Trump’s Favorite Pastor Claims Democrats Worship Pagan God Moloch

[RodISHI]

Another "bizarre" anti-Trump and anti-Christian post.

Clearly lying is no longer considered a sin by many Christians.

Calling it as I see it, Another "bizarre" anti-Trump and anti-Christian post.. You are free to do the same.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Is the charge that some people are literally worshiping an ancient pagan deity identified as Moloch?

Or is the claim that they are worshiping, unknowingly, the spirit of a God that specialized in child sacrifice?

Clearly, the latter. Surely, that's what Mr. Jeffress meant.

Moloch does not exist, and never has existed. It was a false got, made up by an evil cult, that murdered children in sacrifice to that false god.

I very much doubt if Mr. Jeffress intended to claim that Moloch literally exists, or that anyone today is literally worshipping it; rather, the point is that those who participate in and defend the modern murder of children do so in the evil spirit of the ancient Moloch worshippers.

 

[Lysistrata]

^ Thats exactly the kind of thing Moloch would say. Ill be keeping my eye on you.

Good to see you don't deny gods.

I gotta be honest, im not familiar with Moloch, but he sounds like a bad guy.

Well, he's not happy with Trump!

Breitbart News reported, "The Trump administration has redirected $34 million in federal family planning funds from Planned Parenthood to other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions.

"Planned Parenthood chose not to comply with the administration’s enforcement of a rule that states Title X federal funds cannot be used for abortion providers.

"The rule does not cut back family planning funds, however. Instead, it redirects them to non-abortion providers — federally qualified health care centers, which outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics 20 to one."

Bu-bu-but the National Review told me he was pro-abortion.

He has done something everyone promised: De-funded Planned Parenthood.

In fact, they de-funded themselves.

Why was there ever a "rule" that states that Title X funds cannot be used by organizations that also provide abortions or provide references for them?

Good questions. We rule ourselves in a nation of laws. All ruling authority resides in The People, who grant a bit of our authority to our representatives in Congress to write the laws we agree to live under and one of our rules is that OUR money can not be taxed from us and handed to abortion providers.

Why are there "gag rules" that are in obvious violation of the First Amendment?

Heaven Forfend! They have every right to speak and perform this procedure. All that is happening here is that they are no longer receiving federal funding to do so.

...Why are millions of dollars of federal money spent on "abstinence-only" education"? Who are these "other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions"?

They provide health services to women that do not include abortionc.

How do we know that they are legitimate and not fronts for religious proselytizing and indoctrination, like the "pregnancy crisis centers" that some states have demanded women seeking abortions visit have been?

Pregnancy crisis centers are "fronts" for proselytizing and indoctrination?

...this is a reply to someone straying from the topic of some bizarre theories of some "pastor"/politician (who knows) about the religious practices of supporters of a political party that he does not support and who is trying to align religious belief with a particular U.S. political party.

Is this "bizarre" pastor powered by federal funding or simply communicating beliefs you disagree with? Because as Americans we are dedicated to tolerating the latter, while not obligated to fund the former.

In our system, we have no Official Government Church, so, I'm not sure about your "align with a particular US political party" comment.

Federal rules should not be written to enshrine the beliefs of a particular religious group as federal law. Here, federal funds are being withheld to do just that.

Why are federal funds being spent on "abstinence-only" "education"? This is some sort of religious thing, being that it is "abstinence ONLY" rather than being integrated into comprehensive education about sex, reproductive health, and contraception. This IS government support for sectarian religion.

Which are these centers that "provide health services to women that do not include abortion"? Do they provide a full range of contraceptive services in a non-judgmental atmosphere, or are they involved in religious proselytizing of their clients? There have been many stories told by women, who have visited either voluntarily or by force from state governments because they are seeking an abortion, that in the "pregnancy crisis centers" that they were forced to watch religious-oriented videos, were asked probing questions about their personal lives, and were even lectured about "morality." Note that the state governments were complicit in forcing women to these indoctrination centers.

This clown jeffress is deliberately trying to identify the Christian faith with the republican party. Read his quotes. The fact that the buffoons in the White House lap up his shit is what is scary. The federal government has no business sucking up to a sectarian religious cult at the expense of the rest of us. It is supposed to be neutral in matters of religion.

