I don't understand how Evangelicals can support t-Rump! He has nothing in common with religious people of any kind. I have a couple of relatives who are so called religious people and they love him. t-Rump goes against everything any religion proposes. "Love thy neighbor" HA! I wonder if he has ever read the bible.
sharePro life, pro religious freedom, pro American, pro school choice, pro Israel, etc.. He's even been emphasizing the mercy side with prison reform. That's in contrast to the left, which now has complete control of the Democratic party, having finally chased the reasonable Democrats out, being aggressively hostile to religion culturally and legally, opposing Trump on the things listed above, and posing a serious threat to the basic human freedom that religious people (among others) enjoy living in and that's founded on theism in the first place (natural rights theory). Maybe evangelicals understand their own views better than you do.
shareThe Muslim ban is not religious freedom.
ProAmerican is not holding secret meetings with a foreign dictator who wants to destroy democracy and has attacked our government in the 2016 elections.
Prolife is not placing young children in a cage and torturing them. Why doesn't it bother you that a 4 year old child is suicidal because of Trump's policy? You want to throw women in prison for life if they don't want to have their rapists child? What barbarians you are!
Barr is reintroducing the death penalty. Is that part of your "mercy side with prison reform"?
I suggest you read the Constitution about the separation of religion and state and stop trying to introduce your version of Sharia law. You don't even practice true Christianity since you have no compassion. You're obviously are against human rights.
No Muslim ban, no idea what "secret meetings" you're babbling about, no torturing children in cages, no life sentence for raped women, death penalty for the most heinous murders shows that we value life, the phrase "separation of religion and state" doesn't appear in the Constitution, and you know almost nothing about me and likely not much more about Christianity.
Are there any honest Democrats here? I'm serious. Are posts like the bundle of half-baked lies above and elsewhere on this board the best y'all can do?
Your willful ignorance doesn't change reality. I suggest you watch something besides Fox news or whatever your propaganda choice is.
Trump's Muslim ban
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viDffWUjcBA
Trump meetings with former KGB agent and hostile foreign leader Putin without any American officials present and then destroying translators notes.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-putin-meeting-business/story?id=63967271
Children separated from parents crying while border agent makes jokes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=9&v=PoncXfYBAVI
Trump lawyer defends maltreatment of migrant children. Judges angered.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRjUyr_36MY
Alabama is proposing a law that would make carrying out an abortion at any stage of the pregnancy punishable by 10 to 99 years in jail. The strict abortion ban, which has been branded a “death sentence for women”, would even criminalise performing abortions in cases of rape and incest.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/alabama-abortion-crime-pregnancy-trump-administration-us-a8854716.html
No established religion! And you cant prohibit Muslims from practicing their religion:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I know all about you. You're a soulless sanctimonious hypocrite who pretends to be religious but not. I'm waiting for your excuses re: keeping young children in cages and torturing them.
Trump dropped the "Muslim ban" thing even before the election. The travel ban only applies to a few countries and doesn't take religion into account. Only a tiny percentage of the world's Muslims are impacted. It's about a nexus between nations with weak central authority/vetting ability and high terrorism rates. It's also long standing US practice, with Obama enacting similar bans on national security advice with no media hysteria. Even the original "Muslim ban" talk was just Trump trying to address terrorism threats, not because he doesn't like Muslims, and was billed as temporary.
The US and Russian presidents met. So what? That's their jobs. Were you outraged over this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keXx0zxTarE
Or this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7PvoI6gvQs
So nothing to back up your "torturing" children in a cage lie. The cage thing was actually an Obama era practice that Trump stopped, so you should be grateful to him, unless you're just a mindless bottomfeeding partisan hypocrite. Even the leftist AP debunked the "cage" story that spawned these Democrat crocodile tears.
https://apnews.com/a98f26f7c9424b44b7fa927ea1acd4d4
Democrats created this humanitarian crisis by imposing these loopholes that draw massive groups of illegals and a huge spike in those dragging kids with them across deserts, often bought or kidnapped because they're get into the country free cards. Neither Dems or you give a damn about children.
