March 9, 2020

"I have this odd admiration for Evangelical voters. The pretty much sold out their ideals concerning personal morality..."

"... and supported Trump all the way. In return they received Supreme Courts justices they like, a rollback of LGBT rights, a wide expansion of government support for religion, etc.. It was a deal with the devil but for now it is paying big dividends for them. Most of the progressives I know would be horrified by such a 'sellout.' Over at The Nation all sorts of progressives are saying they will sit out the election rather than vote for Biden. Their personal moral purity counts more than winning. It is the same thing that cost Clinton in 2016. It is my biggest worry about 2020."

That's the highest-rated comment (by far) on a NYT column by David Leonhardt, "The Simple Reason the Left Won’t Stop Losing/Progressives need to care more about winning."

243 comments:

1 – 200 of 243   Newer›   Newest»
dwshelf said...

As has been said by many, evangelicals did not vote for a pastor. They voted for a president who supported policies they much preferred. Nothing anywhere near a sellout.

Freeman Hunt said...

Sold out their ideals concerning personal morality? Did we have an ideal about always voting for the most morally upright candidate? Was Hillary more morally upright than Donald? (Ha!)

David Begley said...

“a rollback of LGBT rights, a wide expansion of government support for religion, etc.”

Is there any evidence to back up those allegations?

tim maguire said...

Right, they voted for Trump, who merely is supportive of religious rights when the Democrats were out there fronting the most perfect Evangelical candidate ever. And yet they did not vote for that perfect Democrat.

Why?


WHY????

LYNNDH said...

How is Sundown Joe more moral than Trump? Sundown is corrupt, just look at how he has gotten his son and brother enriched with graft. Catholic Dems support abortion, how is not that morally corrupt? So Trump doesn't want transgenders that have still have original equipment into women's bathrooms, is that really a rollback of LGBT rights, or protecting the rights of women to be safe? I think the post deserved the BS tag.

exhelodrvr1 said...

a rollback of LGBT rights?

JPS said...

"Most of the progressives I know would be horrified by such a 'sellout.'"

Yeah, I've noticed that about the left.

YoungHegelian said...

They pretty much sold out their ideals concerning personal morality & supported Trump all the way.

Oh, sure. Let's just forget about that business of the Obama Administration taking the Little Sisters of the Poor to the Supreme Court. Forget about all those states which shut down religious-based adoption agencies because they wouldn't place with same-sex couples. And let's forget that all the Democratic contenders in 2016 promised to undo the long-standing Hyde Amendment.

Maybe, the Evangelicals went with Trump because he promised that his administration wouldn't put them in the cross-hairs....

Tragic Christian said...

Evangelicals didn’t vote for a pastor. But they did vote for someone who does not actually hate them. Beto let the cat out of the bag when he said we need to start taxing and restricting churches that don’t fall all-in on the lgbt position of the moment. “Live and let live” is not even an option — you MUST bake the cake. I’m also interested in what universe there’s a massive rollback of lgbt rights and government support of religion.

traditionalguy said...

Nope. We made our deal with the Holy Spirit. And being friends with the Spirit of Truth and Reality has benefits. Who has not chased women in their youth?

Otto said...

Progressives I've got a bridge I want to sell you.

TreeJoe said...

This is kinda like how Trump is dampening block voter enthusiasm for Joe Biden....

You mean Trump is supporting a large constituency by not just pandering to them but actually doing things they care about, and in return they support that politician?

As far as I can tell the largest difference between republicans and democrats, at a society level right now, is this:

1. Republicans quickly lose enthusiasm for candidates who say the right thing but don't act.

2. Democrats quickly lose enthusiasm for candidates who don't say the right thing, regardless of actions.

The cases are manifest but look at Liz Warren: Horrible personal and professional record. But always said the right things. Hillary Clinton: A terrible professional record and personally was involved in denigrating women who put forth claim after claim of credible sexual advances by her husband.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

traditionalguy said...
Who has not chased women in their youth?


How are we defining 'youth'?

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Please explain to me how it is moral to support a woman democrat who used her position of power to enrich her family foundation with Russian money - and hid it all with a Private Server.

Please - explain to me how that is morally superior.

Please explain to me how support of Joe Biden - is morally superior.
When Biden family corruption is obvious to anyone paying attention.

dreams said...

When the loser left loses, our country wins.

Char Char Binks said...

I'm an atheist, and I can't stop laughing at Proglodytes' contempt for Christians. Proggies, enjoy your "moral high ground", your abortions, your perversions, your anti-racist hatred of wypipo, your broken families, your STD, your scientific worship of Gaia, your tolerance for crime in your sanctuaries, and all your other consolations for losing.

DavidUW said...

Define “youth” as until death.

h said...

David Begley asks for evidence: When Obama was President gay men could be married, and they could immigrate the US and stay here without documentation; now, three short years later, they can still marry, but their rights to remain in the US without proper documentation have been restricted. On expansion of support for religion, the Trump tax reform raised the personal deduction, and limited the amount of state and local taxes that could be deducted; this created an incentive for people to take the standard deduction, and they could no longer get a tax break for giving to their church. Oh. Nevermind.

DavidUW said...

As the Babylon bee stated, evangelicals voting for candidate less likely to make his religion illegal.

JAORE said...

For the left to care more than winning would require the old "give 110 percent".

mockturtle said...

As usual, the Left thinks we are voting for Pastor in Chief rather than President. Maybe Caesar does a better job of running the Roman Empire than would, say, Herod.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

" a rollback of LGBT rights..."

when? What? do give example of this so-called "rollback of LGBT rights."


The real roll back? the roll back of honesty.
If you support the leftwing agenda and the leftwing media - you support lying liars who lie.

RichAndSceptical said...

As long as they refuse to honestly examine why they lose, they will continue to lose.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

People who are not evangelical Christians writing about people they don’t know and can’t understand would be amusing if it wasn’t so sad. I mean you have to be very ignorant about your fellow Americans and what they believe to write the crap Althouse highlights. And why such monomaniacal focus on ECs? Why not muse about why certain Muslims voted for Obama: was it in their interest or were they sellouts too? How about Mormons? Why not really stir up the shit and ask how Catholic Christians can possibly vote for the infanticide-loving liberals that routinely garner their votes? Oh, I know why. That wouldn’t be helpful to Pelosi and Biden and all the other cafeteria Catholics in “public service” would it?

ignorant assholes.

cubanbob said...

Being a Progressive is in of itself a moral failure. Who cares what the author thinks?

Mattman26 said...

Our problem is we’re too principled! Yeah, that’s the ticket ....

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Hi, I'm Hillary, and I hate you. You're deplorable. Please vote for me.

Hi, I'm a superior democrat and I'm above the law. I hate you. Please vote for me.

Char Char Binks said...

Yes, contempt is an odd sort of "admiration".