 

[RodISHI]

Is the charge that some people are literally worshiping an ancient pagan deity identified as Moloch?

Or is the claim that they are worshiping, unknowingly, the spirit of a God that specialized in child sacrifice?

Clearly, the latter. Surely, that's what Mr. Jeffress meant.

Moloch does not exist, and never has existed. It was a false got, made up by an evil cult, that murdered children in sacrifice to that false god.

I very much doubt if Mr. Jeffress intended to claim that Moloch literally exists, or that anyone today is literally worshipping it; rather, the point is that those who participate in and defend the modern murder of children do so in the evil spirit of the ancient Moloch worshipers.

This is a good reference for those who are interested in the history and etymology of the name or reference.

The amazing name Moloch: meaning and etymology
Excerpts
...The name Moloch occurs only once in the Bible, although it's the Greek version of the Hebrew name ... (Molech), which occurs a few more times. Moloch is mentioned in Acts 7:43, where Stephen quotes Amos 5:25-27, in which the Lord foretells Judah's (or rather: Israel at large) exile to Babylon...

Moloch was the horrifying deity of the Ammonites, whose worship entailed the sacrifice by fire of living children. This was obviously forbidden by the Law of YHWH, the Lord of Life (Leviticus 18:21) but the Israelites did it anyway. No one less than king Solomon built a center of worship for Moloch (1 Kings 11:7) but three centuries later, it was demolished by king Josiah (2 Kings 23:10). See for more details our article on the name Molech...

...An Aramaic cognate verb ... (malak) means to consult, which confirms that the concept of royalty indeed evolved from wisdom and intellectual prowess rather than brute physical or political strength, as is commonly suggested.

 

[RodISHI]

Good to see you don't deny gods.

I gotta be honest, im not familiar with Moloch, but he sounds like a bad guy.

Well, he's not happy with Trump!

Breitbart News reported, "The Trump administration has redirected $34 million in federal family planning funds from Planned Parenthood to other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions.

"Planned Parenthood chose not to comply with the administration’s enforcement of a rule that states Title X federal funds cannot be used for abortion providers.

"The rule does not cut back family planning funds, however. Instead, it redirects them to non-abortion providers — federally qualified health care centers, which outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics 20 to one."

Bu-bu-but the National Review told me he was pro-abortion.

He has done something everyone promised: De-funded Planned Parenthood.

In fact, they de-funded themselves.

Why was there ever a "rule" that states that Title X funds cannot be used by organizations that also provide abortions or provide references for them?

Good questions. We rule ourselves in a nation of laws. All ruling authority resides in The People, who grant a bit of our authority to our representatives in Congress to write the laws we agree to live under and one of our rules is that OUR money can not be taxed from us and handed to abortion providers.

Why are there "gag rules" that are in obvious violation of the First Amendment?

Heaven Forfend! They have every right to speak and perform this procedure. All that is happening here is that they are no longer receiving federal funding to do so.

...Why are millions of dollars of federal money spent on "abstinence-only" education"? Who are these "other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions"?

They provide health services to women that do not include abortionc.

How do we know that they are legitimate and not fronts for religious proselytizing and indoctrination, like the "pregnancy crisis centers" that some states have demanded women seeking abortions visit have been?

Pregnancy crisis centers are "fronts" for proselytizing and indoctrination?

...this is a reply to someone straying from the topic of some bizarre theories of some "pastor"/politician (who knows) about the religious practices of supporters of a political party that he does not support and who is trying to align religious belief with a particular U.S. political party.

Is this "bizarre" pastor powered by federal funding or simply communicating beliefs you disagree with? Because as Americans we are dedicated to tolerating the latter, while not obligated to fund the former.

In our system, we have no Official Government Church, so, I'm not sure about your "align with a particular US political party" comment.

Federal rules should not be written to enshrine the beliefs of a particular religious group as federal law. Here, federal funds are being withheld to do just that.

Why are federal funds being spent on "abstinence-only" "education"? This is some sort of religious thing, being that it is "abstinence ONLY" rather than being integrated into comprehensive education about sex, reproductive health, and contraception. This IS government support for sectarian religion.