So you lied about throwing "women in prison for life" for abortion. Your own source says the bill would punish doctors (10 years more likely than 99), not women, for butchering babies. Abortion is the most evil practice in the world today. Unborn children are the most innocent among us, the truly voiceless. That you so easily dehumanize them underscores what I said about your disregard for children. And it's not the baby's fault if he's the product of rape or incest. That shouldn't be a death penalty.
Like I said, no "separation of religion and state" in the Constitution, which you know nothing about, and you haven't articulated a coherent point anyway.
Also the obligatory "Fox News" attack is so hackneyed. You realize that conservatism long predated Fox News, don't you? Do leftist bottomfeeders like you, Keelai, ever pause to reflect on why you can focus on only citing that one network out of hundreds of channels as supposed "right wing propaganda"? Do you possess enough mental acuity to grasp the implications of that? Heck, even FNC isn't that conservative. Apart from a few conservative opinion show hosts it tilts more left than right now, not that your mindless barb would have been worthwhile anyway.
Everything you said was Trumpism propaganda BS which you mindlessly repeated like a parrot.
The Moslem Ban was written by Islamophobe and white nationalist Steve Bannon.
re: the Moslem Ban:
An internal report compiled by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Intelligence and Analysis Unit concluded that people from the seven nations affected by the Moslem ban pose no increased terror risk.
It's been much longer than "temporary".
Obviously, they added 2 non-Moslem countries to get the Moslem ban passed. N. Koreans aren't allowed to leave their country so any ban against them is nonsense.
It's never the job of any U.S. president to meet in secret without any official nor briefing with a hostile foreign leader especially one who was a KGB agent and has denounced democracy. Trump destroyed his translator's notes and has refused to tell our National Security what happened in the meeting. You can't be so dumb.
BTW, re: your whataboutism - Obama and ALL presidents are carefully briefed, have officals present, keep records of the meeting and National Security is kept informed and give advice - except Trump.
Torturing children by separating them from their parents and placing them in cages was created by Jeff Sessions.
It's obvious you don't care about children - just politics!
It's obvious you want a Christian version of Sharia law in the U.S. which is unconstitutional. And you clearly don't practice the religion yourself since you have so much hate in you for Hispanics that you could care less if children are tortured in cages
Everything you posted is just mindless BS period. You didn't even source your ludicrous, out of context "report" claim. Bannon's not a "white nationalist", not that he has anything to do with this discussion. I said Trump said his initial "Muslim ban" proposal would be "temporary". Trump was a guy with no national security experience trying to sincerely get his head around a real terrorist problem. Once experts coached him up the "Muslim ban" never happened and was replaced by a more robust and updated version of what past presidents, including Obama, were already doing.
World leaders meet all the time and I've already destroyed your moronic Russia comments on the other thread by contrasting Trump's strong actions with Obama's 8 years of feckless appeasement.
https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/5d3a5a9623472e263c8dcb88/The-truth-about-Muellers-claims-about-Russian-interference-in-election?reply=5d3ca4d2d0d7e45c4f956e81
You dodged my question and the videos of Obama mocking Romney in 2012 over Romney's warning about Russia and getting caught on the mike assuring the Russian president that he'd have more "flexibility" after the election. That proves you're a partisan hypocrite.
You actively support the mass slaughter of babies and are fine with Dems getting migrant children killed to push your hypocritical agenda. Disgusting. You ignore the fact that the "cage" story actually detailed Obama era practice, one Trump ended. That confirms you're dishonest. Your concern for "Hispanics" only stretches as far as they're useful as political props. I care about all individuals, and recognize how bad this mess on the border Dems have created is for everyone involved.
"It's obvious you want a Christian version of Sharia law in the U.S. which is unconstitutional."
You sound pretty "Islamophobic" there, lol. I'm a libertarian, moron. Unlike you, I place a premium on religious freedom.
Yes of course he dropped it, because he has no standards and is just a "whatever gets me ahead" kind of snake.
