Recently, I read an article about JK Rowling defending Donald Drumpf’s freedom of speech. She was speaking at Pen America’s annual literary Gala in New York this past May.
She stated, “If you seek the removal of freedoms from an opponent simply on the grounds that they have offended you, you have crossed a line to stand alongside tyrants who imprison, torture and kill on exactly the same justifications.”
Rowling is a “fierce opponent of censorship.” She claims that curtailing Drumpf’s right to speak diminishes her own “freedom to call him a bigot.”
However, I disagree. Freedom of speech never gives licence to be “offensive and bigoted.” I believe in freedom of speech, but I also believe in the intrinsic value of human life. And when the two values of freedom of speech and human life conflict human life always trumps.
I disagree with Drumpf. I strongly oppose Drumpf’smisogyny, racism, and violent propensities. Yes, according to the bill of rights we have the freedom of speech, press, religion and petition, but we also have the Declaration of Independence where “all men are created equal.” Freedom of speech is given in the context of a government that secures our unalienable Rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Drumpf does not see all men as equal. Watch the poem he read in March, snake poem. Just listen to him speak.
Drumpf’s Allure
I want to believe America will be better again. And the desire to better our country is not a bad desire. But good intentions are not enough. Drumpf’s rise in popularity are symptoms of societal dysfunction; something is very wrong.
I can see why so many people are drawn to him, because they are unhappy. Just as so many in the UK voted to leave the EU. People are not satisfied. People are scared. People want America to be great again. But if that means hurting and demeaning others, that is not greatness.Building a wall around the US, berating those who are non-white, bullying your enemies, etc. these are not ways to greatness. Racism shall not be tolerated.
Hitler’s Rise
How did the Nazis come to power? They were voted in legally by the masses. Why did Corrie and Betsie Ten Boom go to jail? For loving Jewish people. Hitler’s government legalized genocide and punished common acts of humanity. Hitler’s radical ethnocentrism attracted many people including churchgoers. They wanted a scapegoat. They wanted a hero. Does freedom of speech mean we tolerate fascism? I think not Ms. Rowling.
Freedom of Economics
While teaching at a high school I had a co worker who was an adamant supporter of a free capitalist economy. He was sure that everything would balance out in the end if there were no limits or government policing. Once again I disagree. Business done without ethics is dangerous. We’ve seen the atrocities of fraudulent companies like Enron where they stole from their employees and tried to bail themselves out. We need a government to ensure security. We need public accountability. A free capitalist economy is good, but there must be safeguards and accountability.
Freedom of Media
Another friend I have shared about watching the Superbowl one year. At the half time show, Justin Timberlake ripped off Janet Jackson’s top with his teeth. Throughout the whole event beer and breasts were advertised and there were commercials about erectile dysfunction.Yes, there is freedom of media, but there are also other values that must be taken into account. The value of respect and dignity for women must be present. Women are not commodities to be objectified and sold. Woman are human too. Freedom of media and press is good, but there must be boundaries and an agreed on set of human rights and morals.
Is Human Nature Good or Evil?
Freedom is vital, but it is not the only factor in decisions we make. Freedom can create hell on earth because human nature is not innocent. Malcolm Muggeridge wrote, “The depravity of man is at once the most empirically verifiable reality but at the same time the most intellectually resisted fact.”
There are many people who believe that man is good deep down. If you believe that then of course complete freedom is acceptable. But I’ve personally seen too much war and violence to hold that view. Giving humanity the benefit of the doubt is a luxury that I can no longer afford.
I believe in the freedom of speech, but I also believe in the depravity of man. Sin is very real and we must be aware of it. Drumpf’s rhetoric breeds racism and hate. It envisions the flourishing of white American males and not anyone else. However at this time in history is this the kind of country we will be? Will we vote in and support and egocentric ethnocentric selfish macho man?
Not all ideas are created equally.
And not all messages should be propagated and tolerated.
What about you? What do you think freedom of speech entails? What do you think of the US’s current presidential candidates? How do you read the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution? What do you think of the root of human nature? What do you think about universal human rights and global ethics? How would you respond?
I am weary of discussing such things. Trump is a Hitler wanna-be and if we give him power, then we may just see Holocaust II in America. I shared my thoughts on evil in my book: Evil – Confronting our inner Hitler.
ADMIN NOTE: For Chris and MJ, I added the “more” break into your articles. Also, MJ, I reformatted the font to match our normal font here.