Which are these centers that "provide health services to women that do not include abortion"? Do they provide a full range of contraceptive services in a non-judgmental atmosphere, or are they involved in religious proselytizing of their clients? There have been many stories told by women, who have visited either voluntarily or by force from state governments because they are seeking an abortion, that in the "pregnancy crisis centers" that they were forced to watch religious-oriented videos, were asked probing questions about their personal lives, and were even lectured about "morality." Note that the state governments were complicit in forcing women to these indoctrination centers.

This clown jeffress is deliberately trying to identify the Christian faith with the republican party. Read his quotes. The fact that the buffoons in the White House lap up his shit is what is scary. The federal government has no business sucking up to a sectarian religious cult at the expense of the rest of us. It is supposed to be neutral in matters of religion.

Regardless of religion many of us "we the people" are unwilling to accept the agendas pushed by abortionist, and their goons, etc. or pay one red cent towards any organization that does with our tax dollars. Just because we also believe in a higher power and consequences for complicity doesn't mean you or anyone else gets to over rule us with your off the wall crap. If you want an abortion do it to yourself. There are many ways to do that including natural means. Democrats threw God out of their platform so many Christians left the leftist party for the Republican party or went full blown independent. If that binds your panties up to f'ing bad.

 

[Pellinore]

Another "bizarre" anti-Trump and anti-Christian post.

How is it anti Christian? I would think that invoking Pagan gods is anti Christian. Do you think that Jeffress represents Christianity? For that matter does T-Rump ?

President Trump is the President of the United States. He says he is a Christian. It makes no difference what I think concerning his religious type choice. Many are Christians yet they have not lived their lives in perfection and that is because they are still a work in progress. I do think for the time he is and was the best choice for president given to the people which is not a reflection of his beliefs or faith as God rules the hearts of men. Per Jeffress, I do not know him but per Democrats worshiping Moloch as you say in your post he may have a very good point there when babes in the wombs are sacrificed and the cells are used in everything from vaccines to soda pop and Stars Bucks Coffee.

That is quite an unhinged ridiculous rant Bubba. !! Baby parts in vaccines and soda pop?? Yup. I can see how you would be a Trump supporter

So you say.


Use of Aborted Fetal Tissue in Vaccines and Medical Research Obscures the Value of All Human Life. - PubMed - NCBI

Senomyx - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Senomyx
Senomyx is an American biotechnology company working toward developing additives to ... HEK293 cells are a cell line widely used in biological and medical research, immortalised through a genetic modification ... We also expect expanded commercialization of food products containing our savory flavor ingredients and ...


Fighting Agenda21: February 2018
Every time you purchase mass-produced processed "food" from the likes of Kraft, PepsiCo, or Nest-lee, you're choosing, whether you realize it or not, to feed your family not only genetically engineered poisons and chemical additives, but also various flavoring agents manufactured using the tissue of aborted human babies.

It's true: A company based out of California, known as Senomyx, is in the business of using aborted embryonic cells to test fake flavoring chemicals, both savory and sweet, which are then added to things like soft drinks, candy and cookies. And Senomyx has admittedly partnered with a number of major food manufacturers to lace its cannibalistic additives into all sorts of factory foods scarfed down by millions of American consumers every single day.

Known as "HEK-293," the aborted human fetal cell line used by Senomyx is manipulated to evaluate how the human palate will react to synthetic flavors used in the production of processed foods. Since most processed foods on the market today are hardly food to begin with, and typically lack any real flavor or appeal on their own, chemical companies like Senomyx are hired to develop artificial ones (which are often deceptively labeled as "natural flavors") in order to make them taste like real food.

A college student's abstract, a Wikipedia page, and a blog are not exactly the most impervious of sources.

Also, you're even misreading that. The Wikipedia page points out that "No human taste receptors are used as ingredients in any flavourings." By that info anyway, the cells aren't used "in" anything.

Personally, I'd be open to hearing more, but you've got to find better sources.

 

[22lcidw]

Good to see you don't deny gods.

I gotta be honest, im not familiar with Moloch, but he sounds like a bad guy.

Well, he's not happy with Trump!

Breitbart News reported, "The Trump administration has redirected $34 million in federal family planning funds from Planned Parenthood to other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions.

"Planned Parenthood chose not to comply with the administration’s enforcement of a rule that states Title X federal funds cannot be used for abortion providers.

