Christian Trump Supporters

[Sand Dancer]

Can you please name a baby that can cook, dress, feed itself and survive outside the womb?

I know adults that have a hard time with those things.

 

[Kooky]

I have evaluated your position. Here it is.

Every law forces people to do something against somebody's will. I am sure you are not advocating no laws.

Is every law that forces people to do something against their will intrinsically justified, then?

Do we not justify laws with a need or moral principle that necessarily needs to be strong enough to override people's intrinsic freedom?

???

Actually I have. You have refused to acknowledge it?

I haven't seen it. Could you show me?

Empirical and verifiable.

Can you please name a baby that can cook, dress, feed itself and survive outside the womb?

No, because that wasn't what part of my answer.

 

[Kooky]

Hmmm... ok, a great dodge. Then again, I presented an irrefutable and logical argument.

Nope.

 

[ElishaElijah]

How do you think this would be accomplished without involving any form of government, and no force or violence of any sort against a woman who does not want to carry her pregnancy to term?

I did say federal government, all citizens and government are to uphold the Constitution, this includes protecting innocent children in the womb. Violence against women who don’t want to carry to term??? No way man, the dude is to take full responsibility to provide for both.
People have to take responsibility for their decisions and when a pregnancy occurs as a result it’s wrong to just kill the child.
Seen as Trump is pro life and Democrats have no problem just killing the child is one of the reasons I voted for him.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Agree, but sadly, I became a Christian as an adult and was raised in a more or less theist home. I was born again in 1987.

I became a Christian when I was 17, and that was 31 years ago. Now I feel old. Lol.

 

[metis]

Yep. I read his niece's book. I feel sorry for him, for the way his dad treated him and his brother. Sadly, he has a lot of damage to undo but will he?

I hear ya. Netflix had a two-hour documentary on him, and they covered some of the "baggage" he grew up with, plus I've read several articles dealing with his past life, and these were not partisan "hit-jobs". He had sortofa love/hate relationship with his father, and his parents had a lot of trouble with raising him which is probably why he was sent to a boarding school and then a military-style school because the former couldn't even handle him. Some of his classmates also had mixed feelings towards him.

His first wife Ivana said that he kept NAZI reading material on his bedstand and would often read some, and she said that this would relax him. Sour grapes, I dunno, but he certainly has had a strong attraction to "strong leaders", including Putin and even Saddam Hussein.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I hear ya. Netflix had a two-hour documentary on him, and they covered some of the "baggage" he grew up with, plus I've read several articles dealing with his past life, and these were not partisan "hit-jobs". He had sortofa love/hate relationship with his father, and his parents had a lot of trouble with raising him which is probably why he was sent to a boarding school and then a military-style school because the former couldn't even handle him. Some of his classmates also had mixed feelings towards him.

His first wife Ivana said that he kept NAZI reading material on his bedstand and would often read some, and she said that this would relax him. Sour grapes, I dunno, but he certainly has had a strong attraction to "strong leaders", including Putin and even Saddam Hussein.

I don't know if this story is accurate, but didn't he arbitrarily cut off the finances for his sick nephew's medical care because he was ticked off at some of his relatives? I read that online somewhere, but I don't remember the source. Maybe someone can confirm it.

 

[metis]

OK, I just painted an imaginary bullseye on both my chest and back because I'm likely to get hit by both sides on this issue.

I am pro-life, largely because what's growing in a pregnant woman is not a turnip nor a chicken-- it's a human being.

OTOH, in the States we live in a representative democracy, thus it is we that decides what laws and sets of morals we are going to operate under-- at least ideally. If the baby was outside the woman, that would be quite different than if it was growing inside the woman, but it's not. Seems that maybe she should have a say about what she may decide to do? IMO, ideally, she should have the baby and keep it or set the child up for adoption, but I ain't her. Am I also going to mandate other medical procedures that she supposedly must have?

But it goes further than this. Surveys show that roughly 60% of Americans do not want Roe v Wade overturned. Are they to be ignored?

But even those who don't want abortions to be legal are not all on the same page. If asked, what if a 15 year-old girl is pregnant through incest, are we to insist that she must go through with having the child? After all, the baby did cause the incest. Many say they can't go that far.