Bob Boyd said...

Evangelicals can separate church and state. Progs can't because their church is the state.

Bob said...

The commenter frames it as a choice between a moral leader who supports immoral polices versus an immoral leader who supports moral policies.

I would think a rational voter would support the immoral leader who advances the voter's concept of morality.

But, as others have pointed out, the real choice is between two immoral leaders, one who supports one view of moral policy and another who supports a different view of moral policy.

Now, that's really a no-brainer.

Not Sure said...

Support for Trump among "evangelicals" during the 2016 primaries was not strong among regular churchgoers. More of a class phenomenon than a religious one. Relatively informative article, despite being in the WaPo.

Bay Area Guy said...

It was a deal with the devil but for now it is paying big dividends for them.

Concern Troll! Nobody cares who leftwingers think right winger evangelicals should be voting for.

Most of the progressives I know would be horrified by such a 'sellout.'

Yeah, right. Nobody cares.

Over at The Nation all sorts of progressives are saying they will sit out the election rather than vote for Biden.

Good! I hope they stay home. They are morons.

Their personal moral purity counts more than winning. It is the same thing that cost Clinton in 2016. It is my biggest worry about 2020."

Moral purity about American politics? May they stay confused.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Hi Christians - we hate you. But you should still vote for democrats who hate you, because if you don't, we will accuse you of hypocrisy because you suffer from the inability to understand morality.

Otto said...

Ann does that mean that practicing Jews should only vote for a practicing Jew, an atheist only voting for an atheist and a muslim only voting for a muslim?
Have you ever voted for someone other than an atheist?

rehajm said...

This democracy thing isn't a la carte. You usually get a choice of rubber chicken or stinky fish...

Fun to talk about morality when you don't have opportunity. Seems to me people weren't voting against their morality as voting for their own economic opportunity.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Bob Boyd nailed it:
Evangelicals can separate church and state. Progs can't because their church is the state.

This is a truism, much like Fen’s Law:

Progs don’t really believe the things they agitate in favor of (paraphrasing).

Anthony said...

Yeah cuz ‘feminists’ supporting a rapist and his woman-trashing wife is perfectly congruent.

hombre said...

If it weren’t for this kind of stupidity 2020 would be a blowout across the board for Republicans. Unlike this imbecile Evangelicals know they aren’t electing either a pope or a messiah. We are voting for constitutionalism, particularly freedom to practice our religion.

And how has Trump’s election resulted in a “rollback of LGBT rights?”

It boggles the mind when these lefties pontificate about morality while tolerating or supporting unbridled grifting, illegal disclosure of classified material, corruption of the news media, abortion and infanticide, etc., and, impending, their second homerun in a row, the selection of a demented old grifter or an evil old commie demagogue as their nominee for POTUS.

Bay Area Guy said...

I have a few conservative friends, who still bellow, "...but Trump's not Conservative!"

And, I always respond, true, Trump's not conservative, but he's accomplished a ton of conservative ends, dumbass.

effinayright said...

These are the same hypocritical leftards who told us repeatedly during the Clinton/Monica scandal that "character doesn't count, competence counts."

Of course, Evangelicals argued the opposite back then, but during the 2016 election the choice was between an utter scoundrel steeped in corruption (and who also openly despised Deplorables) and a rogue Trump whose major moral defect was that he cheated on his wives but also had gobs of executive experience (which Hillary did not).

For most Deplorables, Trump was the better candidate.

Achilles said...

"Most of the progressives I know would be horrified by such a 'sellout.'"

Democrat voters completely lack self awareness.

Vampires deal with mirrors better than the average democrat voter.

bagoh20 said...

Who were the Presidents these moral saints voted for?

OK, then just shut up.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The left hate you. You need to understand and show up and vote for them anyway, you immoral idiots.

Here's a fine example of charming leftwing tolerance.

If you don't fall in line, you will be labeled a "fascist". Just ignore all the fascist promises of State-run everything from the left.

Krumhorn said...

I thought the objective of the game was to vote for those people whose policies we want championed. I’m missing the part where we sold out. Still not tired of winning.

And Freeman Hunt nailed it. Hillary was morally superior to Trump?

- Krumhorn

bagoh20 said...

It seems that everyday the left wakes up and thinks, "how can we insult some voters today?" Maybe that's not exactly a winning strategy. I can assure that is is exactly why you lost in 2016. I'm glad that you either can't see that or can't resist doing it anyway.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

If you live in Minnesota - your vote does not count. The left have a monopoly on vote fraud. Legalized vote fraud.

Paddy O said...

It's funny how people so often make moral issues some kind of boxed together binary. Evangelicals are voting against abortion. Not killing unborn babies is a significant moral issue, compared to which other past moral failings are minimized. That they make the issue about sexual behavior is really being either shockingly or intentionally ignorant.

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...

"The[y] pretty much sold out their ideals concerning personal morality..."
"... and supported Trump all the way."


Yawn.

"Damn, our concern-trolling to get the troglodyte Christian scum of the earth to keep voting against their own self-interest and indirectly advance our agenda, while pluming ourselves on our own unutterable moral superiority, isn't working any more!"

But I guess this shit never gets old for its intended audience.

billo said...

I love this "sellout" comment, when the progs are throwing any ethics in the election process to rig their party for Biden, and will then line up to vote for him whether he can still draw a clock face or not.

Support for Trump was pretty high among Evangelicals in 2016, regardless of what the WaPo says. And the reason is simple.

Given two candidates, one of which is actively antireligious and supports the persecution of Christians who try to live their faith, and one of which is relatively nonreligious and does not support prosecution, it is not a "sellout" to vote for the latter.

Hatred of conservative (either theological or political) Christianity and hatred of Israel are now platform components of Progressive ideology. It is no sellout to attempt to keep people who would see you in jail for your faith out of office. It's not Trump that forced that decision, it's Little Sisters of the Poor, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Elane Photography, University of Toledo, Sweet Cakes in Oregon, Liberty Ridge Farm, Arlene's Flowers and Gifts, 111 Cakery, Görtz Haus Gallery, Memories Pizza, etc. Add that to Evangelical's theology-based support for Israel, and it's a no-brainer.

Since election, Trump has been a pleasant surprise with respect to his policies. His support among the Evangelicals I know has skyrocketed.

JAORE said...

"Who has not chased women in their youth?

How are we defining 'youth'?"

That time of life when I could "chase" anything....

Roger Sweeny said...

rollback of LGBT rights? wide expansion of government support of religion?

I don't think I live in the same reality.

wendybar said...

h said "When Obama was President gay men could be married, and they could immigrate the US and stay here without documentation; now, three short years later, they can still marry, but their rights to remain in the US without proper documentation have been restricted"


I never knew Trump was keeping Gay men out of the US without documentation that used to be able to come here have been restricted!! Please explain...is it only gay men???

