Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

[candycorn]

So you support the idea that Big Government at the state level should be allowed to trample on the rights of that state's citizens. It is not for government at any level to make a personal decision for a private citizen. It is for the private citizen to make personal decisions. These decisions have nothing to do with somebody else's religion.

There is nothing intolerant or bigoted against anyone's religion. But no one should be forced by Big Government to make personal decisions according to a religion that she is not an adherent of.

I support that we follow the Constitution as written and not try to add things to it except via the amendment process.

My issue of large government is with the Federal government, and the State I live in. If Alabama wants to ban abortion on demand let them. If it allows us to stay as one country it is a small price to pay. I live in NY, so I have accepted the people here like large intrusive government, and I only stay because of family and friends. If I want to change that, I have to change it via voting in legislators that agree with me.

I always find it comical when progressives get all uppity about "trampling rights" when it comes to made up ones like abortion and SSM when they feel no remorse trampling an explicit right like those under the 2nd amendment.

Also, right now progressivism is more of a religion than not anyway. You have your heretics, your high priests (AOC be praised) and a slavish need to see those opposed to you as evil.

thanks for the chuckle.

Of course the problem with that is this:

If you're a male working for Bank of America and are picked to head up the new office in Mobile, you pack up and leave if you want the job. No problemo, take the promotion.

If you're a female working for Bank of American and are picked to head up the new office in Mobile, you have to decide if you want to practice abstinence and take the promotion or pass up on it and maintain your lifestyle. Because if you get pregnant, your career is finished as you are now forced to carry the pregnancy to birth.

Or what if you're living in Alabama and a bunch of legislators decide for you that you are now bound to carry a pregnancy to term.

The you get a new job if it bothers you that much. Just like if someone would get transferred to NY and didn't want to pay the onerous taxes.

And I do think they invented something called birth control....

Also, if you are the office manager in Mobile you could probably afford to go to another State to get your abortion. One thing I do not agree with is a law that would punish someone for doing something out of State that is banned in State. That is a violation of State sovereignty, that covers the land of the State, not the people when they are not in the State.

hell progressive groups could form charities to handle paying for the trips.

Again, this is something that would never be asked of the male gender. For women the specter of a bunch of politicians stating what you can do with your body is a bit more personal. I would ask you to give it some thought but clearly, you’re not much into the whole thinking business.

Considering the male gender doesn't have a "choice" anyway in this situation, I honestly don't care.

There are plenty of pro-life women who understand exactly the point you are making, and they are still pro-life. Why do you have to frame this as a "all-men" vs "all-women" conflict?

Oh, right, because hacks gotta hack.

Being a male and a trump supporter, caring is probably too much to ask of you.

As for the supposed “conflict”, it’s a construct of your imagination. About 90% of catholic women practice contraception which was and likely still is antithetical to Church teachings. Women pretty much know the score when it comes to a bunch of people in state capitols making their healthcare decisions. This is why the contraception is used in the first place.

It’s a pretty easy scenario to understand. I’m sure if you try, you could too.

 

[martybegan]

I support that we follow the Constitution as written and not try to add things to it except via the amendment process.

My issue of large government is with the Federal government, and the State I live in. If Alabama wants to ban abortion on demand let them. If it allows us to stay as one country it is a small price to pay. I live in NY, so I have accepted the people here like large intrusive government, and I only stay because of family and friends. If I want to change that, I have to change it via voting in legislators that agree with me.

I always find it comical when progressives get all uppity about "trampling rights" when it comes to made up ones like abortion and SSM when they feel no remorse trampling an explicit right like those under the 2nd amendment.

Also, right now progressivism is more of a religion than not anyway. You have your heretics, your high priests (AOC be praised) and a slavish need to see those opposed to you as evil.

thanks for the chuckle.

Of course the problem with that is this:

If you're a male working for Bank of America and are picked to head up the new office in Mobile, you pack up and leave if you want the job. No problemo, take the promotion.

If you're a female working for Bank of American and are picked to head up the new office in Mobile, you have to decide if you want to practice abstinence and take the promotion or pass up on it and maintain your lifestyle. Because if you get pregnant, your career is finished as you are now forced to carry the pregnancy to birth.

Or what if you're living in Alabama and a bunch of legislators decide for you that you are now bound to carry a pregnancy to term.