You know it and support it as long as he continues feeding the growing Fascism that his base feeds upon.
You have all become so transparent.
The fact that you have lied here and obscured truth using propaganda techniques has completely betrayed you.
You guys know no one here buys your line except your own group.
You guys have become an echo chamber because normal citizens are deflecting your BS and sending it right back.
I think it's beautiful, and I love watching the DESPERATE postings and sock accounts of the RED HAT FASCISTS.
Deal with it.
Every line you posted is a lie. Next time at least try to make your lies interesting.
shareAmerica is not a Christian nation.
shareYes it is, though it depends on how you define "Christian nation". It's not a theocracy, but that's almost never what people who say it is a Christian nation mean. Here's a good explanatory article on it.
https://wallbuilders.com/america-christian-nation/#
The atheist population is going to keep growing.
shareThat would be awful for human rights and anyone, atheist or not, who values our society's largely Christian-shaped moral worldview. Concepts like political equality and the sanctity of human life, for example, that only exist because of Christian premises (equality is scientifically absurd) might be especially missed as we more deeply enter the era of genetic engineering.
shareAm I bad because I'm an atheist?
Secondly, if an atheistic society is oh so awful, why is the Czech Republic, which is mostly atheist, doing just fine?
I didn't comment on whether you're "bad" or not. Depends on premises and definitions. I just pointed out that things will be radically different if you're correct. But I would like you to try and articulate a basis for political equality, or any other natural human rights that transcend government whims, given an atheistic premise. That would involve explaining what it even means to say people are "equal". Equal in what sense, since God loving and valuing every person is temporarily being taken off the table? Also define "people". Etc..
I've never heard anyone cite the Czech Republic as a positive example before, lol. It's had more than its share of....problems...the past century, most notably decades of militantly atheist communist oppression that would not have ended without strong, sustained action by the relatively religious USA and figures like Pope John Paul II. And according to Pew in 2017 only 25% of Czechs claim to be atheist. A majority say they don't believe in God, which is an outlier among nations, though a majority also say they do either believe in the soul, "fate", heaven, and/or one or more of several other religious associated concepts. But it's still surrounded by and part of a civilization whose moral worldview has been overwhelmingly shaped by centuries of Christian conditioning. As Nietzsche observed when admonishing secular humanists who thought they could "kill God" while retaining Christian morality, which he deemed shallow and foolish, historical inertia means these things take time. Generations will likely have to pass before the full impact of rejecting religion is felt.
Why is it that when I am faced with religion, it makes me depressed and I want to get away from it? It's obvious, it doesn't benefit me.
shareI find the notion of ultimate meaninglessness depressing, but to each his own. Regardless, you've certainly benefited from other people being religious: universal morality, concern for others, charity, hospitals, universities, the greatest art ever produced, political freedom (with accompanying prosperity) and equality.....like that human rights question you still haven't answered, even science and likely civilization itself.
shareHuman rights exist. They're not granted by government, but they're not granted by any deity either, they're just there because the individual said so.
As for morals, we're born with them. We're not rapists and murderers by default. Anyone who goes around killing and raping is a psychopath and being religious is not going to stop them.
That's weak. You're saying rights do come from people. That means they can be taken away by people. It's just human whim in your view.
Rights are granted by someone, and there are layers. Governments do grant day to day legal rights. Private citizens and companies can grant rights, like permission to do things. Natural rights are more fundamental and come from God, a moral authority higher than government. That means government can trample those rights but they can't take them away, and one can indignantly challenge government abuse with a moral appeal to that higher authority.
Your worldview of mere conflicting human whims leads to things like Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge. By contrast a political system where rights are concretely rooted in a higher moral authority and the government's purpose is merely to secure those rights is how you get America, and why the founding fathers wrote the most important and famous part of the Declaration of Independence.
The "morality" you're describing is just chemical composition, which can change or be overcome. That leaves no moral basis for saying Hitler, the Aztecs, or anyone else did anything "Wrong". Just different.