Michael K said...

How are we defining 'youth'?

Hunter Biden, who did not show up for his child support hearing again.

Mike Sylwester said...

Democrats are irked that Christians still own pizza parlors and bake shops.

All Christian-owned small businesses were supposed to be bankrupted by now.

wendybar said...

opps….typo above ^^^
"they can still marry, but their rights to remain in the US without proper documentation have been restricted. "

Fernandistein said...

"I have this odd admiration for Evangelical voters. The[sic] pretty much sold out their ideals concerning personal morality..."

Which ideals concerning personal morality?

"... and supported Trump all the way. In return they received Supreme Courts justices they like, a rollback of LGBT rights, a wide expansion of government support for religion, etc..

That sounds like the opposite of "sold out".

wide expansion of government support of religion?

AFAIK, a couple of typically bad SC decisions, so not really Trump. ..? Maybe the scribbler is including Pence's prayer meetings.

JohnAnnArbor said...

a rollback of LGBT rights, a wide expansion of government support for religion

In what ways, for either?

Paul Snively said...

It's almost as if personal morality were... personal.

It's also almost as if Christianity had some sort of, y'know, process for dealing with people who fail to live up to their/your/my personal, or even what it believes to be universal and transcendent, morality.

It's also almost as if, as far as I can tell to a person, no one who writes about "Evangelical voters" actually knows anything about Christianity, Evangelical or otherwise.

Iman said...

Progressives have an inordinate need to view themselves - and have other progressives follow suit - as heroic... preening narcissists that they are.

robother said...

No one is holier than thou than the Left, except possibly Life Long Republicans.

Quaestor said...

ARM continues the chase.

And the women continue to elude.

Otto said...

Definitely yentering.

jnseward said...

Evangelicals didn't sell out anything. We are all sinners. Let he who is without sin run for President.

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...

TreeJoe: 1. Republicans quickly lose enthusiasm for candidates who say the right thing but don't act.

Quickly? Sure didn't look too quick from where I sit.

But at least a lot of 'em appear to have finally caught on.

Still, on my more eeyore-ish days I suspect that certain sub-groups among current Trump supporters will manage to get all het up for the next Romney the GOPe throws up, should the GOPe ever manage to get its act together as l'Age Trump recedes in the rear-view mirror.

MountainJohn said...

And they miss the crucial point: Christianity is about forgiveness, mercy, and new chances. When you come to God, it is as though you had never lived as a sinner. And you may need that forgiveness many times over your life.

Not judging others is also important. Forgive us our trespasses as [in exactly the way] we forgive those who trespass against us.

MikeR said...

I can't understand the article. If they could deal with reality they wouldn't be progressive.

Kevin said...

The drumbeat of "you don't have to fall in love, you just have to fall in line" has begun in earnest.

It's going to be deafening, come November.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
PoNyman said...

Is Bill Clinton really this invisible now days? Althouse has been vocal about this hypocrisy from the Democrat side.

Lloyd W. Robertson said...

I've been surprised at how Trump has apparently become more of a social conservative in the course of running and then serving. He appeared at the National March for Life--something I believe Reagan never did; he has called out Governor Northam for favouring a law that would allow a calm deliberation about whether to kill a post-birth baby or not; and he has spoken against partial-birth abortion. It may be that he is teaching some social conservatives how to think (politically), while they are teaching him what to think.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The left were supposed to stomp out Christianity by now and replace it with a rainbow flag.

Oddly, people like Rick Steves', a famous and rare Christian democrat, is yet another celebrity example of someone who does not understand the actual definition of fascism.

Mr Wibble said...

Evangelicals voted for the party that lies to them rather than the party that hates and wants to destroy them.

And Christians who believe that all men are flawed and that God often uses flawed men to achieve His ends are willing to vote for a flawed man who achieves evangelical goals.

Utterly shocking, I know.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

https://babylonbee.com/news/christian-just-voting-for-whichever-political-party-less-likely-to-make-his-faith-illegal

A lot of non-religious people have a very distorted and inaccurate view of believers. They think we all sit around worrying about other peoples sex lives and using every opportunity to denounce those who do not conform to our views concerning sexual morality. And while there may be some Christians like that, I personally have never encountered any. Sure, we are against fornication, but we are also aware that the Bible discusses money far more than it does sex. Oppressing the poor is a frequent topic in the Bible. Not being a horn dog, not so much. Sure its there, but you know who was a horn dog? King David, "a man after God's heart." Non-believers confuse pietism with religious believe. That is, they think believers are all sanctimonious assholes.

chuck said...

Who has not chased women in their youth?

How are we defining 'youth'?


Wrong question, ARM. You should ask how we are defining "women".

Gusty Winds said...

I love how leftist atheists like to accuse Evangelicals of "selling out their morality". What bullshit. The prerequisite of being a Christian, is understanding that we are ALL sinners, in need of salvation and redemption through Jesus Christ.

They don't even understand the premise to analyse the politics. Fools.

Abortion trumping every other issue is moral? My 35 year old cousin just had an abortion two weeks ago and told me about it. She is devastated, and guilt ridden. I understand why she did it. It's more complicated than "a woman's right to choose".

Leftists are gross.

Otto said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gusty Winds said...

Mr. Wibble said... "And Christians who believe that all men are flawed and that God often uses flawed men to achieve His ends are willing to vote for a flawed man who achieves evangelical goals."

Exactly. Jesus gave the keys to build his church to his most flawed apostle, Peter. The emotional one who denied him in his hour of need. Pretty big church that guy built.

Gusty Winds said...

Is chasing women the ultimate judgement of a man's morality? I got divorced two years ago after being faithful for 23 years. My ex wasn't.

Now I'm chasing women like I did in Jr. High, High School, and College. And I'm having an absolute blast. They seems to be having fun too.

Earnest Prole said...

Progressives are the new Puritans.

Larry J said...

Evangelicals voted for Trump because they knew he was preferable to Hillary. They knew what kind of judges and justices she would nominate to fill vacancies. They knew what kinds of laws she would push. Despite any reservations they might have felt about Trump, they knew Hillary was worse, much worse. They listen to the Democrats running today and will vote accordingly in November.

n.n said...

Religious principles like individual dignity and intrinsic value.

Religious principles like "life deemed unworthy of life", diversity, sex chauvinism, political congruence ("="), etc.

The transgender spectrum ("LGBT") was tainted through conflation of Chamber and State, and association with Twilighters and progressive liberals.

Fernandistein said...

Progressives are the new Puritans.

"There was a vast amount of criminality in London, a whole world-within-a-world of thieves, bandits, prostitutes, drug-peddlers, and racketeers of every description; but since it all happened among the proles themselves, it was of no importance. In all questions of morals they were allowed to follow their ancestral code. The sexual puritanism of the Party was not imposed upon them. Promiscuity went unpunished, divorce was permitted. For that matter, even religious worship would have been permitted if the proles had shown any sign of needing or wanting it. They were beneath suspicion. As the Party slogan put it: 'Proles and animals are free.'