The you get a new job if it bothers you that much. Just like if someone would get transferred to NY and didn't want to pay the onerous taxes.

And I do think they invented something called birth control....

Also, if you are the office manager in Mobile you could probably afford to go to another State to get your abortion. One thing I do not agree with is a law that would punish someone for doing something out of State that is banned in State. That is a violation of State sovereignty, that covers the land of the State, not the people when they are not in the State.

hell progressive groups could form charities to handle paying for the trips.

Again, this is something that would never be asked of the male gender. For women the specter of a bunch of politicians stating what you can do with your body is a bit more personal. I would ask you to give it some thought but clearly, you’re not much into the whole thinking business.

Considering the male gender doesn't have a "choice" anyway in this situation, I honestly don't care.

There are plenty of pro-life women who understand exactly the point you are making, and they are still pro-life. Why do you have to frame this as a "all-men" vs "all-women" conflict?

Oh, right, because hacks gotta hack.

Being a male and a trump supporter, caring is probably too much to ask of you.

As for the supposed “conflict”, it’s a construct of your imagination. About 90% of catholic women practice contraception which was and likely still is antithetical to Church teachings. Women pretty much know the score when it comes to a bunch of people in state capitols making their healthcare decisions. This is why the contraception is used in the first place.

It’s a pretty easy scenario to understand. I’m sure if you try, you could too.

You equate caring with government overreach, or following progressive matras, typical.

Why did you have to shift to contraception of Catholics? I stated there are plenty of pro-life women, and you saw fit to ignore that?

Dodge, duck dip, dive, and dodge.

 

[ptbw forever]

No, it really isn't. A business isn't a religion. Thanks for your opinion on it, but that's all it is, your opinion. The interpretation by the SCOTUS is very different.

A business is not a citizen and does not have religious rights
If it wants to close on Sunday or any other day, they are entitled. If they want to discriminate they must follow the law

A person still retains constitutional rights even if they want to sell something. Nice strawman attempt, but fail.

So Churches can be forced to perform Same sex wedding ceremonies?

A church is not a business knucklehead

A person can hate any group he wants. But once he opens a business, that BUSINESS must comply with local laws

Why does a person automatically lose their constitutional rights when they try to sell something?

Why is free exercise limited only to Churches (in your opinion).

When we tore down your "Whites Only" signs you racist bigoted assfuck.

Too bad you put up “blacks only” signs in their place and forfeited the debate....

 

[g5000]

They may not approve of his life, but unlike the democrats, he will not go after what is important in THEIR lives. Democrats offer nothing to Evangelicals except more attacks on their beliefs and lives.

Voting for a thrice-married, twice divorced man known for extramarital affairs, cavorting with Playboy models, vulgar talk, and an itchy Twitter trigger finger — to say nothing of the accusations of racism and sexual harassment or worse against Trump — certainly opens socially conservative Christians up to charges of hypocrisy. It also arguably makes it harder to reach other Americans, including young people, with their religious missions, or work with fellow Christians in communities of color.

But these consequences pale in comparison to voting for a party that stands opposed to the issues nearest to conservative Christians' hearts. As conservative Christian commentator Erick Erickson put it, the Democratic Party "offers me no home and is deeply hostile to people of faith. The president has shown himself to not share my faith convictions any more than the other side, but the president has shown he is willing to defend my faith convictions and is supportive of them."


Erickson didn't vote for Trump in 2016, but announced earlier this month that he plans to do so in 2020. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee was one of the most steadfast "Never Trump" social conservatives. He too has said he will endorse Trump in 2020.

Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

Of course they won't. They are a bunch of hypocrites.

Only god can judge that.

That's never stopped any of you hypocrites from judging the Clintons and Obama.

 

[Cecilie1200]

They may not approve of his life, but unlike the democrats, he will not go after what is important in THEIR lives. Democrats offer nothing to Evangelicals except more attacks on their beliefs and lives.

Voting for a thrice-married, twice divorced man known for extramarital affairs, cavorting with Playboy models, vulgar talk, and an itchy Twitter trigger finger — to say nothing of the accusations of racism and sexual harassment or worse against Trump — certainly opens socially conservative Christians up to charges of hypocrisy. It also arguably makes it harder to reach other Americans, including young people, with their religious missions, or work with fellow Christians in communities of color.