No, I'm saying I as an individual have rights simply because I said so and no one can take them away.
shareThat's not a persuasive moral argument. Someone else can say he has the right to take your stuff, enslave you, or kill you and you have no basis for saying he's wrong apart from your own arbitrary pronouncement. You haven't explained why your claim should be binding on anyone else. To the extent your alleged "right" you gave yourself existed at all it only does so in your head and ceases to exist when someone kills you or tortures you into changing your mind, not that it matters.
Someone else can say he has the right to take your stuff, enslave you, or kill you and you have no basis for saying he's wrong apart from your own arbitrary pronouncement.
Yes, but that person would be crazy. I'm not. The average person regardless of being religious or not agrees that they shouldn't kill or enslave anyone for any reason. Any one that does is going to do it, whether they're religious or not.
Of course morals aren't going to be EXACTLY the same from person to person, but they're still going to be pretty close.
Also, if someone were to enslave me and take away my stuff as you said, I doubt that by explaining God given rights, they'll have a change of heart.
As for why someone shouldn't enslave or kill anyone, an atheist like myself could simply say "because it is harmful to society and is harmful to yourself. By behaving that way, you'll be looked down upon by most of society."
Not just "because God says you shouldn't."
To the extent your alleged "right" you gave yourself existed at all it only does so in your head and ceases to exist when someone kills you or tortures you into changing your mind, not that it matters.
Personally, I don't see how that is any different when you bring God into the picture. I could believe in God and someone could torture me into changing my mind.
"Yes, but that person would be crazy. I'm not. The average person regardless of being religious or not agrees that they shouldn't kill or enslave anyone for any reason. Of course morals aren't going to be EXACTLY the same from person to person, but they're still going to be pretty close."
That's not true at all. People commit murder, robbery, or enslavement all the time for perfectly rational reasons. In fact SLAVERY HAS BEEN THE NORM AROUND THE WORLD FOR MOST OF HUMAN HISTORY, until Christians stamped it out. "Crazy" is just a word, one that becomes less meaningful the broader it's defined. Entire societies have been governed by moral worldviews radically different from our Christian-based morality. Pagan classical Greeks and Romans might think our anti-slavery sentiments are "crazy" and our notion of "equality" unrealistic. The "average" Aztec had no problem with mass human sacrifice, for example. Their empire was based on it. Comanche morality valued the lives of fellow Comanches but viewed non-Comanches as animals who could be killed or lied to as practicality required without moral implications. I could go on. This has nothing to do with being "crazy". It's just a different morality.
"Also, if someone were to enslave me and take away my stuff as you said, I doubt that by explaining God given rights, they'll have a change of heart."
But if society GENERALLY believed in those God given rights, there's a lot better chance things like slavery and other abuses would be illegal and morally opposed by most people even when cops aren't looking. It's certainly a much firmer foundation than.....nothing.
Things are a lot different in societies that believe there's no higher authority than the state and humans are just animals than they are in America where people believe human life is sacred and individuals receive their freedom from God, the latter resulting in a great push to hold government in line.
Your source is garbage. It's listed as a hate group:
Wallbuilders
Reasoning: Extreme Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Hate Group
The website publishes historical information from a right wing Christian perspective that often is not factual.
WallBuilders has faced criticism as an anti-LGBT hate group as well as anti-Islam and anti-immigration according to the SPLC. Further, David Barton and WallBuilders has been criticized for publishing revisionist, if not false history.
Overall, we rate Wallbuilders Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of propaganda, failed fact checks and labeling as a hate group by other sources. (D. Van Zandt 10/4/2018)
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/wallbuilders/
I knew you were a fake Christian.
My source is the U.S. Constitution:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
That's in plain English. No established religion. Period.
Wallbuilders is the opposite of a "hate group", lol, and its historical scholarship is impeccable. Regardless, the article I linked to is filled with quotes and facts you can easily verify. It's a civil, logical piece appealing to the intellect. The cheap leftist propaganda site you linked to, by contrast, engages in dishonest name calling like "hate group" to shut down discourse. Don't let truly hateful, garbage sites like Van Zandt's shrink your echo chamber until you suffocate. Be open minded and think for yourself.