I am not a fan of censorship because someone has to decide what ought to be censored and what ought not to be censored. I believe in democracy not because all men are so good that they can be trusted absolutely, but rather because all men are so corrupt that any one of them cannot be trusted absolutely. Censorship in practice leads to a handful of people with the power of dissemination of information- any this is dangerous for a free society. Let our moralists instruct on what is and and is not moral. Let our government remain silent on such things.
In the last 100 years we have seen in the west creation of capitalism as an ideal. It’s contrast to socialism (which led to human rights violation, genocide, and a whole host of terrible things)- created in the mind of the west an idea that capitalism was somehow foundational in the preservation of liberty and civilization. Economically free markets then must be allowed to be unfettered so that our country can be most free. This doesn’t follow, but that was the reason. It doesn’t follow because not all markets are free markets. There are a whole host of assumptions and conditions for a market to be called free- and since the rise of modern conservatism there have been increasing calls that we should remove government regulation from markets that are not free- in some misguided attempt to reach the conclusion that would occur if such a market was free. So we see wide spread opposition to regulation of financial institutions and insurance- both of which have numerous externalities which need regulation to be realized. And then to your point about ethics; a perfectly free market does not necessarily mean it will be ethical. The end goal of a capitalistic free market is one where nobody can be better off without making someone else worse off. But isn’t that the ethical thing if one person is a billionaire and the other mentally disabled? Free markets say nothing about ethics.
At any rate, if you are interested in this topic I refer you to the Armchair economist. It’s a really shocking and surprising book that explains a whole host of these kinds of things.
https://books.google.com/books?id=qTBgMMxeJ5IC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
The word censorship needs to be nuanced. I don’t mean big brother is watching you censorship. I mean the right to call out things that are wrong as wrong. To call out racism as intolerable. Which is a message that needs to be repeated constantly in our society because people don’t get it. We have become a society that values money and not morals. That’s basically what I’m trying to say. I am not trying to come up with a blue print for the US economy. You are right free markets say nothing about ethics. But in a society where values are not common or universal, ethics must be explicitly thought and written out. The world does not share a common scripture. So we must determine and draft one. Without that any free market system will fail.
I think MJ is calling for Trump to be censured rather than censored. The two terms are often confused, but there’s a big difference.
There is no perfect society, neither “free” America or Putin’s Russia. When one is free, it can be abused, which sadly it often is.
Trump’s rhetoric is abjectly horrible. In a free society you can call him out and mock him and insult him and call him Drumpf.
But in Putin’s Russia, if you call him Putrid Puking Putin publicly, you might cease to exist and no one will ever know what happened to you.
That’s my two cents.
Wow, Dr. Ben I am surprised that you took my term of endearment as “mocking and an insult.” I would have thought you would have it of as a “cute” nick name;).
I think that you must draw the line between calling someone “Drumpf.” And someone calling immigrants rapists and drug dealers.
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
–Real estate mogul Donald Trump, presidential announcement speech, June 16, 2015
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/07/08/donald-trumps-false-comments-connecting-mexican-immigrants-and-crime/
There’s a difference between criticizing a Presidential candidate and insulting a whole ethnicity group. Just as a certain group of racist fascists claimed that the Jewish people and gypsies and those of darker skin were subpar compared with the Aryan race. Maybe that’s why Trump is so popular he is giving voice to the subconscious racists propensities of our society. That American Wasps really are the best. To be American is to be golden to be destined for greatness but immigrants contaminate that ideal. Maybe that’s why there’s not more of an outrage against him; he appeals to the inner supremacist within us.
Read about the people who come to the US seeking shelter. Know their stories:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/17/opinion/sunday/were-helping-deport-kids-to-die.html?_r=0
Trump can run for President. But it’s important to know what he stands for and believes in. And we should hold him accountable and any Presidential candidate (and their supporters) accountable for the people in this country. My issue is not Trump, my issue is racism and an inconsistent value of human life. I don’t pledge allegiance to either the reds or the blues, each party has its own flaws.
There is so much extremism in the world nowadays. Donald Trump for president would not be the appropriate answer to all that – his views are like oil into the fire
I usually dislike republicans as they seem to only help the rich; trump is refreshing for opening his mouth; if bishops opened their mouths would less kids have been pedophiled? if ubf opened it’s mouth would less young be culticly damaged? if universities opened their mouths would less students be damaged? maybe America, especially American religion deserve, have earned trump: let’s openly deal with/work on real issues, rather than hide behind silence of fear & transgression
Yes, he opens his mouth, and out of it come foul language, barroom clichés, ignorance, lies and hatred. How is this good? Trump himself is rich, in which way does he care for the poor? Do you know how he treats his own employees? He is a fraud and exploiter of people, and hate preacher, nothing else.