Winston reached down and cautiously scratched his varicose ulcer."

Gusty Winds said...

Can somebody please tell where God would find men and women to do his bidding who aren't flawed?

I'd like to visit that mythical island...

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Hillary Clinton would give us an army of Ruth Bader Ginsbergs on the bench.

Ruth voted against the Colorado Cake baker who was harassed by some in the angry gay community. But also, and more importantly, the little cake shop was harassed by State of Colorado.



Amadeus 48 said...

That is a silly comment at NYT.

Ken B said...

Chuck, Inghoul, Ritmo
Personal political purity is priceless; protect it by protesting — plump for possible proxies in preference to pitiful panderers.

Ken B said...

“That is a silly comment at NYT.”

That deserves its own keyboard shortcut.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Gusty Winds-

Joe Biden Island, man. the dude is walking morality.

mockturtle said...

Sure its there, but you know who was a horn dog? King David, "a man after God's heart."

True, but not with impunity.

mockturtle said...

Bob Boyd observes: Evangelicals can separate church and state. Progs can't because their church is the state.

Excellent point, Bob!

Ron Winkleheimer said...

The underlying premises of that NYT comment is that the only morality that Evangelicals are concerned with is sexual morality and that sin is unforgivable.

Mathew 18:21-35

Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?”

22Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times. g

23“Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand bags of gold h was brought to him. 25Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.

26“At this the servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ 27The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.

28“But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred silver coins. i He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded.

29“His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay it back.’

30“But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31When the other servants saw what had happened, they were outraged and went and told their master everything that had happened.

32“Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ 34In anger his master handed him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

35“This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.”

Bay Area Guy said...

Lemme give the clueless NYT commentators a simple example -- the issue of abortion.

I am generally Pro-Life, but it isn't my top issue. I have voted for Pro-Choice candidates several times, as the lesser of two evils.

However, one can argue that DJT is the most Pro-Life President we've ever had (judges, speeches, trying to hamstring Planned Parenthood).

So, a voter who is strongly and passionately Pro-Life, probably is very happy with DJT.

Roy Jacobsen said...

OK, I think I have a pretty good handle on what human rights are. What the hell are LGBT rights?

Ken B said...

Ron W:” The underlying premises of that NYT comment is that the only morality that Evangelicals are concerned with is sexual morality and that sin is unforgivable. ”

Insightful point, but that really is what leftists think of religious people. Ideological Turing test mega fail.

Butkus51 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ron Winkleheimer said...

True, but not with impunity.

Correct.

Samuel 12:7-14

7 Then Nathan said to David, “You are the man! This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. 8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more. 9 Why did you despise the word of the Lord by doing what is evil in his eyes? You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own. You killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. 10 Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.’

11 “This is what the Lord says: ‘Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity on you. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight. 12 You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel.’”

13 Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”

Nathan replied, “The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. 14 But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for[a] the Lord, the son born to you will die.”

Butkus51 said...

Libs pontificating about morals. Yeah, ok.

Rocketeer said...

The non-religious would benefit greatly from reading the Bible, if only to understand that one of it's great themes is God picking imperfect men and women to effect his will.

Christ didn't gather up 12 Pharisees to be his apostles.

Fernandistein said...

'Proles and animals are free.'

Crufts Best in Show winner celebrates by pooping on floor during victory lap.

The "Best in Show" looks like an inflated rat.

Francisco D said...

OK, I think I have a pretty good handle on what human rights are. What the hell are LGBT rights?

Good question. Maybe it is about gaining victim status so they can never be fired from a job or turned down for a promotion because any discrimination (e.g., determining incompetence) against them would be considered unfair.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Anyway, so far as I know, Trump didn't betray anybody so that they died in a battle so he could sleep with their wife and not get caught.

Rick said...

It would be a great argument if only it were 1% true.

Nonapod said...

a rollback of LGBT rights, a wide expansion of government support for religion

Neither of these are true outside of the fantasies of bubble dwelling weirdos.

This commetor's delusions are symptomatic of a larger problem that faces progressive voters: They believe many things that are just not true. This makes it more difficult for them to understand the people outside of their own tribe. And it's nearly imppossible to win against an opponent that you don't understand.

Roughcoat said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Skeptical Voter said...

Freeman Hunt nailed it early. Evangelicals "selling out their morality"? I'd say that they were presented with a binary choice in November 2016--and voted for the lesser of two evils.

Roughcoat said...

I am unaware of any rollback of LGBT rights. Nor am I aware of a wide expansion of widespread government support for religion. It seems rather that the LGBT crowd has quite successfully mugged our culture -- and continues to do so, successfully -- and that religion is in steep decline

Scott M said...

Most of the progressives I know would be horrified by such a 'sellout.'

Utter crap. They did the exact same thing electing Barack Obama, who prior to 2012 was a one-man/one woman marriage guy. They made that "deal" to elect the first black president.

Scott M said...

How is Sundown Joe more moral than Trump? Sundown is corrupt, just look at how he has gotten his son and brother enriched with graft.

A gaffetastic grafemeister?

Lazarus said...

Silly guy. You can strike ideological poses in February or March, but come October/November, everybody is pragmatic. The Evangelical "sell-out" isn't any more drastic than others.

Drago said...

Scott M: "Utter crap. They did the exact same thing electing Barack Obama, who prior to 2012 was a one-man/one woman marriage guy. They made that "deal" to elect the first black president."

In fairness to the dems/lefties and LLR-lefties that supported obama, they all knew obama was lying about that "one-man/one woman marriage" thing.

That marriage stance was simply offered up to fool the LLR's who needed a fig leaf to hide behind to support obambi.

Sort of like that little fake anti-abortion congressman Bart Stupak of MI who knew the jig was up on his "pro-life" fake position after Stupak voted for abortion funding for basically any reason at any time (and Stupak knew it) but obama gave Stupak a "promise" (wink wink) thru an executive order that obamacare funds would only go to abortions in the case of rape, incest or "health" of the mother (wink wink!).

Yeah, old Bart really thought that just might be enough to fool the rubes!

Alas, it did not.

Bart pulled an early "Jeff Flake" and bailed before he could be tossed out on his rear after being exposed as a lifelong charlatan.

tim maguire said...

Shorter liberal: if you vote for my candidate, you're doing it right. If you don't vote for my candidate, they system is broken.

Todd said...

"I have this odd admiration for Evangelical voters. The pretty much sold out their ideals concerning personal morality..."

Sure they did! They were supposed to either sit it out or vote Democrat! Anything else is hypocrisy! Even full-blown abortion in third-trimester Democrats are less hypocritical than voting for Trump cause OrangeManBad. Only liberals can vote "nuanced", dontyouknow...

narciso said...

that's the way, it works it's demotivational all the time,

Gk1 said...