You still haven't articulated what your constitutional point is. Congress being prevented from passing a law establishing a religion (like the Church of England) OR interfering with the various established state religions that existed at the time (supporters of those established state religions were some of the main ones pushing for the establishment clause, to PROTECT established religion from the federal government, which explains the clause's strange wording), has nothing to do with whether this is a Christian nation (and certainly didn't call for the sterilization of all religious references from the public sphere, as modern strict separationists have argued in recent decades). I already said "Christian nation" doesn't mean theocracy. It also doesn't mean a Church of the United States. Instead of swiping at straw man arguments read the article.
[deleted]
For the record your guy Van Zandt, described by the Columbia Journalism Review as an "Amateur" "armchair media analyst" (https://www.cjr.org/innovations/measure-media-bias-partisan.php), used as his main source for the hit job on Wallbuilders the SPLC, a truly hateful and stupid group that essentially considers Christianity in general to be a hate group. The SPLC is such a dishonest defamatory outfit that even the Obama era FBI removed its link from their site after they falsely labeled the socially conservative Family Research Council a "hate group" simply for supporting traditional marriage, prompting deranged gay activist Floyd Corkins to try and massacre everyone there after reading the SPLC site. Dem activist James Hodgkinson, who shot up GOP congressmen while they were at baseball practice, was also an SPLC fan (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/support-for-southern-poverty-law-center-links-scalise-family-research-council-shooters), and the SPLC has been under extreme fire recently for being a money grabbing scam riddled with real bigotry in its own ranks that had to fire its cofounder and pay millions of dollars to people it smeared (https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2019/03/15/why-did-the-southern-poverty-law-center-fire-its-co-founder-n2543160). They labeled Maajid Nawaz, a former Islamist radical turned pro Western Muslim reformer an “Anti-Muslim Extremist” simply for opposing terrorism. He’s still a Muslim and argues that Islam is a “religion of peace”. He sued and the SPLC had to pay him $3.37 million and publicly apologize. When the SPLC ludicrously placed Dr. Ben Carson (world renown brain surgeon and one of the most gentle and intelligent people in politics) on its “extremist watch list” alongside Nazis there was so much uproar that they backed down and apologized. Unfortunately most of the falsely accused aren’t as high profile as Carson and remain on those BS lists.
shareZandt’s other sources were a couple of biased leftist outfits, “politifact” (a partisan joke) and “rightwing watch”, a cheap attack site run by the low rent leftist lobbying group ironically named People for the American Way (that’s like Orwell’s “Ministry of Love”). The other site was snopes, a leftist site that’s become a laughingstock. I lost all respect for snopes back in 2008 when they published a piece saying they couldn’t debunk Democrats’ claim that John McCain was ineligible to run for president because he was born in Panama (Dems invented birtherism, and snopes helped). Anyone with a brain could spend a few minutes researching online and confirm that simply being born to American parents, regardless of where you’re born, means you meet the “natural born citizen” requirements. Just days ago snopes hilariously faceplanted by…again… “factchecking” a satire site. This time the Babylon Bee (https://freebeacon.com/issues/snopes-fact-checks-a-satirical-website-again/). Such “factchecking” is typically just partisans disagreeing with someone on something, and in this case nothing cited in your blog has anything to do with the article in question.
Even if Zandt's sources weren't hopelessly biased his "rating system" is ludicrous and lacks any sound methodology. It's not remotely scientific. He just cherry-picks criticism of two or three items from an outfit that's produces thousands of pages of material. Any source from the NY Times to rigorously reviewed academic studies makes mistakes from time to time. CNN makes more in one week than Wallbuilders ever has, lol. You can give any outfit any "rating" you want just by linking to a couple of people disagreeing with something they said at some point while ignoring the general body of work.