But these consequences pale in comparison to voting for a party that stands opposed to the issues nearest to conservative Christians' hearts. As conservative Christian commentator Erick Erickson put it, the Democratic Party "offers me no home and is deeply hostile to people of faith. The president has shown himself to not share my faith convictions any more than the other side, but the president has shown he is willing to defend my faith convictions and is supportive of them."


Erickson didn't vote for Trump in 2016, but announced earlier this month that he plans to do so in 2020. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee was one of the most steadfast "Never Trump" social conservatives. He too has said he will endorse Trump in 2020.

Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

I dunno if I'd say "never". If they had a better choice, they'd probably take it. But it's a fact that they're not going to abandon Trump for anything the Dems are offering.

 

[g5000]

The Republicans could not find someone who was not a mass adulterer who lies every time he opens his mouth and defrauds seniors of their retirement nest eggs and worships a KGB thug.

They could not find an honest, decent man who is also against abortion anywhere in the whoooooooooooooole party!

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'm disappointed that Catholic bishops are still on the side of the party of infanticide . You never see a Catholic commercial regarding the policy differences between the parties.

If they did, they'd have the IRS sicced on the Church so fast your head would spin. Dems only like churches engaging in politicking when it benefits them.

 

[ptbw forever]

The Republicans could not find someone who was not a mass adulterer who lies every time he opens his mouth and defrauds seniors of their retirement nest eggs.

They could not find an honest man who is also against abortion anywhere in the whoooooooooooooole party!

You mean like Santorum....

Oh wait....

 

[martybegan]

They may not approve of his life, but unlike the democrats, he will not go after what is important in THEIR lives. Democrats offer nothing to Evangelicals except more attacks on their beliefs and lives.

Voting for a thrice-married, twice divorced man known for extramarital affairs, cavorting with Playboy models, vulgar talk, and an itchy Twitter trigger finger — to say nothing of the accusations of racism and sexual harassment or worse against Trump — certainly opens socially conservative Christians up to charges of hypocrisy. It also arguably makes it harder to reach other Americans, including young people, with their religious missions, or work with fellow Christians in communities of color.

But these consequences pale in comparison to voting for a party that stands opposed to the issues nearest to conservative Christians' hearts. As conservative Christian commentator Erick Erickson put it, the Democratic Party "offers me no home and is deeply hostile to people of faith. The president has shown himself to not share my faith convictions any more than the other side, but the president has shown he is willing to defend my faith convictions and is supportive of them."


Erickson didn't vote for Trump in 2016, but announced earlier this month that he plans to do so in 2020. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee was one of the most steadfast "Never Trump" social conservatives. He too has said he will endorse Trump in 2020.

Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

Of course they won't. They are a bunch of hypocrites.

Only god can judge that.

That's never stopped any of you hypocrites from judging the Clintons and Obama.

Criticism and judgement are two different things. Progressives was to enforce consequences for their criticisms, thus judgements they become.

 

[g5000]

I cheated on all three wives. I was a registered Democrat until a few years ago. I called for us to cut and run from Iraq. I called for Bush to be impeached for lying about WMDs in Iraq. I was a personal friend of Nancy Pelosi who I liked very much. I was a personal friend of Bill Clinton. I donated 80 percent of my contributions to pro-abortion Democrats. My entire family donated to Chuck Schumer's first three Senate races. I'm spending more every year than any President in history. And I'm the best guy the Republicans could find! All the rest of them are RINOs!

 

[Cecilie1200]

Actually, I think Conservative Christians should all embrace the party that sanctions infanticide, and gay marriage, promotes sloth, envy, sexual promiscuity, reproductive irresponsibility, and greed, abhors traditional marriage and sexuality, and is openly antagonistic to traditional religious institutions, demanding that they accept their perverted world view or lose their tax-exempt status.

Don't you?

They are embracing the Party of racism and misogyny, which promotes anti-family policies, and the transfer of wealth to the 1% at the expense of the poor and the middle class. A party which increases poverty, and which promotes policies making it impossible for workers to care for their family without government support. I'm sure that Jesus, who said it is more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven, than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, who said that the love of money was the root of all evil, and who said that poor shall inherit the earth, would vote for the party of hate, repression and greed - NOT!

