you know what infuriates me? When people on here are more infuriated and more active in opposing someone like me for voting for Trump in light of his language than they are for someone like Dwight for voting for Hillary in light of her absolute delight in babies being slaughtered. That is what infuriates me. And you refuse to even acknowledge my pointing this out to you numerous times now and keep coming back to talk about Trump’s gutter language.
Bill, about his language compared to the baby blood on her hands, to quote Tommy Lee Jones’s character in The Fugitive, “I don’t care!!!”
Two reasons Les:
1. I don’t believe him. He’s been a lifelong democrat and pro-choicer. He lies as easily as he breathes. That unguarded moment on the bus is quite likely the most truth he has spoken in this campaign.
2. He can’t win. I’ve been saying from day one that a vote for Trump is a vote for Clinton. Clinton will win and abortion rights strengthened. And the church will long be remembered for supporting a sexual predator, racist, misogynist and xenophobe. And Trump supporters will have achieved nothing.
Could I be wrong? Sure. Do you think I’m wrong or just hope I’m wrong?
Bill, here’s what I know.
You refuse to even address what I have said about a high profile Baptist pastor (and blogger and author of posts on this SBC Voices blog) publicly stating his intention to to vote for baby bloodthirsty Hillary.
Here’s what I don’t know.
Whether your continuing to ignore this rather than explain why you do not at least equally address that (equal to your rage about me or a few others here planning to vote for a man who says hurtful things) is intentional or if my comments aren’t visible to you.
Les: Do you really think Trump is pro-life when he advocates the killing of the families of the enemy which include children? Doing as he is said to all immigrants which include children? Children are afraid and it is reported that they are asking their teachers, families, if these things will happen to them or their families. My granddaughter asked this to her mother concerning a classmate and she is only in third grade. Then there is sexual harassment and worse toward women, which if you listen to Michelle Obama’s powerful speech, except for the last part of it, covers that subject well.
As for abortions, no laws have changed in years, not even under a Republican, yet abortions are radically down. More unwed births are happening it seems than abortions. Which I would rather have babies born out of wedlock and loved than murdered.
Given the issues, and my comment above, I don’t blame Dwight for voting the way he is although I am still not voting for either. Trump has said things concerning the black community that would cause me to vote for life and dignity in treatment rather than Trump. If there was a candidate with character on the Republican side I would vote Republican. Here is a letter that may be a reminder why so many cannot vote for Donald Trump.
This is not written by educators. Teachers of the year, who some may or may not be Christians but I think sums up some reasons why I won’t vote for Trump. Children.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/10/14/teachers-are-expected-to-remain-politically-neutral-these-teachers-of-the-year-say-they-cant/
“Debbie, the churches influence has been declining steadily for years. It’s not a new development”
Jeff: That is simply not true. We are still a great influence which is why this is so important.
And this is the craziness of it all. There is a website set up and being promoted by some RNC on Twitter entitled “Traitors to Trump” and the encouragement is to vote those Republicans on this list out. Insanity here.
http://www.traitorstotrump.com/traitors
Debbie, you ever heard of the Hyde amendment? And not surprised you give Dwight a pass. Hypocrisy.
Les, you responded to my questions with, “of the two scenarios you used, I prefer #2.” And yes, I asked which you “prefer,” which in retrospect was not the best way to word it. Our preferences in such instances generally reflect what we interpret as “lesser” sins. But God gets to decide that, not us, and as I read my Bible, I am convicted that a sin is a sin is a sin, without degrees. By the simple act of choosing, you are saying that it’s OK to support a candidate who you concede is a braggart and a liar with little or no moral sensibility. And yes, while I am no fan of Hillary or of abortion, I do get passionate about Christians who consciously make that choice. Finally, what either of us “prefers” may not reflect reality; the very real possibility exists that despite your or my “preference,” Donald Trump is a sexual predator. And this is the man that (some? many?) in the conservative evangelical world are supporting.
And by the way: anything that unites me, Tarheel, Bill Mac, and Debbie must be pretty powerful!
Les: You accuse me of hypocrisy, but look at the candidate’s views from Dwight’s standpoint which he said quite well both on this site and in the BP piece. Anyone who has read it hopefully can also understand. Give us a candidate we can stand behind and this wouldn’t happen in my opinion. Dwight has done anything but sold out, he is preserving his community. I do trust Dwight. He is someone I love and respect having met and spoken to him quite extensively in the past. He spoke at our church several years back which I got to speak to him even further. I love his church and they love him. So yes, if he went this route, he felt he had no other recourse. So your accusations do not bother me considering so many things you have written since Trump announced his candidacy.
