Evangelical support of Trump

theelusiveshadow

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Nov 2, 2016
2,552
4,313
0
I didn't vote for Trump, and there are some evangelicals who are enthusiastic Trump fanboys. But equating approval of most of Trump's policies with "uncritical" acceptance of him is a gross exaggeration. Most evangelicals I know are very aware of his problems and wish he would shut up most of the time, but they like some of the things he's doing and certainly view him as a much better option than Hillary would have been.

One thing many Christians wanted? To be largely left to practice as they saw fit. The Left made it clear they were not okay with that and were more than happy to encroach on religious liberty if it furthered their social agendas.

That's not to say that it's not a problem. I myself was very critical of theologians like Wayne Grudem who came out in support of Trump, something that he had to backtrack on when the Hollywood Access video came out (and really, knowing Trump, was that video a surprise to anyone?). Guys like First Baptist Dallas pastor Robert Jeffress has gotten on my last nerve with his Trumpism. But just because there are some outspoken Trump fans among evangelical leaders doesn't mean it is widespread; many do not support him, and most others have measured support at best.
 

JG

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
62,322
12,959
0
One thing many Christians wanted? To be largely left to practice as they saw fit. The Left made it clear they were not okay with that and were more than happy to encroach on religious liberty if it furthered their social agendas.
Except that is untrue. People on Left are fine with people practicing their religion as they see fit. It is only when that practice infringes on the rights and freedoms of others who may not share those beliefs that we have problems.
 

Shane3

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Feb 17, 2015
14,198
4,577
0
Except that is untrue. People on Left are fine with people practicing their religion as they see fit. It is only when that practice infringes on the rights and freedoms of others who may not share those beliefs that we have problems.
There you go again. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: eodhorn

JG

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
62,322
12,959
0
That third sentence.
What’s wrong with that? Your rights stop at the end of my nose. And vice versa.

A Muslim has the right to practice their religion. Doesn’t mean they can say we don’t have to remove the hijab for a drivers license photo. Doesn’t mean a doctor at a public hospital can refuse to treat a woman.
 

eodhorn

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Mar 24, 2018
1,188
2,283
0
42
Surprise, Arizona
Except that is untrue. People on Left are fine with people practicing their religion as they see fit. It is only when that practice infringes on the rights and freedoms of others who may not share those beliefs that we have problems.
So theoretically you’re okay if someone sued an Arab restaurant for not making them a bacon sandwich, despite the fact that in that Muslims mind you are condemning their soul to eternal hell.
 

bilbo t baggins

Member Who Talks
Aug 13, 2018
605
1,182
0
So theoretically you’re okay if someone sued an Arab restaurant for not making them a bacon sandwich, despite the fact that in that Muslims mind you are condemning their soul to eternal hell.
There caveat here of course would be that they didn't have bacon sandwiches on their menu already. But your point stands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eodhorn

JG

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
62,322
12,959
0
So theoretically you’re okay if someone sued an Arab restaurant for not making them a bacon sandwich, despite the fact that in that Muslims mind you are condemning their soul to eternal hell.
No, not at all. No more than suing Chick Fil-A for not serving you a beer.
 

mcb0703!

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Feb 6, 2015
14,314
24,895
0
Except that is untrue. People on Left are fine with people practicing their religion as they see fit. It is only when that practice infringes on the rights and freedoms of others who may not share those beliefs that we have problems.
Not even remotely close to the truth, but that's expected from you. CO bakery owner took his case to the Supreme Court & won over his right to refuse to sell a cake for a gay wedding based on his religious beliefs.

Looking forward to your next post of remarkably stupid lies. Have a hypocritical day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theSchwarz

calvin farquhar

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Dec 19, 2017
8,523
15,546
0
Not even remotely close to the truth, but that's expected from you. CO bakery owner took his case to the Supreme Court & won over his right to refuse to sell a cake for a gay wedding based on his religious beliefs.