Everytime I hear this lament from my leftie friends about 'how EC's can shame themselves supporting Trump?' I tell them the same thing "The evangelicals hired a bodyguard when they voted Trump, not their local pastor".

But the good news in all this liberal mewling is their recognition they are truly fucked come November. They are blubbering so loudly because their own coalition is shaking apart before our eyes and Trump's support keeps expanding.

Temujin said...

The highest rated comment- no doubt. This is how Libs think. But...

1) Please someone give me the list, or one instance of LGBT rights being rolled back. Just stop this nonsense...please. When I hear someone utter that useless phrase, I quit listening.

2) Thousands of Republicans refused to vote for George H.W. Bush on his re-election because of a broken promise about taxes. That (and Perot) is how Bill Clinton got elected with only 43% of the popular vote. 43%

Republicans fall on their sword and refuse to vote for 'pure' conservatives all the time. Sticking with Trump was clearly voting for (a) change. Real change. Not the kind you find on campaign placards. And (b) voting for the lesser of two evils. There in no universe in which Hillary Clinton is a more moral person than Donald Trump. That's how bad Hillary is.

The good news is that Joe Biden, while not at Hillary's level of corruption, is still up there. He's got a whole trunkload yet to be lit up.

Leland said...

So does the commenter want the federal government to regulate morality?

Darcy said...

Ugh. I feel like throwing in the towel as far as responding to this straw man, but, since it is tied to the message of the gospel, I feel a responsibility to keep trying.

Evangelicals believe that we are all sinners, and that it is impossible to be sinless, thus our need for a Savior. There is no category for the "most moral man". That said, we are not to condone sin. Are we to believe that voting for a man who has sinned (which would be all of us), would amount to condoning his sin? My answer is no. My answer is also to commit to praying for our president (as I did for Obama) to be led by the Holy Spirit and to know that Jesus loves him every bit as much as He loves me.

It does help to know that Donald Trump is a professed believer in Christ. FWIW, he can't be a worse believer than I.



Temujin said...

On my comment above I referred to voting for Trump vs Hillary as voting for the lesser of 2 evils. I did not mean to infer that Trump is evil. He's not. Uncouth, perhaps. Self-promoting, no doubt (what pol isn't?). But he's not evil. I should have said he was the better of two not great choices. As it turns out, Trump has been great in many ways.

Hillary is evil.

I hope that clears it up.

Jerry said...

I wasn't voting for a pastor. I was voting against Hillary for who I thought had the best chance to win.

Those screaming about him not being 'perfect enough' for the EC seem to forget that we were being promised a LOT more of the same stuff we'd seen in the Obama era. More men in women's bathrooms, more forcing people to bake cakes under threat of being charged with 'hate crimes', more disruption of cultural norms here in the US... and with no way of saying "Hey, we need to think and talk about this stuff before we commit to it" without being screamed at for being hateful/misogynistic/racist/sexist/whateverist.

At a certain point, getting screamed at is counterproductive. I don't give a damn about a lot of things that I would at least consider before Obama took the helm. Being continually called RACIST when I dared to even mention I thought Obama wasn't doing a good job got me to shut up - just like it was supposed to.

But it doesn't work any more. And it's not going to work in the future - that card's been pretty well shredded.

Jerry said...

@Temujin -

In the end, results matter. Do I like the results that Trump has delivered so far better than what the Democrats are promising in Nov? Oh, yes.

I look at the front-runners, and see startling ignorance about anything outside DC. WHY in the Wide Wide World of Sports would I vote for someone who's promising to damn near bankrupt me? (Green Nude Eel's looking to cost $75k/household in the FIRST year...)

Or ban fracking in the US - which (we can see this week) would REALLY make things interesting in the oil market.

Why would I vote for someone promising to kick the US in the tender places as hard as they can?

Why would I vote for what's very evidently MUCH worse than what we've got now?

tcrosse said...

If the Evangelicals are in the bag for Trump, then maybe he could switch VPs and run Nikki Haley instead of Mike Pence without losing too many of them. It's a calculation he's probably making.

Jim at said...

Last time I checked, the Trump Administration wasn't forcing nuns to pay for birth control.

Seems to be a win for the religious type, no?

Inga said...

Everyday, on every thread we hear “Leftists this and leftists that and how how terrible and bad they are”, do you folks really think that no one has the right to criticize the right? Every single time Althouse posts something about some lefty criticizing the right, you folks have a meltdown. So who are the snowflakes ?

RobinGoodfellow said...

“Blogger dwshelf said...
As has been said by many, evangelicals did not vote for a pastor. They voted for a president who supported policies they much preferred. Nothing anywhere near a sellout.”

I think this is correct. I didn’t read the article (paywall), but I think it is asinine to assume evangelicals shouldn’t have voted for Trump because he is imperfect. For whom should they have voted—Hillary? People voted for him primarily because he wasn’t Hillary. I did, and I expected him to govern as Hillary-lite. Have been pleasantly surprised day after day. I’ll vote for him again.

mockturtle said...

Tcrosse, you're probably right. Pence really brings nothing to the ticket.

M said...

Non Christians really do not understand Christians. Christians believe ALL PEOPLE are sinners. Everyone. So the person you support politically is the one who’s POLICIES adhere the closest to Christian ideals, not their personal behavior.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Every single time Althouse posts something about some lefty criticizing the right, you folks have a meltdown.

Inga has no counter-argument.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Russia Russia Inga,
Battling the left's lies and bad-faith reasoning is a daily effort. since you buy those lies, wholesale, we certainly understand your confusion.

Unknown said...

Always fun to read what a non-believer thinks about how believers are supposed to think and act. This NYTimes comment is moronic. That lots of other non-believers like it just shows how silly the left is.

Inga said...

“Inga has no counter-argument.”

Exactly. It was merely an observation.

mockturtle said...

OT Fernandistein @ 12:55: Hilarious. I'm a dog show enthusiast but have never seen it happen before. The judges are probably hoping it doesn't set a precedent. ;-)

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Exactly. It was merely an observation.

It is an incorrect observation.

Bilwick said...

So would the Evangelicals have been more morally consistent supporting rape-enabler Hillary?

Bilwick said...

You know who's less moral than Trump? Statists. Legalized looting and coercion, usually followed by a high murder count.

gspencer said...

Sell out our ideals?

Hardly. We voted for Trump because he'd do less damage to us than Hillary would do. That he's given us that and lots more has been all too the good.

ExplainMeMore said...

Progressives don't so much care about their core issues if they are not the ones in power to implement them. Their reason for being is to reshape society which requires that they have total control.

Inga said...

“It is an incorrect observation.”

That’s your opinion, they’re like noses, we all have one.