What about rape? Again, many whom are against abortion believe she should have one if she wants under that circumstance. So, of the 40% of people who consider themselves to be pro-life on this issue, many say that these should be allowed under one of both of these two circumstances, thus significantly lowering that 40%.

So, where does this leave us? Do we go by the majority of what Americans want? Or do we insist there a girl/woman must go through giving birth regardless as to how the unborn child got there? Logically, there doesn't seem to be much wiggle-room for compromise. Leave it to the states? Would they not have the same exact problem, so what does that solve?

OK, fire away!

 

[metis]

I don't know if this story is accurate, but didn't he arbitrarily cut off the finances for his sick nephew's medical care because he was ticked off at some of his relatives? I read that online somewhere, but I don't remember the source. Maybe someone can confirm it.

Yes, and he also fought her father's inheritance when the old man died, thus it got seriously reduced. This has been Trump's tactic for decades, namely litigate and run others out of money so they have to settle for less.

 

[Nakosis]

It is true that with repentance just about all sin can be forgiven by God.
But unlike God we have no means of measuring either repentance or faith.
Both his words and actions would indicate quite the opposite
Trump seems to score very low indeed, on both counts.

How about Judge not, that ye be not judged.
It would seem Trump's or anyone else's ultimate judgement for their past sins lies with God.
Politicians promise to do the right thing. I imagine most vote in the hope of what is promised.
Hope people will repent, hope they will turn to or at least be guided by God's grace.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Yes, and he also fought her father's inheritance when the old man died, thus it got seriously reduced. This has been Trump's tactic for decades, namely litigate and run others out of money so they have to settle for less.

According to these online sources, Donald Trump is involved in over 3,500 lawsuits, and 29 more lawsuits and investigations since he left office last year. He has also been named in at least 169 federal lawsuits. That's not to mention the $25 million settlement he was court-ordered to pay the people he swindled through his phony business university, or the $250,000 he was court-ordered to pay to eight different charities for illegally misusing charitable funds at the Trump Foundation for political purposes.

Trump involved in 3,500 lawsuits: report

FACT CHECK: Has Trump Been In Thousands Of Lawsuits?

Litigation Tracker: Pending Criminal and Civil Cases Against Donald Trump

 

[pearl]

What about rape? Again, many whom are against abortion believe she should have one if she wants under that circumstance. So, of the 40% of people who consider themselves to be pro-life on this issue, many say that these should be allowed under one of both of these two circumstances, thus significantly lowering that 40%.

One of the reasons I do not see compromise with anti-abortionists, as the innocence of the unborn, which we all agree with, ought not to be determined by the act of another person, the father.

 

[metis]

According to these online sources, Donald Trump is involved in over 3,500 lawsuits, and 29 more lawsuits and investigations since he left office last year. He has also been named in at least 169 federal lawsuits. That's not to mention the $25 million settlement he was court-ordered to pay the people he swindled through his phony business university, or the $250,000 he was court-ordered to pay to eight different charities for illegally misusing charitable funds at the Trump Foundation for political purposes.

Trump involved in 3,500 lawsuits: report

FACT CHECK: Has Trump Been In Thousands Of Lawsuits?

Litigation Tracker: Pending Criminal and Civil Cases Against Donald Trump

Yep, and it begs the question why any law-abiding citizen and/or person of faith would support a man who does these things? Doesn't character matter any more?

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Yep, and it begs the question why any law-abiding citizen and/or person of faith would support a man who does these things? Doesn't character matter any more with some?

The character of the president used to matter significantly to conservatives when Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were in office, but that wasn't the case when Trump was in office. However, concern for the president's moral character among these conservatives has made a miraculous comeback when Biden was elected, after being curiously absent during Trump's entire presidency, and also during the time he was campaigning back in 2015. Instead of wailing and gnashing their teeth at Trump for his sins (as they did with Clinton and Obama, and now with Biden), they repeatedly insisted they voted for a president, not a pastor. They also persistently insisted that Trump's sins were between him and God, and Christians shouldn't judge him. And when these devout conservatives are reminded of their blatantly obvious morally inconsistent judgments of a Democratic president's sins (while thumbing their nose at Trump's perpetual immoral behavior), they'll either immediately deflect, resort to vicious name-calling, or they will ignore you.