"The rule does not cut back family planning funds, however. Instead, it redirects them to non-abortion providers — federally qualified health care centers, which outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics 20 to one."

Bu-bu-but the National Review told me he was pro-abortion.

He has done something everyone promised: De-funded Planned Parenthood.

In fact, they de-funded themselves.

Why was there ever a "rule" that states that Title X funds cannot be used by organizations that also provide abortions or provide references for them?

Good questions. We rule ourselves in a nation of laws. All ruling authority resides in The People, who grant a bit of our authority to our representatives in Congress to write the laws we agree to live under and one of our rules is that OUR money can not be taxed from us and handed to abortion providers.

Why are there "gag rules" that are in obvious violation of the First Amendment?

Heaven Forfend! They have every right to speak and perform this procedure. All that is happening here is that they are no longer receiving federal funding to do so.

...Why are millions of dollars of federal money spent on "abstinence-only" education"? Who are these "other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions"?

They provide health services to women that do not include abortionc.

How do we know that they are legitimate and not fronts for religious proselytizing and indoctrination, like the "pregnancy crisis centers" that some states have demanded women seeking abortions visit have been?

Pregnancy crisis centers are "fronts" for proselytizing and indoctrination?

...this is a reply to someone straying from the topic of some bizarre theories of some "pastor"/politician (who knows) about the religious practices of supporters of a political party that he does not support and who is trying to align religious belief with a particular U.S. political party.

Is this "bizarre" pastor powered by federal funding or simply communicating beliefs you disagree with? Because as Americans we are dedicated to tolerating the latter, while not obligated to fund the former.

In our system, we have no Official Government Church, so, I'm not sure about your "align with a particular US political party" comment.

Federal rules should not be written to enshrine the beliefs of a particular religious group as federal law. Here, federal funds are being withheld to do just that.

Why are federal funds being spent on "abstinence-only" "education"? This is some sort of religious thing, being that it is "abstinence ONLY" rather than being integrated into comprehensive education about sex, reproductive health, and contraception. This IS government support for sectarian religion.

Which are these centers that "provide health services to women that do not include abortion"? Do they provide a full range of contraceptive services in a non-judgmental atmosphere, or are they involved in religious proselytizing of their clients? There have been many stories told by women, who have visited either voluntarily or by force from state governments because they are seeking an abortion, that in the "pregnancy crisis centers" that they were forced to watch religious-oriented videos, were asked probing questions about their personal lives, and were even lectured about "morality." Note that the state governments were complicit in forcing women to these indoctrination centers.

This clown jeffress is deliberately trying to identify the Christian faith with the republican party. Read his quotes. The fact that the buffoons in the White House lap up his shit is what is scary. The federal government has no business sucking up to a sectarian religious cult at the expense of the rest of us. It is supposed to be neutral in matters of religion.

When taxes were lower it did not mean a difference. But totalitarian tax stealing means the government is god.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Is the charge that some people are literally worshiping an ancient pagan deity identified as Moloch?

Or is the claim that they are worshiping, unknowingly, the spirit of a God that specialized in child sacrifice?

Clearly, the latter. Surely, that's what Mr. Jeffress meant.

Moloch does not exist, and never has existed. It was a false got, made up by an evil cult, that murdered children in sacrifice to that false god.

I very much doubt if Mr. Jeffress intended to claim that Moloch literally exists, or that anyone today is literally worshipping it; rather, the point is that those who participate in and defend the modern murder of children do so in the evil spirit of the ancient Moloch worshipers.

This is a good reference for those who are interested in the history and etymology of the name or reference.

The amazing name Moloch: meaning and etymology
Excerpts
...The name Moloch occurs only once in the Bible, although it's the Greek version of the Hebrew name ... (Molech), which occurs a few more times. Moloch is mentioned in Acts 7:43, where Stephen quotes Amos 5:25-27, in which the Lord foretells Judah's (or rather: Israel at large) exile to Babylon...

Moloch was the horrifying deity of the Ammonites, whose worship entailed the sacrifice by fire of living children. This was obviously forbidden by the Law of YHWH, the Lord of Life (Leviticus 18:21) but the Israelites did it anyway. No one less than king Solomon built a center of worship for Moloch (1 Kings 11:7) but three centuries later, it was demolished by king Josiah (2 Kings 23:10). See for more details our article on the name Molech...