"They are embracing the party I'M JUST SURE thinks this stuff, never mind that I don't know shit about the country and I'm not even in it, I KNOW that this is what Catholics should agree with, because I'M AN EXPERT ON EVERYTHING by my ability to imagine things and assume they're true."

Thanks for sharing your usual serving of nothing and bullshit. I know we were all eager to have you inform us of your vastly ignorant prejudices stated as fact.

In other news, why aren't you pestering people about your own country's politics, instead of trying to dictate them for a country you don't live in and know nothing about? Oh, that's right. Because your country doesn't matter.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Fully propagandized Catholics (like me) are extremely uncomfortable with the concept of "being saved," which is de riguer with Evangelicals. We like to think that being saved is a lifetime quest, decided finally at the moment of death.

Other than that, I think Micks and Bible thumpers should be able to get along reasonably well.

However many doctrinal differences Catholics and Protestants have, we ought to all be able to recognize that we still have more in common with each other than we ever could with non-believers.

 

[martybegan]

The Republicans could not find someone who was not a mass adulterer who lies every time he opens his mouth and defrauds seniors of their retirement nest eggs and worships a KGB thug.

They could not find an honest, decent man who is also against abortion anywhere in the whoooooooooooooole party!

They had a primary, he won the primary.

Only the Democrats feel the need to rig their primary, but I have a feeling the RINO's and Never Trumpers wish they had rigged the Republican one.

 

[Cecilie1200]

They may not approve of his life, but unlike the democrats, he will not go after what is important in THEIR lives. Democrats offer nothing to Evangelicals except more attacks on their beliefs and lives.

Voting for a thrice-married, twice divorced man known for extramarital affairs, cavorting with Playboy models, vulgar talk, and an itchy Twitter trigger finger — to say nothing of the accusations of racism and sexual harassment or worse against Trump — certainly opens socially conservative Christians up to charges of hypocrisy. It also arguably makes it harder to reach other Americans, including young people, with their religious missions, or work with fellow Christians in communities of color.

But these consequences pale in comparison to voting for a party that stands opposed to the issues nearest to conservative Christians' hearts. As conservative Christian commentator Erick Erickson put it, the Democratic Party "offers me no home and is deeply hostile to people of faith. The president has shown himself to not share my faith convictions any more than the other side, but the president has shown he is willing to defend my faith convictions and is supportive of them."


Erickson didn't vote for Trump in 2016, but announced earlier this month that he plans to do so in 2020. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee was one of the most steadfast "Never Trump" social conservatives. He too has said he will endorse Trump in 2020.

Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

So not even religious beliefs are enough to get people to look past the duopoly?

Not sure how religious beliefs magically give you a third choice.

 

[ptbw forever]

I cheated on all three wives. I was a registered Democrat until a few years ago. I called for us to cut and run from Iraq. I called for Bush to be impeached for lying about WMDs in Iraq. I was a personal friend of Nancy Pelosi who I liked very much. I was a personal friend of Bill Clinton. I donated 80 percent of my contributions to pro-abortion Democrats. My entire family donated to Chuck Schumer's first three Senate races. I'm spending more every year than any President in history. And I'm the best guy the Republicans could find! All the rest of them are RINOs!

I wonder what kind of candidates Democrats would run if the far right controlled everything and the media was constantly looking to destroy any decent people who ran as Democrats.....

 

[Cecilie1200]

Actually, I think Conservative Christians should all embrace the party that sanctions infanticide, and gay marriage, promotes sloth, envy, sexual promiscuity, reproductive irresponsibility, and greed, abhors traditional marriage and sexuality, and is openly antagonistic to traditional religious institutions, demanding that they accept their perverted world view or lose their tax-exempt status.

Don't you?

There is no sanctification of infanticide unless you are talking about warfare...

"I'll just deny that your beliefs even exist, and that will make it true."

Yeah, go with that. That'll work.

 

[Cecilie1200]

They may not approve of his life, but unlike the democrats, he will not go after what is important in THEIR lives. Democrats offer nothing to Evangelicals except more attacks on their beliefs and lives.

Voting for a thrice-married, twice divorced man known for extramarital affairs, cavorting with Playboy models, vulgar talk, and an itchy Twitter trigger finger — to say nothing of the accusations of racism and sexual harassment or worse against Trump — certainly opens socially conservative Christians up to charges of hypocrisy. It also arguably makes it harder to reach other Americans, including young people, with their religious missions, or work with fellow Christians in communities of color.