 

[Quetzal]

Regardless, I do support food stamps and supportive services.

Excellent, I appreciate the balanced approach here.

Do you think that sometimes if we never confront difficulty we actually hinder personal growth?

Depends on the difficulty. It has to be something that can be reasonably overcome by personal choice at the sacrifice of temporary comfort. In other words, it has to be possible to be successful. If you gave me $20 and said buy food with this for one week, I could do it. It wouldn't be fun and not very nutritious, but I could be successful. There is an opportunity for growth here. Give me $5 instead and it becomes insurmountable, there is no personal growth there.

Yes! I am glad it was addressed but imagine if it hadn't passed.

Id rather not, thank you!

Of course, at some point, my faith will bleed through. Hope, love and the value of life. I have a high premium on this. Also, the fact that you want to support these people group, I can see that you do too.

I appreciate ya, Ken! I think we have hit most of the big talking points on this topic. We have some differing views, but nothing you have shared with me comes across as unreasonable. Merry Christmas!

 

[ElishaElijah]

The character of the president used to matter significantly to conservatives when Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were in office, but that wasn't the case when Trump was in office. However, concern for the president's moral character among these conservatives has made a miraculous comeback when Biden was elected, after being curiously absent during Trump's entire presidency, and also during the time he was campaigning back in 2015. Instead of wailing and gnashing their teeth at Trump for his sins (as they did with Clinton and Obama, and now with Biden), they repeatedly insisted they voted for a president, not a pastor. They also persistently insisted that Trump's sins were between him and God, and Christians shouldn't judge him. And when these devout conservatives are reminded of their blatantly obvious morally inconsistent judgments of a Democratic president's sins (while thumbing their nose at Trump's perpetual immoral behavior), they'll either immediately deflect, resort to vicious name-calling, or they will ignore you.

This is the OP: For Christian Trump supporters: please provide a scripturally-based argument for your decision to back this man (without changing the subject to denigrate any opponent), including an explanation for rejecting scripture that clearly casts this person, based on his speech and actions (past and present), as an unfit ruler.

This has been answered so probably start a new discussion because now you’re just talking to yourselves.
Merry Christmas everyone!

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

This is the OP: For Christian Trump supporters: please provide a scripturally-based argument for your decision to back this man (without changing the subject to denigrate any opponent), including an explanation for rejecting scripture that clearly casts this person, based on his speech and actions (past and present), as an unfit ruler.

This has been answered so probably start a new discussion because now you’re just talking to yourselves.
Merry Christmas everyone!

As a matter of fact, I was just talking to metis by responding to his posts. But thank you for your advice anyway, ElishaElijah. I'll give it all the consideration I think it deserves. I'm sure if my correspondence with metis was a problem, then the staff would tell me.

 

[ElishaElijah]

As a matter of fact, I was just talking to metis by responding to his posts. But thank you for your advice anyway, ElishaElijah. I'll give it all the consideration I think it deserves. I'm sure if my correspondence with metis was a problem, then the staff would tell me.

It’s not a problem, would just start a different thread or why not a one on one conversation between you 2. Not sure the point in this thread.

 

[Kenny]

Is every law that forces people to do something against their will intrinsically justified, then?

Do we not justify laws with a need or moral principle that necessarily needs to be strong enough to override people's intrinsic freedom?

Another side step.

Are you saying that babies have no intrinsic freedom?

No, because that wasn't what part of my answer.

It satisfied the parameters that you set

 

[Kenny]

Excellent, I appreciate the balanced approach here.

Depends on the difficulty. It has to be something that can be reasonably overcome by personal choice at the sacrifice of temporary comfort. In other words, it has to be possible to be successful. If you gave me $20 and said buy food with this for one week, I could do it. It wouldn't be fun and not very nutritious, but I could be successful. There is an opportunity for growth here. Give me $5 instead and it becomes insurmountable, there is no personal growth there.

There is absolutely NO argument here...

Id rather not, thank you!

I appreciate ya, Ken! I think we have hit most of the big talking points on this topic. We have some differing views, but nothing you have shared with me comes across as unreasonable. Merry Christmas!