...An Aramaic cognate verb ... (malak) means to consult, which confirms that the concept of royalty indeed evolved from wisdom and intellectual prowess rather than brute physical or political strength, as is commonly suggested.

Today the left calls Molech, "Choice"

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Today the left calls Molech, "Choice"

Sacrificing children has been a custom of the truly evil throughout the ages. Planned Parenthood aborts, hacks up the bodies and sells off the parts all without a single word of protest or outrage from the left.

How does someone become so dead inside they support such an organization? Every group does some good.
In the abortion business that is greatly outweighed by the evil.

 

[Zorro!]

I gotta be honest, im not familiar with Moloch, but he sounds like a bad guy.

Well, he's not happy with Trump!

Breitbart News reported, "The Trump administration has redirected $34 million in federal family planning funds from Planned Parenthood to other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions.

"Planned Parenthood chose not to comply with the administration’s enforcement of a rule that states Title X federal funds cannot be used for abortion providers.

"The rule does not cut back family planning funds, however. Instead, it redirects them to non-abortion providers — federally qualified health care centers, which outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics 20 to one."

Bu-bu-but the National Review told me he was pro-abortion.

He has done something everyone promised: De-funded Planned Parenthood.

In fact, they de-funded themselves.

Why was there ever a "rule" that states that Title X funds cannot be used by organizations that also provide abortions or provide references for them?

Good questions. We rule ourselves in a nation of laws. All ruling authority resides in The People, who grant a bit of our authority to our representatives in Congress to write the laws we agree to live under and one of our rules is that OUR money can not be taxed from us and handed to abortion providers.

Why are there "gag rules" that are in obvious violation of the First Amendment?

Heaven Forfend! They have every right to speak and perform this procedure. All that is happening here is that they are no longer receiving federal funding to do so.

...Why are millions of dollars of federal money spent on "abstinence-only" education"? Who are these "other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions"?

They provide health services to women that do not include abortionc.

How do we know that they are legitimate and not fronts for religious proselytizing and indoctrination, like the "pregnancy crisis centers" that some states have demanded women seeking abortions visit have been?

Pregnancy crisis centers are "fronts" for proselytizing and indoctrination?

...this is a reply to someone straying from the topic of some bizarre theories of some "pastor"/politician (who knows) about the religious practices of supporters of a political party that he does not support and who is trying to align religious belief with a particular U.S. political party.

Is this "bizarre" pastor powered by federal funding or simply communicating beliefs you disagree with? Because as Americans we are dedicated to tolerating the latter, while not obligated to fund the former.

In our system, we have no Official Government Church, so, I'm not sure about your "align with a particular US political party" comment.

Federal rules should not be written to enshrine the beliefs of a particular religious group as federal law. Here, federal funds are being withheld to do just that.

Why are federal funds being spent on "abstinence-only" "education"? This is some sort of religious thing, being that it is "abstinence ONLY" rather than being integrated into comprehensive education about sex, reproductive health, and contraception. This IS government support for sectarian religion.

Which are these centers that "provide health services to women that do not include abortion"? Do they provide a full range of contraceptive services in a non-judgmental atmosphere, or are they involved in religious proselytizing of their clients? There have been many stories told by women, who have visited either voluntarily or by force from state governments because they are seeking an abortion, that in the "pregnancy crisis centers" that they were forced to watch religious-oriented videos, were asked probing questions about their personal lives, and were even lectured about "morality." Note that the state governments were complicit in forcing women to these indoctrination centers.

This clown jeffress is deliberately trying to identify the Christian faith with the republican party. Read his quotes. The fact that the buffoons in the White House lap up his shit is what is scary. The federal government has no business sucking up to a sectarian religious cult at the expense of the rest of us. It is supposed to be neutral in matters of religion.

When taxes were lower it did not mean a difference. But totalitarian tax stealing means the government is god.

I can make no sense of what you are attempting to communicate. Please rephrase and elaborate.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Update,,,,,the disease spreads

Too extreme for Fox News: Todd Starnes, a deplorable Christian extremist who hates gays, Muslims, Democrats, and the separation of church and state, has been fired by Fox News.