Blindly relying on such sources without reading and addressing articles from actual Christians like those at Wallbuilders undermines any pretense you have of being tolerant of Christianity, let alone the implication that you're a Christian yourself. Wallbuilders has a record of factual accuracy and quality analysis that these hack leftist sites could only dream of having.
Wallbuilders' David Barton is a religious kook who believes the Earth is 6,000 years old. Enough said.
shareKeelai's a rabid anti-Christian nut who's too brainwashed, dim, and closed minded to even read an argument from the other side or address it substantively. Sadly that's all there is to say at this point.
shareDo you believe the Earth is 6,000 years old? Yes or no.
shareActually I'm an agnostic on distant past events, since our natural empirical knowledge is limited to extrapolation from current observations and making a lot of assumptions about how constant things have remained. But I'm a science buff and I'm certainly more conversant with mainstream theories, past and present, than you are, lol. When discussing scientific cosmology I operate under the assumption that the universe is roughly 13.8 billion years old and the earth about 4.5 billion, albeit with those caveats.
Guess you've surrendered on the whole "Christian nation" discussion, btw.
I suggest you move to England if you want to live in a Christian nation so badly.
shareBritain is more secular than America, and less free.
shareNevertheless, it's officially a Christian nation and will be one person less secular once you arrive.
Bon voyage!
I'm not sure what you mean by "officially" a Christian nation. If you had read the Wallbuilders article you would have seen numerous official pronouncements in Supreme Court opinions, office holder statements, and elsewhere that America is a Christian nation. Regardless, why would I leave for a more secular nation that's less free?
Britain has socialist healthcare, gun control, and government media/entertainment (BBC) that citizens are forced to fund that's unaccountable to either elected officials or ratings.
You're free to go there and fulfill your dream of living as livestock any time you wish!
You're very nitpicky!
U.S. has socialized heathcare: Medicare, Medicaid, Champus and whatever the tax-funded one Trump and politicians have. This should be an incentive for you to leave.
You can join this fun group once you arrive in England.
https://www.huntersofengland.com/
England is perfect for you! They speak English and are Protestant!
Otherwise, you'll need to become Catholic and learn another language.
Bolivia.
Costa Rica.
El Salvador.
Liechtenstein.
Malta.
Monaco.
Some cantons of Switzerland (state religion): ...
Vatican City (Theocracy)
BTW, you want politicians censoring TV shows? You would love it in Russia!
"BTW, you want politicians censoring TV shows?"
No, I'm not a leftist. I'm opposed to political censorship. BTW, when bottom feeding leftists insist the US is already "socialist", what exactly are you trying to argue for? Are you implying we've gone as far as we need to or should in a socialist direction, or are you claiming that if one is happy with the socialism we already allegedly have then he should be fine with dramatically increasing it?
I'm genuinely curious what, if anything, goes through your mind when you say things like that.
"BBC... unaccountable to either elected officials"
= political censorship
https://www.gov.uk/entering-staying-uk
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/apply-renew-passport/how-to-apply.html
Tax payer funded.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/heres-what-it-will-cost-you-to-travel-to-north-korea/
Americans aren't allowed to go to North Korea. Besides, I'm happy with the present separation between church and state in the U.S. You aren't which is why I suggest you go to England.
shareReading isn't your strong suit. Some Americans do go for various reasons and the article lays out how.
Since North Korea is an officially atheist nation, you'd presumably be right at home there. Plus it's fully socialist, the realization of your ideology with no conservatives to get in the way of "progress".
America being a "Christian nation" has nothing to do with a state established religious denomination like the Church of England. I already made it clear I oppose that (government can corrupt religion; maybe one reason the UK is so secular), as does the Establishment Clause (at least where the federal congress is concerned). What that clause does not do is mandate the sterilization of religious references from the public sphere: cross memorials, nativity scenes, Christmas celebrations, chaplains, "In God We Trust" and other theistic mentions, voluntary prayers at football games or even public schools, religious based charities, etc..
No need for me to go anywhere including Trump's close pal's home since I'm happy with the status quo of separation of church and religion as per the Constitution.