“And by the way: anything that unites me, Tarheel, Bill Mac, and Debbie must be pretty powerful!”
Hahaha.
John Wylee: I hear you and agree.
Tarheel said to Les, “You and Ben Carson keep saying that this is normal among guys who are friends – the bragging about sexual predation – if that’s true it is y’all who need to find new friends.” Tarheel you are spot on! I was not a high school or college athlete, though I knew most of them. However, I was a police officer in a small city. Yes, there were officers who bragged about their sexual exploits, but it was a minority, usually more directed toward who they wanted to have sex with, and never, ever about forcing themselves on a woman. It was not that way when I was a uniformed officer, nor a detective, and certainly not while I was in Internal Affairs. Had it been: you can believe they would have been under investigation in a heartbeat!
John
Debbie, please explain why you think it’s fine for Dwight to be at a place where he “has no other choice” but to vote for an avowed and plainly known lover of baby killing who has pledged to increase baby killing, but you think it crazy for me to be at a place where I think I have no other choice but to vote for a despicable man who as far as is known is not responsible for baby killing and has pledged to not increase baby killing.
Please explain that to me and thereby disabuse me of the thought that you are being hypocritical.
In the United States, unlike parliamentary systems, we focus much more on the individual running than on the party. Maybe that’s good, maybe it’s bad, but that’s the way it is. I think we’re beyond the “hold your nose” stage for Christians in this election. Christians are being urged to vote for a man who, if he wasn’t rich and powerful, would likely be on the sex offender registry and living the solitary life of a known predator.
Jeff:
I agree. That is the situation we will all be facing soon.
It will even be tougher when both parties espouse bad policies. Making a decision in that case will really be bad.
I expect to see articles like this about evangelicals soon – next time we speak to morality in culture we will all be reminded of our own wagon circling of Trump. Some articles to this effect are already being written – and sadly they’re not wrong.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/441046/note-democrats-over-forty-years-old
That is an excellent article.
Trump and Hillary are a reflection of the nation that nominated them. When we look at them, however horrified, we are looking at ourselves collectively. We should not be political purists but we should be people that stand for more than power. We should work for more than power.
This election is likely to be won by Hillary because the liberals have done a better job of winning the war of ideas. That is the arena in which America can be great. Electing a conservative and hoping he can bravely put his finger in the dyke of the river of culture is both foolish and simplistic.
Abortion will be illegal again when the argument is won at the level of the culture, not when there is a president of a different party. Want big change? Be ready to work for it.
Voting for the big angry orange guy who disavows most of what you hold dear is not the kind of cultural change that is needed.
This just in from Jerry Falwell Jr.:
“I believe Donald Trump. I believe he’s a good man.”
No one can be that willfully ignorant. It just isn’t possible.
See. There is no other way to describe that statement than defending trump.
Debbie, if you cannot see that the influence of the church in our culture and political system is at an all time low, I simply don’t know what sort of bubble you live in. On our watch over the last 50 years we have seen legalized baby murder, gay marriage, gender neutralization, the dismantling of the nuclear family, the sexual revolution, the church politicized, greed grow exponentially, a lower percentage of the population attend church regularly than any point in our history, in the SBC fewer baptisms than we had in the late 1940’s, and many, many other things.
We are living out 2 Timothy 3:1-5. The church in far to many areas has a form of godliness but none of the power. As salt we have lost our flavor. These things have happened on our watch. Where exactly is our influence in the culture and politics bearing fruit?
DEBBIE KAUFMAN: “I don’t blame Dwight for voting the way he is although I am still not voting for either.”
JOHN FARRIS: “By the simple act of choosing, you are saying that it’s OK to support a candidate who you concede is a braggart and a liar with little or no moral sensibility. And yes, while I am no fan of Hillary or of abortion, I do get passionate about Christians who consciously make that choice.”
BILL MAC: “To suggest that there is any reasonable defense for seeking to put a sexual predator in the Oval Office and make him leader of the free world.”
—> A question for the 3 of you (from one who at this point plans to vote for niether):
Do you have the same level of “blame” or passionate opposition, toward those who see Trump and decide to vote for Hillary as the lesser of 2 evils? If you do not “blame” Dwight for voting the way he is, how can you “blame” another believer for voting for Trump? Each is trying to select what will bring the least harm to the nation: A Man who brags of sexual predation or a woman who brags of supporting the murder of unborn children?