Sebastian said...

Late to the party, I know, but:

"They pretty much sold out their ideals concerning personal morality..."

No. Evangelicals just decided to be rational.

"... and supported Trump all the way."

Well, they supported Trump as the better candidate.

"In return they received Supreme Courts justices they like,"

True, considering the alternatives.

"a rollback of LGBT rights"

Huh? What does that mean? Trump was pro-gay before Hill and Barry.

"a wide expansion of government support for religion"

Huh? What does that mean? A reduction in overt government attacks on religion, perhaps.

"It was a deal with the devil"

Pray tell, what's so devilish about Trump? He reduced illegal immigration and regulation, put needed pressure on China and Iran, presided over healthy growth with low unemployment, and overcame a deep-state collusion hoax and coup attempt. He spoke at the right to life march and expresses pride in America. Sure, progs dislike some of his priorities, but why "devil"?

Michael K said...

Evangelicals got tired of being lied to. They picked a guy who sounded like he would do what he said and has done it.

Both parties have been lying for decades. Democrats to blacks and GOP to evangelicals.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

That’s your opinion

Why yes, yes it is.

The Vault Dweller said...

" a rollback of LGBT rights..."

For those who are wondering, the only thing that comes to mind for me is that previously Transgender people were briefly allowed to serve in the military but Donald Trump rescinded that change. So I guess this is really just a rollback of T rights not LGBT rights. But honestly no one cares about B rights. So the base group should just be LGT rights. But if we are being fair we would recognize that gay men have done the most work and faced the most backlash in society, so it should probably be GLT rights.

On an aside I don't think the Left at large realizes just how much the Right at large cares about the courts. I don't think Trump realized either. When someone came up to him in the primary and told him he has to talk about courts I imagine him saying something like, "Are you telling me, if I just promise the people I will only nominate justices from this little list from the Federalist Society I'll win over a bunch of supporters? Sure! OF course I'll do that!"

Makes me wonder why this wasn't a more widely understood position from other Republicans.

robother said...

"Odd admiration" is a step up from open contempt for Deplorables. But I'd still advise Evangelicals to keep a safe social distance from any of these odd admirers. They're toxic as hell.

Clyde said...

David Begley said...
“a rollback of LGBT rights, a wide expansion of government support for religion, etc.”

Is there any evidence to back up those allegations?


That's exactly what I was wondering, along with "What country is that bozo living in? Is it one with women wandering around in crimson robes with lampshades on their heads?"

WillowViney said...

King David had Uriah killed so he could grab his wife Bathsheba. When Moses was young he killed an Egyptian overseer, buried his body in the sand, and he ran away. Paul persecuted and condemned Christians, some to their deaths. And yet God raised them all up to become great and faithful servant-leaders.

Compared to their sins Trump is a piker.

Rick said...

Inga said...
Everyday, on every thread we hear “Leftists this and leftists that and how how terrible and bad they are”, do you folks really think that no one has the right to criticize the right? Every single time Althouse posts something about some lefty criticizing the right, you folks have a meltdown. So who are the snowflakes ?


Noting that criticism is wrong is not arguing the speaker has no right to criticize. Plus she describes criticism by the right as a "meltdown". Apparently she really believes leftist criticism cannot be criticized. Left wing politics has broken their ability to think.

Gusty Winds said...

I don't think Jesus was a big fan of the self-righteous. i don't believe he would be a big fan of today's social media virtue signaling.

Matthew 6:5 "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others."

Jim at said...

Every single time Althouse posts something about some lefty criticizing the right, you folks have a meltdown. So who are the snowflakes ?

Pushing back against the non-stop, left-wing lies and smears = conservative snowflakes having a meltdown.

Got it.

Todd said...

The Vault Dweller said...

On an aside I don't think the Left at large realizes just how much the Right at large cares about the courts. I don't think Trump realized either. When someone came up to him in the primary and told him he has to talk about courts I imagine him saying something like, "Are you telling me, if I just promise the people I will only nominate justices from this little list from the Federalist Society I'll win over a bunch of supporters? Sure! OF course I'll do that!"

Makes me wonder why this wasn't a more widely understood position from other Republicans.

3/9/20, 2:41 PM


If by Republicans, you mean Republican politicians, it was/is understood but they mostly prefer to be invited to "all the right parties" than to stick their necks out supporting originalist judges when they think they will get the same votes regardless. What are the rubes going to do, vote for the Democrat? So why make waves.

Trump LIKES waves...

Fernandistein said...

Progressives are the new Puritans.

It's hilarious and sad that these stories of the trivial travails of fragile women are (inter)national news:

"That's when she alleged Lucido made inappropriate comments to her, including telling her that a group of schoolboys from Warren's Catholic high school De La Salle "could have a lot of fun with you."
...
...McMorrow, who said Lucido put his hands on her hips and made a comment about her appearance during the orientation."

Fernandistein said...

Has anyone read any stories about, say, a female cashier at 7-11 or Walmart having someone they knew put his hands on their hips?

"In all questions of morals [the proles] were allowed to follow their ancestral code,"

John Lynch said...

I think it's pretty simple. Trump doesn't hate evangelicals.

BUMBLE BEE said...

Show me a city, state or country that leftists haven't turned into a shithole. America got where it got without "progressivism". Progressivism's got people shitting and shooting up on city streets. Liberals and progressives provide the enabling engines for moral decline.

Jamie said...

By all means, Inga et al., respond to criticisms of your side! I won't pretend to speak for any other commenter here, but I myself am glad you're here - I want to have a window into how the other half lives but I confess I don't have the stomach for actually immersing myself in the blogs where I know I'm despised. So kudos to all of you for being here, where (it seems to me) you're frequently mocked, sometimes as proxies for your entire side, but are still valued at least as foils.

But commenters on this thread are responding substantively to a particular implied critique - that Evangelical Christians are hypocrites for having pulled the lever for Trump, even though everyone knows there's no perfect vessel, inside or outside Christianity. That's not being "snowflakes." Being snowflakes would be answering the charge with, "Well, but - you're just a big doo-doo head! And literally a Nazi!"

Unknown said...

I think that it was the treatment of Romney, perhaps the kindest gentlest nominee ever put forward. He was treated as if he was Satan himself. For me and a lot of others, it helped crystalize that winning was better than losing with grace. I don't love Trump. I wish he was more "presidential". However, if he was kinder and gentler, I think he would have lost. So you take him as a package and now I'm getting a huge percentage of what I want. It beats the hell out of losing gracefully.

glam1931 said...

