Religion & Trump

[Gregory Matthews]

Religion & Trump:  In general, this forum has not welcomed politically focused comments.  The following may be thought to violate this practice.   I am posting it now as I believe that it takes a moderate position, in the middle between two extremes that deserves consideration.

https://spectrummagazine.org/views/columns/one-nation-under-trump/

 

[Gustave]

Those familiar with history know that NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association was a founding member of IGLA (International Gay & Lesbian Association). The UN was willing to give status to the IGLA (along with a significant amount of cash) IF the association stopped trying to lower the legal age of consent so that adult gays could have sex with young boys. The IGLA (to the get the money) kicked NAMBLA out of the IGLA. Here is a video about some of the history. 

The Democrats are looking at a "event horizon" here where they will either move toward the center or sin off so far into left field that they will no longer be relevant. 

The Trans movement is an ideology that not enough voters are ready for to make it a viable platform for a political party to run on. This is one thing that Christians, Muslims, Jews and Hindus are in agreement with. 

[phkrause]

6 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Religion & Trump:  In general, this forum has not welcomed politically focused comments.  The following may be thought to violate this practice.   I am posting it now as I believe that it takes a moderate position, in the middle between two extremes that deserves consideration.

Excellent article!!

[bonnie1962]

Such an interesting paragraph

More importantly, the reputation of the Christian church in America has been, and will continue to be, hurt by evangelicals’ toxic embrace of Trump. While evangelicals are now able to separate Trump’s personal piety (or lack thereof) from his political benefits, the broader public largely cannot. Part of that is because these same Christians, a generation or two earlier, were in some cases the exact same people telling the nation how important it was for the president to be a moral man. Maybe evangelicals are more politically nuanced now, or they have found their integrity a price worth paying for political power.

 

Either way, the confusion is created of how people who purport to follow Jesus could support a politician who seems to be the antithesis of what Jesus represents.

I remember asking a similar question and ended up being called a couple of not so nice names.

Democrats were able to separate Kennedy/Clintons personal piety (or lack thereof) from their political benefits. Part of that is because these same Christians (democrats), now are the exact same people telling the nation how important it is for the president to be a moral man.

If I remember correctly it was made known that Ted Kennedy and another politician had a fondness for a waitress sandwich. He was voted back into office repeatedly as his moral character didn't have anything to do with his abilitiy to fulfill his political duties WE all know the same was true of Clinton, his moral character again didn't have any bearing on his ability to lead this nation. So said the democrats. Voted in for a second term. Now suddenly moral values in a president is of such great importance? 

That is a pretty good definition of situational ethics

Maybe democrats are more politically nuanced now, or they have found their integrity a price worth paying for political power.