To say that one has “no reasonable defense”, while the other does, would require at least some explanation.
What is your path to peace with your fellow believers in your church who decided to vote for Trump?
(BTW, I agree with Bill that Fallwell’s and Jeffress’ support for Trump is in a different realm. I’m not talking about those people, I’m talking about those who simply think Trump is not quite as bad as Clinton, and plan to vote for him).
Personally, I have no problem with Christians seeking to do the right thing who, believing Clinton to be unnaceptable, end up voting for trump. Niether do I have a problem with those who, believing Trump to be an unnaceptable, vote for Clinton. Both of these will be present in my church in November, and I don’t feel a need to confront either side about their supposed “unchristian” vote.
Andy: I’ve said several times that I understand the lesser of two evils argument, but I’ve also said that my understanding is growing less and less with each passing day. And I too understand those who think Clinton is the lesser of two evils, even with her abortion stance. I don’t think Clinton can be prevented from becoming president, so I’m more concerned with the witness of the church than with defeating Clinton. I think evangelical support for Trump is a massive blight on our witness in this country and the rest of the world. There is no way I will vote for a sexual predator, a person you wouldn’t want mopping floors in your local school, let alone in the Oval Office. And since he basically confessed to doing what these many women are accusing him of, I have no doubt that he is indeed a predator.
“But that even one single person thinks Trump is qualified to be president just boggles my mind. That millions do makes me despair for the country. That Christians are among that group makes me wonder if I’m even sane.”
I agree with this.
Bill, first I think more Southern Baptists and evangelicals in general will vote for Clinton than you know.
Second, why have you given a prominent SB pastor and contributor here a pass in your verbal, interactive “assault” (not meant in a bad way Bill) about his intention to vote for Clinton, the baby slaughter lover?
“more Southern Baptists and evangelicals in general will vote for Clinton than you know”
Not surprising in this election cycle.
It is absolutely fair to say most of my focus has been on Trump rather than Clinton, because suddenly I have no political home. I don’t have a party that represents me, but a loud, lying ignorant buffoon purports to represent me, and we have Christian leaders encouraging Christians to associate with, in my opinion, the most immoral candidate we’ve ever seen.
But you’re right, we’ve been easier on Dwight than you. I’m not sure why. I’ve always been opposed to Clinton, never considered voting for her, but Trump triggers something far more passionate and visceral in me. I think part of it is my continuing disbelief that we are even in this position. Over half the country identifies with the Democrats, so it isn’t surprising that Clinton rises to the top on that side of the aisle. But that even one single person thinks Trump is qualified to be president just boggles my mind. That millions do makes me despair for the country. That Christians are among that group makes me wonder if I’m even sane.
Andrew, I have never said that there is a “reasonable defense” for voting for Hillary. I believe that she (and Bill) believe they are above the law, or at least that a different criteria applies to their actions than it does to others. I think Bill, while he did well on the economy as President, was a disgrace to the office because of his sexual encounters, and they may well have risen to the level of sexual assault. However, Bill Clinton is not a candidate, and I cannot see that Hillary did more than any good wife who believed her husband would do–with the caveat previously mentioned, that both think a different criteria applies to them. I have never tried to defend Pastor McKissic’s decision, although neither have I felt led to attack him for it. If he came on this blog and argued that we should vote for Hillary, I would probably engage with him–but he has not, or if he has, I missed it. As I have stated on other occasions on this very blog, I believe (1) that a Donald Trump Presidency would be a dangerous thing; I am afraid that he might get us into even more wars, and/or set up a scenario in which our allies are drug into wars while we abandon our alliances, such as NATO. I am further afraid that he would be rather ineffective as President, because it would be such a rude awakening for him that he cannot fire either members of congress or of the Supreme Court, and therefore that he cannot bully his way through either. While I do not support Hillary, I think our country has a much better chance of surviving her than we do Trump. And as that implies, I do not believe that she will “do away” with the Church, religious freedom or the second amendment. I am willing to revisit that in four years and we will see. But (2) I believe that conservative evangelicals have been take for granted by the Republican Party, and have given us nothing in return other than lip service. Despite 8 years of President Bush, during 6 of which there was a Republican majority in Congress, there was no marriage amendment even proposed. Yes, there was the Defense of Marriage act (I think was the name), but non-lawyer that I am, I knew it would be overturned. Unless I am sick or dead, I cannot let the election slide by without voting. And yes, I know the arguments that a vote for anyone other than Trump is a vote for Hillary. But I think it is strategic thinking to vote for someone else, and that if enough Evangelicals do it, the GOP will realize that need to “put their money where their mouth is” if they want our votes in future elections.