Why don’t you like Sanders if you care for social justice?
mark, I see the validity of this: “maybe America, especially American religion deserve, have earned trump”
Trump is indeed the face of what a major part of America has become–racist, nationalistic, openly vulgar and worst of all perhaps–cultic.
Trump is a master cult leader. His actions have been intentional and precise. Always he has a distraction, keeping the eyes of America away from the real issues and hiding his actions.
At first, I too thought Trump was refreshing… he is bold and speaks his mind. But Trump goes too far. He is taking pages out of Mein Kampf and other dictator-like schemes to rise to power.
It is sad to me that the once “big tent” GOP party has become ransacked by populism and “small tent” nationalism. The GOP platform is the real danger here.
If you just look at his slogan “America First!”, and forget about all the disgusting rest, then it is already 100% clear that Trump stands opposed to everything Christianity is about. Jesus said “Love your neighbor as yourself.” This is the antithesis of everything Trump stands for. Isn’t Mexico the neighbor state of the US? And Brian is right in that Trump’s slogan eerily resembles “Deutschland Über Alles!”
i do like sanders but he didn’t make it/hilary is too status quo; sincere foul language is superior to insincere sweet lies, & political impasse is waste of time when business must get done
not sure race is such an issue; business approach “trumps” as diverse customers increase business
obviously trump’s lingo is not like jesus (although it may be like john the baptist:) but the presidency is about strong leadership to get things done; the testing point is whether he bows to corrupt overprivileged interests or works for common good
Trump gives you both: Foul language AND all kinds of lies you want to hear.
And yes, Clinton may be the worst candidate the democrats ever had. But how can that be an argument to vote for Trump instead if you’re a Christian? Why would you want to vote for a man who stands opposed to everything Christian? Even the pope felt compelled to point this out (and evangelicals do as well). Clinton may be a bad candidatate, but she never positioned herself so blatantly as a non-Christian and opposed Christian and humanist values. She also stands for womens’ rights. Would you rather want to vote for a sexist instead? Clinton may profess a watered down version of the values that Sanders stands for, but Trump stands for the antithesis of these values. So how is voting for Trump better if you share these values?
By the way, the “strongman” argument is exactly why Germans voted for Hitler (ask Brian, he’s the expert now).
And how is this about “getting things done”? Trumps only “concrete” plan is to build a wall. Everything else he says are platitudes and lies. The man has absolutely no plan and no compentence, except in being a dazzler.
Regarding John the baptist: He was a man “wearing clothes of camel’s hair, living on locusts and wild honey”. He was not a billionaire, not a peacock with a family consisting of barby dolls. Also, he told all people to repent, not only the rich ones. And people came to him in order to repent and confess their sins, not in order to hear about how they are great abd how he wants to make their country great again. He was the exact opposite of the smug Trump who tells people what they want to hear, spewing all kinds of unchristian and racist slogans and the message “we come first”. John the baptist would have told a bigoted, racist, capitalist America to repent, believe it or not. And this America does not consist of only the top few. The popularity of Trump shows that also the ordinary people have lost their moral compass. (Just to make this clear: I don’t want to single out America here. Of course John the baptist would have also called people in other countries to repent. The rise of nationalism and hostility and the erosion of solidarity is a worldwide phenomenon.)
I guess the moral compass has swung from religion which failed to enlighten & politics which failed to work, to business, people need jobs & basic community: jesus helped his carpenter dad work in this world & enlightened us to eternal values
Maybe if you are still unsure, take the following quiz:
trumporjesus.com
It illustrates the point I wanted to make very nicely.
I’ve heard multiple people express sentiments regarding Trump like Mark’s above. I just don’t get where this comes from. How is he discussing issues in a way that is actually healthy and helpful? The man is a flaming narcissist and a walking contradiction. He’ll say anything as long as it brings attention to himself. It would be comedic if he wasn’t an actual contender for u.s. president: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pqHzwdmU3Sg
Living in southern illinois (highly conservative) I have heard two main reasons people like Trump. First, they hate Hillary (and she has given them plenty of reasons). Additionally, they fear she will try to take their guns away. Second, many I have spoken with don’t believe he will (or can) do everything- but if he does even 5% of what he says that will be 5% more than what Hillary does in their eyes.