Moloch's Revenge: Fox News Fires Christian Extremist Todd Starnes

Starnes is paradigmatic of the Christian extremist. In the past the conservative Christian propagandist has argued that Jesus would love American snipers who kill “godless” Muslims; blamed the Devil, pornography, and church state separation for the school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida; and claimed that Disney is persecuting Christians.

Earlier this week Starnes was caught agreeing with Trump-loving Pastor Robert Jeffress that Democrats worship Moloch, the demon god of the Old Testament.

 

[xband]

Another bizarre rant from the pastor who predicted civil war if Trump is impeached.

Progressive Secular Humanist -

Demons for Democrats: Robert Jeffress, Texas megachurch pastor and one of Trump’s closest spiritual advisors, claims Democrats worship Moloch, the demon god of the Old Testament.

Who?? Moloch?

This Democrat for one never heard of Moloch and I'm sure that most have not.

Jeffress is a dangerous idiot. The attempt to literally demonize Democrats is childish and unAmerican, as is the assumption that everyone must worship some god.

And while Jeffress may be an idiot, he manages to influence the thinking of President Donald Trump, the Idiot-in-chief.

Folks, this is the type of person who has Trumps ear. Republicans: Please explain how that is not downright scary ?

All Pastors are Hedonists.

 

[Zorro!]

Good to see you don't deny gods.

I gotta be honest, im not familiar with Moloch, but he sounds like a bad guy.

Well, he's not happy with Trump!

Breitbart News reported, "The Trump administration has redirected $34 million in federal family planning funds from Planned Parenthood to other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions.

"Planned Parenthood chose not to comply with the administration’s enforcement of a rule that states Title X federal funds cannot be used for abortion providers.

"The rule does not cut back family planning funds, however. Instead, it redirects them to non-abortion providers — federally qualified health care centers, which outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics 20 to one."

Bu-bu-but the National Review told me he was pro-abortion.

He has done something everyone promised: De-funded Planned Parenthood.

In fact, they de-funded themselves.

Why was there ever a "rule" that states that Title X funds cannot be used by organizations that also provide abortions or provide references for them?

Good questions. We rule ourselves in a nation of laws. All ruling authority resides in The People, who grant a bit of our authority to our representatives in Congress to write the laws we agree to live under and one of our rules is that OUR money can not be taxed from us and handed to abortion providers.

Why are there "gag rules" that are in obvious violation of the First Amendment?

Heaven Forfend! They have every right to speak and perform this procedure. All that is happening here is that they are no longer receiving federal funding to do so.

...Why are millions of dollars of federal money spent on "abstinence-only" education"? Who are these "other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions"?

They provide health services to women that do not include abortionc.

How do we know that they are legitimate and not fronts for religious proselytizing and indoctrination, like the "pregnancy crisis centers" that some states have demanded women seeking abortions visit have been?

Pregnancy crisis centers are "fronts" for proselytizing and indoctrination?

...this is a reply to someone straying from the topic of some bizarre theories of some "pastor"/politician (who knows) about the religious practices of supporters of a political party that he does not support and who is trying to align religious belief with a particular U.S. political party.

Is this "bizarre" pastor powered by federal funding or simply communicating beliefs you disagree with? Because as Americans we are dedicated to tolerating the latter, while not obligated to fund the former.

In our system, we have no Official Government Church, so, I'm not sure about your "align with a particular US political party" comment.

Federal rules should not be written to enshrine the beliefs of a particular religious group as federal law. Here, federal funds are being withheld to do just that...

No. US LAW prevents using taxpayer money for abortion. That is perfectly proper and reasonable.

... Why are federal funds being spent on "abstinence-only" "education"?...

If you want that prohibited then convince a majority of both Houses and the President.

... This is some sort of religious thing, being that it is "abstinence ONLY" rather than being integrated into comprehensive education about sex, reproductive health, and contraception. This IS government support for sectarian religion...

You are heading off into the weeds. If you think the duly passed law that US taxpayers may not be required to fund abortions is unconstitutional, then take it to court.

In Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, 582 U.S. (2017), a State grant program to improve playground surfaces so that when kids fell off a piece of equipment that they didn't injure themselves, could not be provided to a religious school, even though grants were also provided to non-religious group, violating the freedom of religion guaranteed by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

This wasn't even a close call by the Court, but a 7-2 decision finding that the state violated the First Amendment by denying a public benefit to an otherwise eligible recipient solely on account of its religious status, calling it "odious to our Constitution" to exclude the church from the grant program.