P.S.
I GOP did not do anything about aborting during the Bush years either.
John Farris, let me point you to October 9, on this site.
First is a comment from Bart:
Bart: “Dwight, have you considered voting for a third-party candidate? I’ve got to say, Hillary Clinton is also a terribly bad choice. I think it is difficult to be very persuasive in critiquing Trump voters if one is planning to vote for Clinton.
So, why not a third-party or write-in vote for you?”
Reply
Dwight Mckissic says
October 11, 2016 at 2:40 pm
Bart,
That was my intent ’till I observed the first debate. Read your post so I’m aware that u are aware of my reasoning whether u agree or not, and obviously u don’t.
Your question is a fair one. I realized that I would be offering myself up to such an observation/critique/criticism etc, by taking the position that I have on Trump supporters. But, they have reasoning that’s justifiable to them for voting Trump(none of which I agree with, in terms of Trump’s willingness to deliver) & I have my reasoning that’s makes real good sense to me since I’m absolutely convinced that Trump is a racist and misogynists. I find those two traits more detestable than anything that could be said ’bout Hillary.
I recognize that the thimble full of votes that I may possibly influence would not be enough to bring victory to Hillary. But, I did not want to explain to my grandchildren that I did not lift a finger to keep a racist and misogynist from occupying the White House.”
https://sbcvoices.com/are-we-being-played-is-the-election-a-big-con/
Of course Dwight says that he is opening himself up to “observation,/critique/criticism” which besides Bart’s question, I have seen none. Maybe I missed it.
John Farris, the GOP has at least maintained the Hyde amendment which should it go away, there will surely be an increase in baby blood swirling down drains in abortuaries all across this country, with our money voting the bill. So there’s that.
John,
Not sure I agree. He (Bush) did some good work on stem cell research and kept the spirit (and letter) of the hype amendment that prevents federal taxpayer dollars from providing for abortive action. He also worked hard toward a ” conscientious objection” for doctors and pharmacists.
Just as we’ve seen with them avidly pro-choice president in Obama – and avidly pro like the president can make a difference.
This is a large part of the reasoning I can support neither Hillary nor Trump – because neither of them can be described by any reasonable person as being avidly and principlely pro-life.
I will flat out say that while I understand how many of my Christian brothers and sisters can rationalize a vote for trump on the basis of the Supreme Court (I strongly disagree with them because I think his blatant immorality and his lack of real conviction on the abortion issue disqualify him) – I can in no way understand and do call into to question the Christian convictions of anyone who votes for Hillary Clinton.
Sorry about the typos in the above paragraph – I am typing on my phone while riding in the backseat of our family van. 😉
*Hyde not Hype
*Just as we’ve seen with an avidly pro-choice president in Obama – an avidly pro life president can make a difference.
Again: I NEVER said I was voting for Hillary. At the same time, I cannot and will not vote for Trump. That means I will either vote for a third party candidate or a write-in. I don’t think I can vote for “What’s Aleppo” Johnson and I know I cannot for Stein, so I am leaning toward a write in. Had he been the nominee, I am pretty sure I would have voted for Kasich, probably for Bush, and maybe for Rubio, so I may write one of those names in. However, at the moment, I am leaning toward William Henry Harrison. He was a successful general, and has Presidential experience (though limited); granted he is dead, but that at least means he cannot do as much harm as some of the live ones who are running.
OK, I stand corrected about Dwight McKissic’s posting here, but I have already said I was against Clinton, for all the reasons so many have listed, so what else can I say? He has the same right to his choice as any of the rest of us. And while I disagree with Mrs. Clinton on a WIDE rage of topics, I am positively frightened about the prospect of a Trump presidency–hence that is where my passion currently lies.