So when for example Trump says he will bring coal jobs back they like this and want to vote for him, even if Hillary is more factually accurate when she says those jobs are not coming back.
Many Trump supporters have been taught if you work hard you can have a good life, but economics pressures increasingly mean “working hard” is something like going to college and less like working in a steel plant.
What is fascinating to me is that Trumps platform of economic protectionism, geopolitical isolationism, and nativism is something out of the 19th century. This platform effectively died with Teddy Roosevelt.
religious bullies damaged us when we kindly aspired; elite bullies robbed us when we sincerely admired; it’s time to be self-acclaimed/self-assured/unrelenting bulls, pushing our (& others) way to just due
the renegade illuminati have reached the end of their abusive cord; there will no longer be business as usual benefitting only the 50 rich of the world at the expense of all others: they shall be exposed/targeted for reform
if they are recalcitrant, not obeying God’s right ways, innumerable people will unite against them & they shall incur God’s wrath
I do not intend to vote for Trump. But I live in a part of the country where there are many Trump supporters. Poverty, family breakdown and hopelessness are rampant in white small-town rural America (not just in large urban areas), and Trump’s appeal among these disaffected people is that he is the only candidate who has been speaking directly to them.
This recent article about American hillbilly culture (which has become the most widely read article ever on The American Conservative) has earned praise by readers across the ideological spectrum. If you haven’s seen it, please take a look. It gives real insight into the kinds of people who are supporting Trump. The book described in the article(Hillbilly Elegy by J.D. Vance) is fantastic. Sharon and I both loved it, and it is helping us to understand how to relate to friends, neighbors and acquaintances in our part of the world.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/trump-us-politics-poor-whites/
(If you have trouble accessing the article, be patient keep trying. So many people have been reading it that their web server has been crashing.)
interesting article, as a plumber’s son I have some affinity with hillbilly culture & at times I enjoy the supremacy of idiocy to false wisdom
trump is a tool whose time has come, privilege must deflate overprivilege so redistribution may ensue; a duke to commoners must derail hoarding overlords so that necessary pillaging may rectify gross inequities
I like your poetry, Mark! I hail from the north country of Ohio (from a town called Defiance). So I can relate to your sentiment Mark. We are sort of “civilized” hillbilly’s, where I come from.
This song tells you all you need to know about such hillbilly country mindset:
Country boys can survive
We can skin a buck and we can run a chalk line (we can build stuff).
This is a conversation that would be typical for me to hear growing up:
“I went out to cut the grass but the barn door was lopperjawed and my tractor wouldn’t start… So I went into town to buy a whatchacallit so I could jerryrig the tractor. Afterward, my old lady worshed my clothes and we watched the fireflies light up the wheat like gold bars. We sat on our davenport sipping sun tea and buds.”
I love the snub Ohio gave Trump. There is not much support for him in Ohio, even though I suspect 100% of Ohioans love Trump’s cavalier spirit. For us “civilized” hillbilly’s, we want a gentleman’s cavalier…and we blame society’s ills on the “big city life”…
Thanks, Joe. This article resonated with me in that I grew up so “upper middle class” that I didn’t realize until years after I married in the U.S. that I didn’t know any “poor people” growing up, which comprised >90% of people!
His story is something I never ever even remotely experienced: “I learned domestic strife from the moment I was born, from more than 15 stepdads and boyfriends I encountered, to the domestic violence case that nearly tore my family apart (I was the primary victim). So predictably, by the time I got married, I wasn’t a great spouse. I had to learn, with the help of my aunt and sister (both of whom had successful marriages), but especially with the help of my wife, how not to turn every small disagreement into a shouting match or a public scene. Too many conservatives look at that situation, say “well that’s a cultural problem, nothing we can do,” and then move on.”
according to reelz, chicago’s continued gangster history including bribe police/judge isn’t that long ago (& excessive force/coverup is federally certified “overfresh”); so yeah big city may not bring out people’s best (groups do what individual hesitates)
@Joe, thank you so much for sharing this article. Like Dr. Ben I am so isolated from most of the USA. Chicago is diverse in a sense, but in another sense it is not diverse. As Vance stated we all have that “basic tribalistic impulse.” I hang around those like me; I don’t rub elbows with the white working class. I don’t have many white friends.