My suggestion was for you to live in England permanently. Not just visit. You can have your semi-theocracy with your Protestant rituals and idols. God save the Queen!
I'm happy with the status quo of separation of church and religion as per the Constitution.
No need for me to go anywhere including Trump's close pal's home since I'm happy with the status quo
And Protestantism is watered down Catholicism which is watered down Judaism.
CHEERS!
https://youtu.be/I8KSAtos-dk?t=25
I disagree, but if North Korea's not your bag there are some other wonderful atheist destinations like China, Cuba, and Vietnam.
"One nation, under God..."
Actually, I like Canada.
They have separation of church and state also and they don't have gun or religious nuts.
Have you learned the words to your new national anthem yet? Make your new Queen proud!
Canada's head of the state is the British Queen, genius.
Canada is weak on free speech, so maybe you would feel at home there. In recent years they've literally prosecuted comedians for telling jokes deemed politically incorrect by a government committee.
But Canada is mostly Christian so you'd still probably like North Korea better. They check to make sure visitors to the country aren't bringing Bibles with them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjV2EErPHdg
The only one crying about wanting a state religion is you.
Leave and go to England!
I've said I don't want a "state religion" like the Church of England and that's not what America being a "Christian nation" means. Stop crying about my posts and learn to read or go to North Korea. That country should appeal to you because of its militant atheism and the fact that critical thinking isn't expected or even wanted.
shareHow many babies did you put in cages this week, Christian?
shareDo cribs count?
shareChild abuse is funny to you, "Christian"?
shareCribs have bars. I guess babies are basically kept caged much of the time.
shareYou're a sociopath.
sharePutting babies in cribs is a far cry from stabbing their skulls with scissors, or dismembering them and vacuuming them through a machine, one of the most gruesome forms of homicide ever devised, which is how you get your kicks.
shareYou lost all moral authority since you support child abuse.
shareSays the person who supports killing babies, about the most evil thing one can do. I oppose child abuse. Abortion is the ultimate child abuse.
sharePro life, pro religious freedom, pro American,
Me: "Are there any honest Democrats here? I'm serious. Are posts like the bundle of half-baked lies above and elsewhere on this board the best y'all can do?"
And you come along as if to answer my question by posting nothing but some of the same halfbaked, easily debunked lies as the other poster, except yours were even more half-assed. LOL!
Do you think at all before hitting the keyboard?
Me: "Are there any honest Democrats here? I'm serious. Are posts like the bundle of half-baked lies above and elsewhere on this board the best y'all can do?"
And you come along as if to answer my question by posting nothing but some of the same halfbaked, easily debunked lies as the other poster, except yours were even more half-assed. LOL!
Do you think at all before hitting the keyboard?
That's a "no" on you thinking then. Got it.
shareA million babies killed every year supported and celebrated by the democrat party. The party which now celebrates post birth abortion. The party which supports planned parenthood who sells killed baby parts for profits.
Do you really expect evangelicals to support the abomination that is the democrat party?
Glad we could help you understand. You’re welcome.
Does it bother you that Trump paid for abortions when his flings became pregnant? Don't forget that he was prochoice until recently and it was Michael Cohen's job to pay hush money and pay for abortions.
I'll guarantee if another fling becomes pregnant, he'll pay for another abortion rather than pay child support.
Trump is a known athiest but he pretended to be a Christian during his presidential campaign so religious suckers would vote for him. Apparently it worked.
shareHow do you know, though?
share"A former pastor of Trump's church said he never saw him there."
He was not an active and visible member of the church, no," Pastor David Lewicki recalled.
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1142784534204882944?lang=en
Also:
"“I was @realDonaldTrump's pastor for 5 years @MarbleChurch. I assure you, he had the ‘option’ to come to Bible study. He never ‘opted’ in. Nor did he ever actually enter the church doors. Not one time,” Lewicki wrote in a tweet Tuesday morning. He also noted that he wasn’t aware of any financial contribution from Trump during his time at the church.