I maintain that the GOP has taken conservative evangelicals for granted as a voting block. Disagree if you wish. What they did was too little, and now is is likely too late. Given the current mood of the country, neither a marriage nor an abortion amendment would pass the requisite number of states, even if Congress managed to initiate it–and given the obstructionism of the most far right wingers in Congress, quite a few of whom border on Libertarianism, I do not see it happening now. They failed to do anything like that when the opportunity was with us, some 15 – 18 years ago. And as for SCOTUS, (1) a justice who promised to overturn Roe v. Wade would never be confirmed, and (2) a justice who indicated that he/she had a predetermined opinion on ANY given case, rather than evaluating it case-by-case as presented, and consistently with the corpus of Constitutional law, would not be confirmed, probably not even by a Republican senate.
Tarheel, there is NOT an “avidly pro-life candidate” running. Trump claims to be, but he is not “avid” at least as I understand the meaning of the word; in fact, given both his past positions and his penchant for saying whatever he thinks will get him votes (i.e., lying), I doubt he is really pro-life at all.
I agree neither are avidly pro life – and I don’t believe Trump to be much more than, if at all, nominally prolife.
John Farris, for all the Repub failures, and aI agree there are many, two words: Hyde amendment. Now three words. Babies’ lives saved. Now 5 words: With Hillary, more babies die.
John: I agree. I have no reason to believe anything Trump says, especially those things that are plainly contrary to the entirety of his life.
There is one path for peace following this election, the believers who vote/support Trump will have to demonstrate grace and humility toward the Nevertrumpers who have written article after article railing on Trump supporters as being less spiritual than them. This article’s attempt at graciousness comes too late and after too much “if you were as spiritual as me you wouldn’t vote for Trump” to resonate with those who have read Voices over the last year.
What is sad to me is those who want to have a prophetic voice on this matter can’t muster enough courage to take to task the 20% of the evangelical church that has walked lockstep with the pro-abortion and pro-homosexual Democratic party for decades.
Interesting that we have had a completely different experience regarding pushback for political choices. I get emails and facebook messages from people (mostly current or former church members) because I LEAN against supporting Trump. They imply that I am either: a) Stupid, b) Carnal, c) a and b.
That’s my experience too, Mike W – Those implications and more..
There doesn’t seem to be much grace these days either way. Most people today are all-or-nothing in areas that don’t require it. I prefer to hold all-or-nothing positions for those things that are truly important. Dr. Mohler’s provision for those who disagree with him in this area of whether to support Trump or not is an example of how to hold a position firmly yet graciously.
Bro. Mike, I do not doubt you have received such comments because I have been treated rather coldly for my refusal to get on the Trump train. However, look closely at what I have written; I am not speaking of private conversation, nor social media. I am speaking about people who write articles, blogs, share podcasts, who constantly berate Trump supporters. They share their dismay that a believer could vote for such a scoundrel. The message comes across, to me, as if you were just as spiritual as me you wouldn’t vote for Trump. I have not seen any Southern Baptist write about their dismay that any believer could vote for Hillary. I am certain someone will post one that has been written in the last couple of months as this criticism has been shared but in all honestly we all know respected SBC writers have left Hillary alone.
There are comments made by authors on this blog that simply smack of spiritual arrogance and they are indeed a shame.
Evangelical divide seen in LifeWay Research survey
Trump 45 percent
Clinton 31
Johnson 8
Undecided 15
http://www.bpnews.net/47727/evangelical-divide-seen-in-lifeway-research-survey
David R. Brumbelow
You know, this is a Christian site with mostly ministers yet those who are against voting for Trump are called the same thing unbelievers usually call Christians. Getting on our high horse, better than those who are voting for Trump(which I cannot disagree with, considering we are speaking of human rights, treatment of women, disabled, and the list goes on) and I guess it surprises me the hardness of the heart toward the things Donald Trump is advocating. Does this show how far down the religious right has gone? Politics before morals? Character? I think you gave up any one listening to anymore morality sermons. And to hear you even use abortion as an excuse almost boggles my mind that you believe this is why you are voting for Trump.
Show me where any abortion laws have been eradicated? How many years and how many Republican Presidents, how many times during these Presidencies’ did the Supreme Court overturn any abortion law? Do you really think that Donald Trump will do the same? I think it’s an excuse used to vote for Trump. It used to be cry anti-abortion, pro-life, and Christians would fall all over themselves like robots to vote for the Republican candidate, which in the past were people I could vote for, having voted Republican in every election since 1974(Remember Nixon? Watergate?).