And when I was in Springfield a couple months ago I realized that that was a much more accurate representation of Illinois and most of the US.
Vance’s comments about reverse snobbery also made me aware of it within myself. Talking to U of C and Northwestern grads can be so frustrating sometimes because of the level of vocabulary and irrelevant content of conversations. The gap between the elite and non-elite in the US is vast. Sometimes I think what’s the point of ivy league education if you can no longer talk to normal people?
Now, I am starting to understand more of the appeal of Trump. He gives voice and legitimacy to many who have been ignored/condescended by Obama and Clinton supporters. Trump “expands the scope of acceptable behavior” for those who don’t belong to the elite group.
When it comes down to it unity is important. It is imperative hear out all Americans, even the “hillbillies.” It is right that they are seen with contempt and that is despicable to God.
Theologically it brings to question who we define unity and how trinitarian our worldviews are.
One question I have from the article, though, is Mawmaw’s statement that he kept repeating, “Hillbillies are the one group of people you don’t have to be ashamed to look down upon.” Is that supposed to mean we’re supposed to look down on them I don’t understand?
The illocutionary force of Trump supporters is valid.Their emotions are real. Their pain is real. Their reasons behind their behavior are very real, but that doesn’t justify all rhetoric and behaviors and attitudes. It does help us see that something is very wrong in our society.
As an American it makes me realize how little I really know about this country.
MJ, in answer to your question:
Mamaw (as Vance described in his book) saw herself as a hillbilly. She wasn’t being critical of hillbillies. Her statement was just her observation that, throughout most strata of American society, it was socially acceptable to view hillbillies with contempt.
Sorry to say that to some in UBF it was perfectly regarded as okay to look down on “non-white sheep” as “junk sheep,” and not even bat an eyelid about it. To this day my heart aches that I did this for a couple of decades without ever thinking how horrible it is.
“Chicago is diverse in a sense, but in another sense it is not diverse.”
Yep. If your image of America is Chicago, you have not seen the heart and soul of America…America lives in the country.
Defining America is not easy task. To be American what does that mean? There are ex-refugees from Asia living here who just recently received their US citizenship but identify completely as American because no other country would take them, not even the country they were born in. They don’t know how to hunt for deer or sing country music, but I believe they are American too.
The American experience is extremely broad and extremely deep. Who is a true American other than the native Americans? To whom does this land belong too? Who’s lived here the longest? Who has the right to determine what is American and what is not American?
Even the word “American” is controversial as Canada and Mexico are part of North America. Is a hispanic immigrant who only speaks Spanish an American? Is it simply your passport? Who determines which American experience is the most authentic? Is American-ness located in only a certain part of the world or a within a certain pigment?
To be American is different to different people. My siblings and I are the first generation of both sides of my family to be born in this country. We are the first generation to speak English as our first language. To or not to be American…
Good questions. And my apologies for my country boy comments… My inner Hitler got the best of me. I am a city boy now living in Detroit. I have not lived in the country for about 30 years… and yet my country pride runs deep.
MJ makes a great point. America has never been monocultural; from the beginning it was diverse. When people speak of “real Americans” they may have a certain picture in mind (white, not highly educated, Christian, living in the South or Midwest) but only 20% of voters actually fit that description. Whenever we add requirements to what it means to be a “real American”, we inevitably leave a lot of people out.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/only-20-percent-of-voters-are-real-americans/
I am stunned that any evangelical could support Trump. I spoke with people in a conservative church here and some people from UBF and they have showed support for Trump.
I just want to point out a few things about Trump:
He appeared on the cover of playboy.
He has been married 3 times, to increasingly young women.
He could not give a favorite scripture when asked.
He could not properly cite a scripture in front of Liberty university.
He advocates killing the families of Isis sympathizers (This is a war crime)
He was for abortion and gay marriage until last year when he started running.
He has been tried and convicted of racial discrimination against his employees.
He has ran casinos.
He wants to give other countries nuclear weapons.
I mean…I just don’t know how much more anti-Christan you can get.
You might disagree with Hillary’s position on abortion and gay marriage, yet these were Trump’s same position until a year ago. Hilary held bible studies when she was first lady of Arkansas, is a faithful Methodist, and she chose a former Jesuit Missionary as her VP.
I just don’t get it. And this is just counting the traditional Evangelical platform, many of whom don’t find anything wrong with economic or social justice that was very much apart of Jesus ministry.