"Rollback of LGBT rights" - say what? At best there has been a very slight slowdown of special privileges. As a gay man in his 60s, I have never been less worried about any president infringing on my life than this one. He respects the Brandeis "right to be left alone."
In my college days I was an activist for gay rights...primarily the right to be left alone and not be bothered by others. Slowly that evolved from asking for tolerance to demanding special privileges and protections and special attention that I think are totally unjustified. Stuff like the gay wedding cake lawsuits make me puke. And so my activist years ended.
We were watching the show Station 19 the other night, and to judge by it, half the men and women working in firehouses are gay and lesbian. It's just a matter of time before transgenders and drag queens are joining the force. I am so done with that show, and the other tiresome efforts in media to shove gay and LGBTQRSTUV+++ bullshit down everyone's throats. I'm content being part of the quiet contingent of the 2% of the population that is happy to just be left alone.

Geoff Matthews said...

"a rollback of LGBT rights"
The only rollback I'm aware of is preventing trans individuals from serving in the military.
Given that they're working through a mental illness, I can understand why. Otherwise, you'd probably draw in a bunch of people who would demand "gender affirming" treatments, which would draw away from more deserving treatments.

Mark said...

Evangelicals have no problem with staying home. They stayed home in 2008 and in 2012.

Just goes to show just how AWFUL Hillary was in order for them not to stay home this time. Many of them were going to. But stopping the greater evil in Hillary was the greater priority.

Gk1 said...

It is illustrative that my FB feed is choked with bay area friends afraid to leave their homes and blaming the Orange Bad Man for not stopping the coronavirus by (fill in the blank) yet downtown streets are caked with feces, dropped needles and used latex gloves and general all around trash. These people get extremely defensive when you point this out. This is bad and we used to have a country where we could agree this was bad and needed to stop.

But to go after Trump 24/7 you now have to pretend "X" is happening like Gays not being allowed to legally immigrate here or a new puritanical Handmaidens Tale is being instigated by Pence and the moral majority. That is more pressing that making sure our streets are not caked with feces and used drug needles. And liberals wonder why Trump is so popular with people.

Drago said...

Inga: "Everyday, on every thread we hear “Leftists this and leftists that and how how terrible and bad they are”, do you folks really think that no one has the right to criticize the right?"

LOL

Let the "logic" of that sink in.....

CR said...

Evangelicals who have taken to heart Psalm 51 and Romans 3 have no illusions about their own moral purity. Unfortunately, many progressives on the left do have such illusions.

Bobb said...

The Democrats' election slogan to evangelicals (and men and white women and Jews etc.) is:

"Vote Democrat! We hate you!"

I don't understand why that isn't working.

RichardJohnson said...

Inga
Every single time Althouse posts something about some lefty criticizing the right, you folks have a meltdown. So who are the snowflakes ?

Here is an example of what most would agree is a meltdown- a snowflake's incoherent shouting.Trigglypuff's meltdown at UMass.

Consider some of the comments from this thread.
Freeman Hunt @11:16 a.m.
Sold out their ideals concerning personal morality? Did we have an ideal about always voting for the most morally upright candidate? Was Hillary more morally upright than Donald? (Ha!)


YoungHegelian @11:24 a.m.
Oh, sure. Let's just forget about that business of the Obama Administration taking the Little Sisters of the Poor to the Supreme Court....Maybe, the Evangelicals went with Trump because he promised that his administration wouldn't put them in the cross-hairs....



Tragic Christian @@11:24 a.m.

Evangelicals didn’t vote for a pastor. But they did vote for someone who does not actually hate them. Beto let the cat out of the bag when he said we need to start taxing and restricting churches that don’t fall all-in on the lgbt position of the moment. “Live and let live” is not even an option — you MUST bake the cake. I’m also interested in what universe there’s a massive rollback of lgbt rights and government support of religion.
@11:30 a.m.


Jerry @ 1:30 PM
I wasn't voting for a pastor. I was voting against Hillary for who I thought had the best chance to win.


Gk1 said...

Everytime I hear this lament from my leftie friends about 'how EC's can shame themselves supporting Trump?' I tell them the same thing "The evangelicals hired a bodyguard when they voted Trump, not their local pastor".

How do these comments constitute a "meltdown?" inquiring minds want to know.

Freder Frederson said...

or one instance of LGBT rights being rolled back.

Only one? That is so fucking easy

If you would like more, I can certainly provide some.

Roy Jacobsen said...

Inga said...
Every single time Althouse posts something about some lefty criticizing the right, you folks have a meltdown.

Please point to a comment from someone on the right in this thread that you think is "a meltdown."

Saying that a criticism is fatally flawed is not a "meltdown" in my view, and it seems to me that thus far, that's what most of the comments have said: that the quoted comment from the NYT doesn't understand evangelicals and so does not understand why they can, in good conscience, support Trump.

BUMBLE BEE said...

Bowe Bergdahl. Did it in 2 words Freder. Can you count to two?

Paul Snively said...

Darcy, so this is what it takes to get you out of the woodwork, eh? :-)

Freder Frederson said...

Let's just forget about that business of the Obama Administration taking the Little Sisters of the Poor to the Supreme Court.

They refused to fill out a one page form. They were begging to be sued.

Jim at said...

Joining the military and demanding the taxpayers cough up the cost of your gender-reassignment surgery is now a right?

Well, I'll be.

Freder Frederson said...

Bowe Bergdahl. Did it in 2 words Freder. Can you count to two?

I have no idea what the hell this is in reference to.

gilbar said...

Geoff Matthews said...
"a rollback of LGBT rights"
The only rollback I'm aware of is preventing trans individuals from serving in the military.


and THEN fredderfredrickson said ...
Only one? That is so fucking easy
If you would like more, I can certainly provide some.


please do! Can you? Will you?

mockturtle said...

I think one reason to keep trans out of the military is their high maintenance costs.

eddie willers said...

We were watching the show Station 19 the other night, and to judge by it, half the men and women working in firehouses are gay and lesbian.

It's gotten silly. A new show came on that starred an actor I enjoy (Rob Lowe) about a 911 Service/Fire squad in Austin, Texas (where I used to live). So I thought I'd give it a try.

So it opens with man's man Rob Lowe looking every inch a tough old fireman whose son is also on the squad. First words out of son's mouth is, "I'm thinking about asking Alex to marry me". I am weary at first but calm myself with "Plenty of women are nicknamed "Alex". But, of course, not only is Alex a male, but a black male to boot.

All of a sudden I am in a Monty Python skit (I'm A Lumberjack) that Hollywood wants us to take seriously.

I've been a "live and let live" guy all my life, but, by God, that's a two way street.

Sebastian said...

""I have this odd admiration for Evangelical voters. The pretty much sold out their ideals concerning personal morality . . . It was a deal with the devil" . . . That's the highest-rated comment (by far) on a NYT column by David Leonhardt, "The Simple Reason the Left Won’t Stop Losing/Progressives need to care more about winning.""

OK, so progs tell evangelicals that they are homophobes, that they sold out their ideals, that they made a deal with the devil, that they are in every way backward and deplorable -- and then evangelicals need some sort of special reason not to vote for the prog candidate?