Looking forward to your next post of remarkably stupid lies. Have a hypocritical day.
You'll bake that cake by god because my right to eat cake cannot be interfered with by your constitutional right to practice your religion. There is no right to demand someone bake you a cake. A dick cake, a KKK cake, a confederate flag cake or a cake for a gay wedding. But, only one of those will have lefties demanding you do as you're damn well told to do.
 

JG

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
62,322
12,959
0
Not even remotely close to the truth, but that's expected from you. CO bakery owner took his case to the Supreme Court & won over his right to refuse to sell a cake for a gay wedding based on his religious beliefs.

Looking forward to your next post of remarkably stupid lies. Have a hypocritical day.
There is a highly significant difference. Asking a restaurant to make something that isn't on the menu is asking them to sell something they normally do not. Like going to a car place and asking to buy a couch. Or going to Home Depot and demanding they sell you milk.

The bakery was asked to sell their normal product they sell every day. They refused to sell to a gay couple out of religious bigotry.

That would be the same as the Arab restaurant refusing to serve jews, based upon religious beliefs.

Thanks for your service and have a great day.
 

mcb0703!

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Feb 6, 2015
14,314
24,895
0
There is a highly significant difference. Asking a restaurant to make something that isn't on the menu is asking them to sell something they normally do not. Like going to a car place and asking to buy a couch. Or going to Home Depot and demanding they sell you milk.

The bakery was asked to sell their normal product they sell every day. They refused to sell to a gay couple out of religious bigotry.

That would be the same as the Arab restaurant refusing to serve jews, based upon religious beliefs.

Thanks for your service and have a great day.
& yet again, @JG changes the narrative to prove to himself, & himself only, that he's right & everyone else is wrong.

Previously, I stated that I was "looking forward to your next post of remarkably stupid lies..." You didn't disappoint...

Thanks for your continued stupidity. Have a hypocritical day.
 

JG

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
62,322
12,959
0
& yet again, @JG changes the narrative to prove to himself, & himself only, that he's right & everyone else is wrong.

Previously, I stated that I was "looking forward to your next post of remarkably stupid lies..." You didn't disappoint...

Thanks for your continued stupidity. Have a hypocritical day.
The poster said this: "So theoretically you’re okay if someone sued an Arab restaurant for not making them a bacon sandwich, despite the fact that in that Muslims mind you are condemning their soul to eternal hell. "

I addressed that. No they can't be sued for that. They don't bacon sandwiches to ANYONE. Not something they sell. The bakery people were asked to sell the same product they normally sell, to a gay couple. They refused, out of religious bigotry. The comparison would be an Arab restaurant refusing to sell falafel to a Jewish customer, out of religious bigotry.

Not lies. Facts.

Have a great day.
 

mcb0703!

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Feb 6, 2015
14,314
24,895
0
The poster said this: "So theoretically you’re okay if someone sued an Arab restaurant for not making them a bacon sandwich, despite the fact that in that Muslims mind you are condemning their soul to eternal hell. "

I addressed that. No they can't be sued for that. They don't bacon sandwiches to ANYONE. Not something they sell. The bakery people were asked to sell the same product they normally sell, to a gay couple. They refused, out of religious bigotry. The comparison would be an Arab restaurant refusing to sell falafel to a Jewish customer, out of religious bigotry.

Not lies. Facts.

Have a great day.
I don't care what any other poster stated; I've proven, yet again, that you're a hypocritical liar. & then once proven, yet again, you change the narrative so you can tell yourself you're correct & everyone else is wrong.

Facts.

Have a hypocritical day.
 

sacatomato horn

Member Who Talks
Sep 15, 2016
601
1,218
0
There is a highly significant difference. Asking a restaurant to make something that isn't on the menu is asking them to sell something they normally do not. Like going to a car place and asking to buy a couch. Or going to Home Depot and demanding they sell you milk.

The bakery was asked to sell their normal product they sell every day. They refused to sell to a gay couple out of religious bigotry.

That would be the same as the Arab restaurant refusing to serve jews, based upon religious beliefs.