Yes, it is so scary how extreme the world has become on the on hand, and so boldly indifferent on the other when it comes to scrutinize Trump’s views and words. Jesus has told us clearly in the bible that the love will grow cold in many
This article and reasoning will not be popular with many but here is a response from a theologian who wrote a popular recent book on Systematic Theology: http://townhall.com/columnists/waynegrudem/2016/07/28/why-voting-for-donald-trump-is-a-morally-good-choice-n2199564 There will be many who will disagree, but this, I think, is the gist of why he supports Trump:
“I did not support Trump in the primary season. I even spoke against him at a pastors’ conference in February. But now I plan to vote for him. I do not think it is right to call him an “evil candidate.” I think rather he is a good candidate with flaws.
He is egotistical, bombastic, and brash. He often lacks nuance in his statements. Sometimes he blurts out mistaken ideas (such as bombing the families of terrorists) that he later must abandon. He insults people. He can be vindictive when people attack him. He has been slow to disown and rebuke the wrongful words and actions of some angry fringe supporters. He has been married three times and claims to have been unfaithful in his marriages. These are certainly flaws, but I don’t think they are disqualifying flaws in this election.
On the other hand, I think some of the accusations hurled against him are unjustified. His many years of business conduct show that he is not racist or anti-(legal) immigrant or anti-Semitic or misogynistic – I think these are unjust magnifications by a hostile press exaggerating some careless statements he has made. I think he is deeply patriotic and sincerely wants the best for the country. He has been an unusually successful problem solver in business. He has raised remarkable children. Many who have known him personally speak highly of his kindness, thoughtfulness, and generosity. But the main reason I call him “a good candidate with flaws” is that I think most of the policies he supports are those that will do the most good for the nation.”
Ben, to me this sounds as disusting as those who defend Samuel Lee and continuation of his “heritage” saying he, his conduct and his ideology of UBFism had only a few “flaws”.
For Jesus, if you fail to love your neighbor (like your Mexican neighbor), you miss the highest commandment. That’s not just a flaw, it’s a transgression of God’s known will and law. Christianity has a name for this, and this name is “sin”, not “flaw”. Let’s call a spade a spade.
As others have already done, you could also list all the other laws of God he is transgressing in a habitual fashion, e.g. that you should tell the truth and not lie. These are all not mere flaws. But I prefer to look at the big picture, the highest commandmend. From there everything is crystal clear. This man spreads hate, not love. He is a narcissist. He nourishes pride, not humility. He is the opposite of a Christian.
Anybody who votes for him or downplays his sins knows nothing about Christianity.
The more influential a person is, the more the person tries to manipulate other people and form their opinion, the more public they appear, the more they play leadership roles, the more serious I take their sins, and the more I detest downplaying their sins. By downplaying their sins as mere flaws you send the message that these sins are acceptable.
@forrests I agree with you 100%.
I wouldn’t tolerate his behavior in one of my 3 year old students why should it be tolerated in a presidential candidate?
I wouldn’t tolerate his behavior in any leader of any authority.
But Trump can do no wrong.
Nothing he’s done so far has brought up any red flags with his supporters.
Nothing.
Let people have what they want.
#democracy
“The presidency is a powerful job where mistakes can kill millions, and whoever holds it needs to take that power seriously and wield it responsibly.”
http://www.vox.com/2016/7/21/12218136/donald-trump-nomination-afraid
2 big no no’s for Hillary.
She’s a woman and a democrat.
She should be with her grandkids……
I find it ironic though that the red party is against abortion, but also against welfare.
They tell you to have your baby, but won’t help you care for it.
I’ll write an article on that next.
The inconsistencies of both parties.
If you watch anything from the DNC. Please watch this clip https://youtu.be/uG0K_9RDeFE
Its a good lesson in inclusiveness and accepting the other, which is a topic spoken about often here.
I think it is just way too easy for “one side” to trash the “other side.” For years some Protestants trash Catholics and vice versa; some Armenians trash Calvinists and vice versa; some cessasionists trash carismatics and vice versa; and as far as every election goes some Democrats trash Republicans and vice versa.
I obviously do not like Trump. But I also cannot embrace Democratic policies: “Under President Obama, a liberal federal government has seized more and more control over our lives. But this can change. This year we have an unusual opportunity to defeat Hillary Clinton and the pro-abortion, pro-gender-confusion, anti-religious liberty, tax-and-spend, big government liberalism that she champions. I believe that defeating that kind of liberalism would be a morally right action.”