But these consequences pale in comparison to voting for a party that stands opposed to the issues nearest to conservative Christians' hearts. As conservative Christian commentator Erick Erickson put it, the Democratic Party "offers me no home and is deeply hostile to people of faith. The president has shown himself to not share my faith convictions any more than the other side, but the president has shown he is willing to defend my faith convictions and is supportive of them."


Erickson didn't vote for Trump in 2016, but announced earlier this month that he plans to do so in 2020. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee was one of the most steadfast "Never Trump" social conservatives. He too has said he will endorse Trump in 2020.

Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

Talk about arrogance.

Now you presuppose to speak for millions of people whom you have never even met about what they will feel for years to come.

Oh, yeah, because THAT doesn't happen from every damned side of every damned issue. God knows, leftists NEVER attempt to speak for what millions of people think and want and need.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Evangelicals are no better than anyone else their opinion doesn't prove their piety nor does it improve their political power...It is just another groan from a dying dinosaur..

Yeah, and "Well, you're no better than anyone else and your beliefs are dying! So THERE!" is definitely a winning strategy for getting votes. You should totally say that as much as possible. You don't need no stinking votes from no stinking people who insist on believing things you don't like.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Actually, I think Conservative Christians should all embrace the party that sanctions infanticide, and gay marriage, promotes sloth, envy, sexual promiscuity, reproductive irresponsibility, and greed, abhors traditional marriage and sexuality, and is openly antagonistic to traditional religious institutions, demanding that they accept their perverted world view or lose their tax-exempt status.

Don't you?

They are embracing the Party of racism and misogyny, which promotes anti-family policies, and the transfer of wealth to the 1% at the expense of the poor and the middle class. A party which increases poverty, and which promotes policies making it impossible for workers to care for their family without government support. I'm sure that Jesus, who said it is more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven, than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, who said that the love of money was the root of all evil, and who said that poor shall inherit the earth, would vote for the party of hate, repression and greed - NOT!

So they should support a party that shits on their religious beliefs, forces them to not just tolerate, but accept lifestyles they do not approve of, and enforces an open hositlity to their religion in schools and the public square?

And can it with the ist/ic/ism bullshit. You are just as bigoted as the most virulent KKK asshole, but because you are bigoted against "approved" groups, you think you get a pass.

As long as Democrats are the party of "BAKE THAT FUCKING CAKE, PEASANT" they will not have the support of the most Religious people in this country.

They also lose people like me, who while not religious, don't have the deep hatred of the religious you have.

You have it backwards. The EVANGELICALS are the ones who shit on the beliefs of others, who denigrate other Christians who don't believe as they do, and who reserve the right to deny service to those they deem unworthy. They ignore Jesus commandment to "Love one another as I have loved you", and his instruction "Judge not lest you be judged" and have determined in their own minds that some sins are worse than others. They have no prohibition on serving second marriages or adulterers, but they draw the line at homosexuals. It makes no theological sense whatsoever. Adultery is prohibited in the 10 Commandments and was punishable by stoning to death in Biblical times. But homosexuality was neither. The obvious logical conclusion is that evangelicals are hiding behind religion to discriminate against gays, just as they hide behind "private religious schools" to ensure their children aren't forced to mix with non-white children at school.

Evangelicals are using "religious freedom" to discriminate against gays and non-whites, and because the Republican agenda lets them control the sexual behaviour of women. That's while they will continue to support Republicans. Racism, misogyny and homophobia. It has nothing to do with religion.

YOU have it backwards, because you keep thinking you know something and have something to say that means something.

Blathered like a true child of a nation that doesn't have religious freedom, and doesn't even understand the concept.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Actually, I think Conservative Christians should all embrace the party that sanctions infanticide, and gay marriage, promotes sloth, envy, sexual promiscuity, reproductive irresponsibility, and greed, abhors traditional marriage and sexuality, and is openly antagonistic to traditional religious institutions, demanding that they accept their perverted world view or lose their tax-exempt status.

Don't you?

Apparently you havent read the book.

Hey, show me the quote that says we're supposed to look for religious instruction to morons who don't even share our beliefs. Because for the life of me, I don't recall God ever saying that, "Reverend" Dud.