In an interview with The Christian Post Wednesday, Lewicki said he served on Marble Collegiate’s pastoral staff from 2004 to 2010 and not once did he notice Trump at the church’s Bible study even though he seems to be supportive of Bible literacy now.
“I led Wednesday night worship services and I was present every Sunday to lead worship services,” Lewicki said.
“To my knowledge, no one ever saw President Trump in that time while I was there. So he was not a visible and active member of our congregation while he was on the membership rolls during that time,” he added.
In 2015, as Trump campaigned for the presidency he declared that he attended the Marble Collegiate.
The church released a statement then, however, saying he was an inactive member.
"Donald Trump has had a longstanding history with Marble Collegiate Church, where his parents were for years active members and one of his children was baptized. However, as he indicates, he is a Presbyterian, and is not an active member of Marble," the church said."
The cheapskate didn't even contribute a dime to the church. Rubes!
The mainstream right hasn't strongly aligned itself with Christian conservatives in decades. That's the fringe right at this point. As the last election, and no doubt the the next election will show, middle America isn't liberal AND they aren't far right...but they vote Republican.
shareActually social conservatism has broader support than fiscal conservatism does, especially in the Midwest. The political/media/academic establishment has been hostile to it but it's strong at the grassroots level. Republicans need both elements to win. And since an overwhelming majority of Americans are Christians (even if they're barely represented in Hollywood), and Christians skew strongly conservative, I wouldn't call Christian conservatives "fringe". Evangelicals in particular were huge in putting Trump over the top, a fact he recognizes.
share"even if they're barely represented in Hollywood"
Explain how "they are barely represented in Hollywood" when every Christmas an enormous amount of Christmas-themed movies, TV shows and music appears. If anything, Christmas is notorious for being over-commercialized.
Trump who cheated on every wife, paid for abortions, sexually assaulted women and underage girls, bragged about watching half-naked under-aged girls in their dressing room on the Howard Stern radio show, worships money, lies steals and cheats (remember the commandments?), and divides Americans based on race, ethnicity, religion, ideology, etc.
His support by evangelicals makes them hypocrites which I knew anyway. Rev. Billy Graham said a bunch of anti-Semitic things to Nixon. And I know other evangelicals supported racism.
He's a conman looking for idiots who will fall for his lies which explains why his base is uneducated.
About the only true thing you said is there are a lot of Christmas movies and music around the Holidays (I'm not sure the Hallmark Channel really qualifies as "Hollywood" though, lol). But how many main characters on tv or in movies are explicitly identified as Christian? It's very rare. Overtly gay people, for example, are proportionally waaaay more represented among major characters than Christians are. That's despite only about 3% of the population being gay or bisexual according the CDC, while over 80% of the American population is Christian and most of the rest are theists of some sort. When overt Christians are present they're often villains or portrayed in an unflattering light. That's a disgraceful skew. Think about it as you watch tv from now on.
The rest of your lies are too stupid to merit a response. But I do appreciate you showcasing just what a rabid anti-Christian bigot you are. Transparency is good.
There are plenty of Christians represented in The Handmaid's Tale, a huge Hollywood hit on Hulu. It's a dystopian science-fiction story about what would happen if a militant Christian uprising overthrew the government, seized power and installed a theocracy in it's place that enforced by violence a Christian fundamentalist way of life upon all remaining citizens.
To me, it's a dytopian tale. But you should check it out...you'd probably think it's a version of Utopia.
LOL, thank you for illustrating my point. From Jussie Smollett to Erica Thomas to garbage like the Handmaid's Tale and the Russia collusion conspiracy theory, leftists are forced to live in a delusional, fantasy land bubble because the real life facts don't go their way.
shareIts because evangelicals only care about money and understand Trump supports their tax exemption scam.
sharethere are people who are just powerful or whatever.
I dont know why people watch him.
I ate a picture of him as a joke.
The entity you speak of doesn't exist. The President of the US of A is a man named, Donald J Trump.
share