The prog gamble is that they can win without concessions to moderate evangelicals and the nice Althouses of America. I take it Leonhardt isn't so sure, but the gamble is not irrational.

Jack Klompus said...

It truly has been a dark era given how many rights have been taken away from the bisexual community.

effinayright said...

Freder Frederson said...
or one instance of LGBT rights being rolled back.

Only one? That is so fucking easy

If you would like more, I can certainly provide some.

**************

Then you better start over, because NO ONE has a right to serve in the military.

NO ONE

Jupiter said...

"... a rollback of LGBT rights, ..."

Yeah, Dave, whip that big dick out of your ass and come help me nail this closet shut.

Freder Frederson said...

But, of course, not only is Alex a male, but a black male to boot.

But I'm not a racist or homophobic at all!

Freder Frederson said...

please do! Can you? Will you?

For you? Of course

Gk1 said...

Proof=Interest group website. ;-) o.k champ.

You want to see a fight break out at a democratic town hall? Ask them how many sexes there are. :-)

Jim at said...

Links to transequality dot org bashing the Trump Administration? Why, of course.

Got any NAMBLA links while your browser is open?

YoungHegelian said...

@Freder,

They refused to fill out a one page form. They were begging to be sued.

Perhaps because what was on that one page form was enough to violate what they thought were the tenets of their faith. Is it up to the government now to determine what constitutes the theological tenets of the various faiths?

What really mystifies me about all this is that the Justice Dept for an American administration never really seemed to be concerned about the optics of this case. Did no one in the Justice Dept write a memo asking "Guys, do we really want to go to court adverse to the fucking Little Sisters of the Poor?"

It just shows to go you just how deeply embedded anti-Christian sentiment has become in the modern Left. Which actually, is no surprise, since it was there as an essential aspect of its ideology at the Left's creation during the French Revolution.

Michael McNeil said...

It does help to know that Donald Trump is a professed believer in Christ. FWIW, he can't be a worse believer than I.

Ditto. (Hi, Darcy!) And remember what Paul said: I'm the worst sinner of them all.

Freder Frederson said...

Links to transequality dot org bashing the Trump Administration? Why, of course.

Well, yes, who else would I look to? If something on the website is inaccurate, please point it out.

Got any NAMBLA links while your browser is open?

Fuck you! What does this comment have to do with this thread? Are you just a sock puppet of fucking Michael K.?

Birkel said...

Freder Frederson:
Nuns were begging to be sued.
Everybody should be allowed to serve in the military.
And noticing Hollywood's ridiculous prog-themed garbage is racist/homophobic.

Me:
It's amazing these positions have been rejected.
/sarc

Freder Frederson said...

Perhaps because what was on that one page form was enough to violate what they thought were the tenets of their faith.

No, what was on that form was that they were a religious organization and had a religious objection to providing contraception.

Birkel said...

Freder Frederson is indignant that we mock his well-known NAMBLA support?

Freder Frederson said...

Freder Frederson is indignant that we mock his well-known NAMBLA support?

Delete this post. You know it is a lie. Do I have to email Ann again and maybe get you banned for a couple weeks?

Fuck you asshole.

Freder Frederson said...

I'll give you five minutes.

Birkel said...

It's no more a lie than The Little Sisters of the Poor were asking for it, what with wearing those skirts.

Nichevo said...

Freder Frederson said...
Freder Frederson is indignant that we mock his well-known NAMBLA support?

Delete this post. You know it is a lie. Do I have to email Ann again and maybe get you banned for a couple weeks?




Running to mommy? I thought the Irish didn't squeal.

Gk1 said...

"Did no one in the Justice Dept write a memo asking "Guys, do we really want to go to court adverse to the fucking Little Sisters of the Poor?"

Funny you mention this I think I saw a round table of ex obama officials and I forgot who (maybe Arne Duncan?) mentioned it was the dumbest hill to fight on as the administration was trying desperately to tamp down the festering state by state lawsuits on Obamacare and this just added more grease to the fire. Apparently the young turks in the administration over ruled the seasoned hands that knew what a shit storm this would cause. So yeah, they did ask themselves that but chose the wrong answer.

rcocean said...

What a ridulous comment. First there has been no "Rollback" of LBWT rights.

Secondly, Evangelicals have not "Sold out" by supporting Trump. Do Catholics "Sell out" by supporting Trump? Did Jews "sell out" by supporting Trump? The whole idea that a bunch of religious people can only support a person who believes in their religious view 100% is absurd. Using that logic, no Christian should vote for Bernie, after all he's Jewish. Crazy!

We're not electing a religious leader, we're electing politicians. Its their policies that are important, not their private beliefs.

Birkel said...

Make an argument that is logically distinguished from the logic you use to support _______-group and expanding their rights.

HINT: Do not use the Scalia dissent in your efforts.

Jim at said...

Fuck you! What does this comment have to do with this thread?

The point is you're using blatantly biased websites as some sort of 'proof' that LGBTQWTFBBQ rights have been curtailed during the Trump Administration.

So, if you're going to post bullshit links? Might as well find some other friendly sources to back up your lies. Just trying to be helpful.

Gk1 said...

But we should really thank the liberals that they are so out and proud with their anti-religious bigotry. Attacking the Little Sister's of the Poor in court is a badge of honor to them. As a voter It makes things a lot easier come election day. Like watching Bernie holding hands with Jesse Jackson and "praying". They are only fooling themselves and no one else.

Freder Frederson said...

Running to mommy? I thought the Irish didn't squeal.

I am not running to mommy. I am trying to make sure that I am not libeled. I can and do take a lot of shit on this site, but accusing me, or anyone else, of child molestation, is a step too far. You and Birkel (and also Michael K.) are fucking assholes.

rcocean said...

Bush-II wanted to put harriet miers on the supreme court. even though she had no track record, and had been a liberal before she met Bush.

But all the evangelicals were supposed to support her, because she was born again Christian. So what if she might have been another Souter. Crazy. Fortunately, we got a Catholic, who has been a solid supporter of religious freedom.

Freder Frederson said...

Attacking the Little Sister's of the Poor in court is a badge of honor to them.

So bringing a lawsuit against an organization that is flouting the law is attacking them?

Jeff Weimer said...

I'm not evangelical (Catholic), but I understand the 2016 choice as this:

Vote for a candidate who is not particularly religious but is, at worst, indifferent to their concerns, or:

Vote for a candidate whose policies represented implacable opposition to their concerns.

It really was not much of a choice, was it?

rcocean said...

2015 Liberal: That damned Religious Right needs to be destroyed. Bunch of bigots!

2020 Liberal: I'm so concerned that Trump is conning Evangelicals. How can they give up their great Christian Ideals and support Him?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 243   Newer› Newest»