I will not be upset if Hillary becomes President because of her stance concerning women, immigrants, race and the past shootings. I am against abortion but in this case(and so far only this race) I do think Hillary to be the lesser of two evils. Trump is a nut running amuck and getting nuttier and more cruel by the day. He also seems to have some paranoia and thinks bullying those who feel strongly against him being President is OK. He is a narcissistic nut. It is like having someone from the KKK run for President along with an abuser. It’s beyond the pale of human decency. I think he empowers racists, bullies, those who think women should be put back in time as for their pleasure, and abuse, immigrants. Either he will lose, or he won’t be President for long before being impeached. He is too out of control to be President, and has shown where many Republicans in this country are out of control and that includes many Christians who are evidently reading the OT and forgetting the NT. They are allowing Trump and his running mate to take the Bible completely out of context, in fact slaughtering it and not saying a word.
As for Dwight, he can speak for himself: “McKissic said Trump’s answer to the question was essentially “law and order” and “stop and frisk.”
“I thought to myself: you’ve got to be kidding me,” McKissic wrote. “That spoke volumes to me. He saw black people as criminals. In order to heal the racial divide, his solution would be to stop and frisk my 12 grandchildren and, upon sight, see them as in need of law and order supervision. His answer was horrifying to me.”
McKissic, in the past a single-issue voter opposed to abortion and same-sex marriage, said people being mistreated by police, regardless of the color of their skin, “is just as much a quality of life issue as abortion.”
“Police brutality is one of the most pressing, unresolved social issues of our time,” he said. “It certainly is a life and quality of life matter. It will certainly impact the environment my grandchildren are raised in. Therefore, I must ask myself which candidate will do a better job and be more objective and fair in making sure the citizens and the police are being treated fairly? Who best understands and empathizes with both sides of this issue? Whose justice system and attorney general’s office would I rather see be involved in these matters?”
I understand.
Debbie, ever heard of the Hyde amendment? Hillary has voiced her commitment to working for the elimination of the Hyde amendment. Thus, an increase in baby slaughter. That is who Dwight says he will vote for.
Trump is on record wanting to make Hyde permanent. Just yesterday it is reported,
“Donald Trump on Friday announced a new “pro-life coalition.” The president of the Susan B. Anthony List — a top national group opposing abortion — will head it.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, who is head of the non profit organization that supports anti-abortion politicians, will be the national chairwoman of the coalition. Additional co-chairs will be announced later this month according to SBA List.
Trump has penned a letter which will be used to recruit other coalition members.
On Friday Trump reinforced his commitment to three anti-abortion platforms and announced he would also back making the Hyde Amendment permanent law, saying in a statement:
“Hillary Clinton’s unwavering commitment to advancing taxpayer-funded abortion on-demand stands in stark contrast to the commitments I’ve made to advance the rights of unborn children and their mothers when elected president. I am committed to:
· Nominating pro-life justices to the U.S. Supreme Court.
· Signing into law the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would end painful late-term abortions nationwide.
· Defunding Planned Parenthood as long as they continue to perform abortions and reallocating their funding to community health centers that provide comprehensive health care for women.
· Making the Hyde Amendment permanent law to protect taxpayers from having to pay for abortions.””
Trump is the candidate you and others here apparently see as the greatest evil since, I don’t know, Hitler. This is the candidate you all simply cannot stop bashing and taking to task the Christians who would dare vote for, while remaining silent about the other only possible winner, Hillary. You know Hillary, the one who wants baby deaths to increase in this country…with your dollars.
Sorry Debbie et al, baby blood running down the drains and their limp, dead, dismembered bodies cast into dumpsters means more than someone getting hurt by words or even discrimination. Bill Mac, I’m looking your way too.
Sorry Les, but I don’t buy it. Trump supporters are giving us Clinton, plain and simple. Never Trumpers have been warning people about this since the election cycle began. If you want to blame someone for a Clinton presidency, blame the people who thought President Trump was a good idea. Their candidate, and now your candidate, is now doing his best to ensure that the congress goes down with him, eliminating any obstacles Clinton might have to pursuing her agenda.
Sorry Bill but I ain’t buying it. If you are going to be so bold then I will as well. Never Trumpers will hand this election to Hillary if she wins. Baby blood down the drains will increase. None of you yet has made a persuasive argument to convince me that I should back down on my plan to vote to try and stop an increase in baby slaughter. It’s frankly embarrassing.
Hillary and the “progressives” are a threat to our basic Constitutional rights.