In this case, funding is being withheld, not due to their religious beliefs, but because we do not use taxpayer money to fund abortions in this nation, and haven't for probably 40 years.

... Which are these centers that "provide health services to women that do not include abortion"? Do they provide a full range of contraceptive services in a non-judgmental atmosphere, or are they involved in religious proselytizing of their clients?...

If you have a position to make and support, make and support it.

... There have been many stories told by women, who have visited either voluntarily or by force from state governments...

"By Force"? What are you talking about?

... state governments were complicit in forcing women to these indoctrination centers...

It's your claim, support it.

... This clown jeffress is deliberately trying to identify the Christian faith with the republican party...

He has the right to free speech and free exercise, he can attribute the faith to red headed martians. We tolerate folks believing as they like and expressing those views as will, in this nation. Are you aware of what it means to be an American? Do you understand that it demands tolerance of the voicing of views you disagree with? The kind of society with the policing of thought belief and actions that you folks seem to want boggles the mind. Here is something that will save you a LOT of frustration:

We are a 50/50 nation, neither side holds power for very long. All these legal coercive systems you want to use on your opponents, will be handed over to your opponents, probably in a decade and used against you. So use your head and do not support these coercive systems, not just because that is the right and just thing to do, but it's also the SMART thing to do.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

No. US LAW prevents using taxpayer money for abortion. That is perfectly proper and reasonable.

What law would that be??

 

[xband]

No. US LAW prevents using taxpayer money for abortion. That is perfectly proper and reasonable.

What law would that be??

2ed Amendment which has the snowflakes weeping and moaning.

 

[Meathead]

Another bizarre rant from the pastor who predicted civil war if Trump is impeached.

Progressive Secular Humanist -

Demons for Democrats: Robert Jeffress, Texas megachurch pastor and one of Trump’s closest spiritual advisors, claims Democrats worship Moloch, the demon god of the Old Testament.

Who?? Moloch?

This Democrat for one never heard of Moloch and I'm sure that most have not.

Jeffress is a dangerous idiot. The attempt to literally demonize Democrats is childish and unAmerican, as is the assumption that everyone must worship some god.

And while Jeffress may be an idiot, he manages to influence the thinking of President Donald Trump, the Idiot-in-chief.

Folks, this is the type of person who has Trumps ear. Republicans: Please explain how that is not downright scary ?

What does this have to do with buttsex?

 

[Zorro!]

No. US LAW prevents using taxpayer money for abortion. That is perfectly proper and reasonable.

What law would that be??

Hyde Amendment.

The original Hyde Amendment was passed on September 30, 1976, by the House of Representatives, by a 207–167 vote. DEMOCRATS HELD THE HOUSE AT THAT TIME. It was named for its chief sponsor, Republican Congressman Henry Hyde of Illinois.

Congress subsequently altered the Hyde Amendment several times. The version in force from 1981 until 1993 prohibited the use of federal funds for abortions "except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term."

On October 22, 1993, President Clinton signed into law the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1994. The Act contained a new version of the Hyde Amendment that expanded the category of abortions for which federal funds are available under Medicaid to include cases of rape and incest.

2016 marked the first time the Democratic platform had an explicit call to repeal the Hyde Amendment.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Well, he's not happy with Trump!

Breitbart News reported, "The Trump administration has redirected $34 million in federal family planning funds from Planned Parenthood to other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions.

"Planned Parenthood chose not to comply with the administration’s enforcement of a rule that states Title X federal funds cannot be used for abortion providers.

"The rule does not cut back family planning funds, however. Instead, it redirects them to non-abortion providers — federally qualified health care centers, which outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics 20 to one."

Bu-bu-but the National Review told me he was pro-abortion.

He has done something everyone promised: De-funded Planned Parenthood.

In fact, they de-funded themselves.

Why was there ever a "rule" that states that Title X funds cannot be used by organizations that also provide abortions or provide references for them?

Good questions. We rule ourselves in a nation of laws. All ruling authority resides in The People, who grant a bit of our authority to our representatives in Congress to write the laws we agree to live under and one of our rules is that OUR money can not be taxed from us and handed to abortion providers.