“That is why this election is not just about Hillary Clinton. It is about defeating the far left liberal agenda that any Democratic nominee would champion. Liberal Democrats are now within one Supreme Court justice of their highest goal: gaining permanent control of the nation with a five vote majority on the Supreme Court, and then relentlessly imposing every liberal policy on the nation not through winning elections but through a relentless parade of one Supreme Court decision after another.”
Ben, nobody asks you to embrace Hillary Clinton. In real world politics, you must always follow the “lesser of two evils” principle, (particularly so if you have a two-party-system). In this case it is completely obvious who is the lesser evil. Anybody who claims otherwise and says they are comparable downplays the evilness of Trump. Those who don’t vote saying that all parties are equally bad only play into the hands of the extremist and populist parties.
Also, I think the American people have to blame themselves for getting into this dilemma – all those who pushed Trump over the other Republican candidates and Clinton over Sanders. Don’t always blame “those at the top.”
> It is just way too easy for “one side” to trash the “other side.”
Another remark here. I don’t think this is about trashing one particular “side”, it is about trashing Trump personally. The man doesn’t stand for any side, he says whatever people want to hear and he is only interested in his finanical and political gain, in his ego, in nothing else. Or, if you want to locate Trump on any “side”, you would find him on the side of racism, sexism, populism, division, ignorance and vanity. That side can easily be trashed any time. His side hasn’t anything to do with the ideas of the Republican founding fathers.
Also, I think you’re presenting an “argument to moderation” here, also known as “golden mean fallacy”. Trump is completely unacceptable – not only for Christians, but it should be particularly obvious for Christians to see this. The fact that some still find him acceptable is only a sign that something is completely wrong with the mindset of American Christians.
evidently enough americans are tired of decades systemic corruption/increasing overprivilege to the few (which changed a false American dream into a true nightmare),
so they have spoken by choosing the lesser evils: Clinton & trump:)
i think trump would bring jobs (which would allow people to improve other things) & would trouble falsely elite billionaires like Bloomberg, which would gladden my heart..
Trump will certainly not bring jobs to America. You need a lot of expertise which he obviously doesn’t have and apart of that, a president is not a magician. The econmony of the country depends on a lot of things, particularly the global economy. Isolating your country will make things only worse. Why do you simple believe that he will bring jobs? He’s just an impostor. Also, you should think twice for whom you vote, even if he would manage to bring unemployment from six million to 100,000 like a certain leader in Germany. You always buy the whole package.
Regarding sharply differing religious and political views, this pastor (whose posts often resonate with me) states it very well: https://www.facebook.com/srcrosby1/posts/10153594031165764?pnref=story If you can’t see the link, here is what he wrote:
“When it comes to religious and political points of view on things, I have next to nothing in common with some of my CLOSEST FRIENDS, people I would trust with my life.
Kingdom-wise, we agree on NOTHING other than Jesus is Lord. Downstream from that, regarding “the Bible” or “Christianity” or the “church,” we agree on nothing. In politics, other than sincere desire to live in peace with all men, we also have nothing in common. I lean toward a conservative libertarian perspective, and some of my closest friends are far left progressives.
I find it pitiable that so many in our culture and so many on Facebook cannot seem to understand that to disagree does not make someone an enemy. To criticize thought, ideas, and values is not the same as criticizing the person. Folks cannot seem to make that distinction because their sense of personhood/identity is wrapped up with their point of view. Reject their point of view, you have rejected them and they respond in visceral attack mode.
It is possible to concede that someone else may have a reasoned point of view, even if we disagree with it. I fear that as a culture and as the “church” the majority no longer have the ability to do this. In our culture, spiritual and civic, to disagree means you have judged me and you are now my enemy and you are to be destroyed . . . at least rhetorically and in more substantive ways if possible.
For believers, isn’t one of the fundamental ethical outcomes of supposedly being a Christ-follower is to be able to make “enemies” friends? Is that not what Christ has done for us? Is He not our pattern? What part of: “You are kind (show agape) to your friends, so what? Even unbelievers do that,” do we not get?
I feel sorry for these folks. It is such a narrow, barren, intellectually and spiritually sterile way to live.
Love does not require doctrinal or political agreement. Love transcends both and loving well carries its own reward.”