Thanks for your service and have a great day.
Your point is incorrect and the entire analogy is off base. The Cake was not an off the shelf, on-the-menu product. Wedding cakes require artistic creativity. To conform to the customer's order, the baker was required to create a stylistic message that ran counter to his religious beliefs. The proper analogy would be a Muslim baker coerced by the Colorado Commission to bake a cake with a Zionist message written on it, in bacon.

Since the original ruling, militant gays have demanded cakes from Christian bakers adorned with figurines performing fellatio. I'm sure they could be reasonably accommodated by other bakers, but then, that's not the point, is it?
 

ttaghorn

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
12,030
3,515
0
There is a highly significant difference. Asking a restaurant to make something that isn't on the menu is asking them to sell something they normally do not. Like going to a car place and asking to buy a couch. Or going to Home Depot and demanding they sell you milk.

The bakery was asked to sell their normal product they sell every day. They refused to sell to a gay couple out of religious bigotry.

That would be the same as the Arab restaurant refusing to serve jews, based upon religious beliefs.

Thanks for your service and have a great day.
Lets see if we can make it simple for you. To an independent business person, who is not involved in selling anything or any product to the Federal Govt, pays his taxes, and supports a family, shouldn't he have the right to serve or not serve any customer he desires. Its called "freedom", we are free to do what we please as long as it violates no law, Not providing a service to a Gay, Lesbian, Trans, or whatever they want to call themselves is not guaranteed if performed by an independent business owner. I don't frequent Arab restaurants so I don't have a problem. I do support a few bakery's that have a right to refuse to service anyone they choose.
 

JG

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
62,322
12,959
0
Lets see if we can make it simple for you. To an independent business person, who is not involved in selling anything or any product to the Federal Govt, pays his taxes, and supports a family, shouldn't he have the right to serve or not serve any customer he desires. Its called "freedom", we are free to do what we please as long as it violates no law, Not providing a service to a Gay, Lesbian, Trans, or whatever they want to call themselves is not guaranteed if performed by an independent business owner. I don't frequent Arab restaurants so I don't have a problem. I do support a few bakery's that have a right to refuse to service anyone they choose.
Except millions of blacks were denied food, hotels, and housing using that rationale.
 

JG

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
62,322
12,959
0
Your point is incorrect and the entire analogy is off base. The Cake was not an off the shelf, on-the-menu product. Wedding cakes require artistic creativity. To conform to the customer's order, the baker was required to create a stylistic message that ran counter to his religious beliefs. The proper analogy would be a Muslim baker coerced by the Colorado Commission to bake a cake with a Zionist message written on it, in bacon.

Since the original ruling, militant gays have demanded cakes from Christian bakers adorned with figurines performing fellatio. I'm sure they could be reasonably accommodated by other bakers, but then, that's not the point, is it?
If the gays can demonstrate that the bakers made similar cakes for straights then yes. But since that is highly likely not the case, then no.
 

ttaghorn

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
12,030
3,515
0
Except millions of blacks were denied food, hotels, and housing using that rationale.
I knew in your devious, shallow, and wicked mind you would bring up the race card. However, you forgot the Women issues. Go back and recalibrate your system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eodhorn

ttaghorn

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
12,030
3,515
0
If the gays can demonstrate that the bakers made similar cakes for straights then yes. But since that is highly likely not the case, then no.
I hate to tell ya old fellow, but you are missing the entire point on this issue. Its simply a matter of whether I as an independent business man choose to serve you or anyone who walks into MY establishment, and based on Freedom I should have that right. How about trying the Bill or Rights under "Pursuit of happiness". If it makes me happy and I don't violate any City, County, State or Federal statues, then I should be able to serve anyone, or reject to serve anyone, I damn well please.
 

JG

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
62,322
12,959
0
I hate to tell ya old fellow, but you are missing the entire point on this issue. Its simply a matter of whether I as an independent business man choose to serve you or anyone who walks into MY establishment, and based on Freedom I should have that right. How about trying the Bill or Rights under "Pursuit of happiness". If it makes me happy and I don't violate any City, County, State or Federal statues, then I should be able to serve anyone, or reject to serve anyone, I damn well please.
Google "Civil Rights Act" and get back to me.