Why are there "gag rules" that are in obvious violation of the First Amendment?

Heaven Forfend! They have every right to speak and perform this procedure. All that is happening here is that they are no longer receiving federal funding to do so.

...Why are millions of dollars of federal money spent on "abstinence-only" education"? Who are these "other providers that do not perform or refer for abortions"?

They provide health services to women that do not include abortionc.

How do we know that they are legitimate and not fronts for religious proselytizing and indoctrination, like the "pregnancy crisis centers" that some states have demanded women seeking abortions visit have been?

Pregnancy crisis centers are "fronts" for proselytizing and indoctrination?

...this is a reply to someone straying from the topic of some bizarre theories of some "pastor"/politician (who knows) about the religious practices of supporters of a political party that he does not support and who is trying to align religious belief with a particular U.S. political party.

Is this "bizarre" pastor powered by federal funding or simply communicating beliefs you disagree with? Because as Americans we are dedicated to tolerating the latter, while not obligated to fund the former.

In our system, we have no Official Government Church, so, I'm not sure about your "align with a particular US political party" comment.

Federal rules should not be written to enshrine the beliefs of a particular religious group as federal law. Here, federal funds are being withheld to do just that.

Why are federal funds being spent on "abstinence-only" "education"? This is some sort of religious thing, being that it is "abstinence ONLY" rather than being integrated into comprehensive education about sex, reproductive health, and contraception. This IS government support for sectarian religion.

Which are these centers that "provide health services to women that do not include abortion"? Do they provide a full range of contraceptive services in a non-judgmental atmosphere, or are they involved in religious proselytizing of their clients? There have been many stories told by women, who have visited either voluntarily or by force from state governments because they are seeking an abortion, that in the "pregnancy crisis centers" that they were forced to watch religious-oriented videos, were asked probing questions about their personal lives, and were even lectured about "morality." Note that the state governments were complicit in forcing women to these indoctrination centers.

This clown jeffress is deliberately trying to identify the Christian faith with the republican party. Read his quotes. The fact that the buffoons in the White House lap up his shit is what is scary. The federal government has no business sucking up to a sectarian religious cult at the expense of the rest of us. It is supposed to be neutral in matters of religion.

When taxes were lower it did not mean a difference. But totalitarian tax stealing means the government is god.

I can make no sense of what you are attempting to communicate. Please rephrase and elaborate.

Makes perfect sense to me. God warned Israel when they rejected him as king and wanted a human king, the people would be burdened with outrageous taxes. This was only one warning he gave. They have all come to pass.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Another bizarre rant from the pastor who predicted civil war if Trump is impeached.

Progressive Secular Humanist -

Demons for Democrats: Robert Jeffress, Texas megachurch pastor and one of Trump’s closest spiritual advisors, claims Democrats worship Moloch, the demon god of the Old Testament.

Who?? Moloch?

This Democrat for one never heard of Moloch and I'm sure that most have not.

Jeffress is a dangerous idiot. The attempt to literally demonize Democrats is childish and unAmerican, as is the assumption that everyone must worship some god.

And while Jeffress may be an idiot, he manages to influence the thinking of President Donald Trump, the Idiot-in-chief.

Folks, this is the type of person who has Trumps ear. Republicans: Please explain how that is not downright scary ?

What does this have to do with buttsex?

 

[Meathead]

Another bizarre rant from the pastor who predicted civil war if Trump is impeached.

Progressive Secular Humanist -

Demons for Democrats: Robert Jeffress, Texas megachurch pastor and one of Trump’s closest spiritual advisors, claims Democrats worship Moloch, the demon god of the Old Testament.

Who?? Moloch?

This Democrat for one never heard of Moloch and I'm sure that most have not.

Jeffress is a dangerous idiot. The attempt to literally demonize Democrats is childish and unAmerican, as is the assumption that everyone must worship some god.

And while Jeffress may be an idiot, he manages to influence the thinking of President Donald Trump, the Idiot-in-chief.

Folks, this is the type of person who has Trumps ear. Republicans: Please explain how that is not downright scary ?

What does this have to do with buttsex?

Is that about buttsex? I don't get it. Perhaps some kind of fag foreplay?