Ben, there are two ideas here which should not be mixed up:
* “You don’t need to agree with people regarding ideology or doctrine in order to love them.”
I would certainly agree with that. But there is also another idea here:
* “It suffices to recognize someone as a Christian if they are professing that ‘Jesus is Lord’.”
I learned the hard way that this is not enough. The point is that different people have different images of God and Jesus. Some of these images are distorted caricatures of God, some seem to follow a completely different God from mine. So for me the more crucial question is: “Who do you think is Jesus? How do you think God is like? What do you think is God’s most important command?” If they answer that God is love and the highest command is to love God and each other, then and only then I feel on the same page with them. I can feel much closer to atheists or believers in other religions who share these ideas of humanity and love with me, than fundamentalist Christians who profess ‘Jesus is Lord’ but with their deeds and words deny everything that Jesus stands for. Trump is such a case. It was even claimed he has become a “born again Christian” recently. Laughable. The Dalai Lama is a thousand times closer to Jesus than Trump. Not all who talk about Jesus really belong to Jesus, but those who follow the principles of Jesus (Mt 7:21).
overcharged environs beckons hellfire from the Lord, for sincere innocents are incited to deleterious pursuits; provision for restoration has not ensued so personal costs/losses have escalated: Christkillers have damaged Christfollowers, but doom is sure, for God is a mighty warrior rescuing seekers while dissipating wealth/health/stealth of pillagers;
they illegally profit at the expense of the innocent (elder panders damage their own young who then damage other young, luring underage to imbibe addicting/laced substances/then pillaging them); they fraternize to smokescreen their practices;
they buyoff members/leaders/security;
they reveal money is their god/greed is their game;
yet they lack wisdom of being watched/recorded/revealed;
they are betrayed by insiders fearing loss;
they return resources to harmed to reduce liability;
like the priest who pandered & the bishop who covered, their day of reckoning has finally come
they must be trumped
some have a sign/saying: ‘caution, we call police’;
I have a sign/saying: ‘caution, we call lawyers’:) hallelujah!
may the Lord protect the underpowered from the overpowered & the overpowered be disempowered by the Lord
Donald trump for president & we’ll have business everyday of the year!
Pat Robertson: “God came to me in a dream last night and showed me the future. He took me to heaven and I saw Donald Trump seated at the right hand of our Lord.”
Michele Bachmann: “We may not have a perfect candidate but he may be the one, like the Book of Daniel — the most high God may have lifted up Trump, because very possibly he’s the only one that could defeat Hillary Clinton this fall.”
Robert Jeffress: “You know, I was debating an evangelical professor on NPR, and this professor said, ‘Pastor, don’t you want a candidate who embodies the teaching of Jesus and would govern this country according to the principles found in the Sermon on the Mount?’ I said, ‘Heck no.’ I would run from that candidate as far as possible, because the Sermon on the Mount was not given as a governing principle for this nation.
When I’m looking for somebody who’s going to deal with ISIS and exterminate ISIS, I don’t care about that candidate’s tone or vocabulary, I want the meanest, toughest, son of a you-know-what I can find — and I believe that’s biblical.”
Pat Robertson: “God came to me in a dream last night and showed me the future. He took me to heaven and I saw Donald Trump seated at the right hand of our Lord.”
At this point I wanted to puke until David clarified it’s satire.
Mark has been trolling us all. His quotes above are from the satirical news site, bizstandardnews.com. Here’s the link: http://bizstandardnews.com/2016/07/14/robertson-said-he-had-vision-of-trump-seated-at-the-right-hand-of-the-lord/
Perhaps all of Mark’s comments of late have been part of an elaborate troll job. If so, well played, Mark. I owe you a beer.
I’m relieved. Guess it’s Poe’s law in action again. Or is it even dog-whistling? Those who believe it love Trump even more, for all others it’s just satire?
I have never liked nor respected Donald Trump. He has always seemed arrogant and self-serving. Now, after having lived with a narcissist, I recognize Trump as a classic narcissist. He can never think of anything but what he thinks nor care about anything but what matters to him.
A lot about Nazis and Hitler is mentioned in this article but the truth about that history is greatly misunderstood by the common person. And I mean nothing anti semitic by this but here is what a Rabbi says. Is that Jewish Rabbi an antisemite?
Why did Hitler hate the jews? By Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi and Rabbi Yosef Tzvi ben Porat.
חכמה מן השמים/Wisdom from Heaven
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C2utUSJM-50