A Christian response to "No Kings."

[Fervent]

Ok so US politics is deeply mixed with religion. Or the US is deeply mixed with religion. But I understand the difference with say Australia or maybe England or even Canada. Theres a long tradition of religion while there is also a strong independence which is based on the constitution of freedoms, rights and democracy.

It's not quite a US issue, but rather the nature of religions that express moral sentiments. Politics is, in a sense, a public negotiation about what social values the nation will exhibit, and at the heart of the matter is what authority is legitimate. If someone is religious, that's not something that can realistically be compartmentalized. There are no part-time Christians, or Muslims, or Hindus, or secular humanists. So it is inevitable that religion and politics are going to step on each others toes, unless one is purely subjected to the other.

Which are sort of transcedent truth principles we should all support and happen to align with Christian values. Even the freedom to hold alternative beliefs under freewill as a Christian must come to God freely but have the choice not to.

Sounds more like Enlightenment humanism than authentic apostolic teaching to me, but there's room for debate.

So even though we have different belief ideologies there are certain transcedent truth which we hold up as values or morals as the basis for society and the nation.

Bound to.

The problem I see is that under the right to hold different beliefs and morals it means all beliefs are welcome in the public square. The State never aligns with one belief religion or ideology over another. Yet I think this is unreal as we would not support say Sharia laws.

The state certainly does align with one set of beliefs or ideology over others. Pluralism is only theoretical, in practice states reflect dominant social philosophies of their day.

Nevertheless as rational and moral creatures we recognise some moral truths. The problem I see is what happens when both sides or maybe 3 or 4 ideological groups or parties both claim they are the truth. They represent the good of the nation and consitution.

Which moral truths are universally recognized?

Then why are more and more Jewish and Christians being targeted. Why is the rhetoric still similar to before the election against Trump. The same narratives that the opposing beliefs by TRump or Kirk supporters should be stopped and even shot down. One third of Uni students believe that violence is a legitimate means to stop others with oppsing beliefs they think are hateful.

Legitimizing political violence isn't new, and its more a reaction of fear at the authoritarian rhetoric of Trump and Christian nationalists in general that is creating that response. But the evil world is going to be evil, Christianity shouldn't be reactive and defensive...Christ said to repay evil with good, to pray for those who persecute us. The Christian nationalist rhetoric seems to be nothing more than an attempt to declare divine sanction for oppressive jingoistic behavior. It is, in my mind, a form of idolatry of the state.

They call KIrks, Trumps and all those who agree as hateful. So is this not cultivating a dangerous climate and thats why we are seeing an increase in violence and assassination attempts. Believe me there will be more. How many before the climate settles. How long before Jews and Christians are targets because Christian values seem to also align with what people say they hate.

The peace that Christians have enjoyed in America was bound to be a temporary reprieve. When Christ calls a man, he bid him come and die.

I think Christians and the church of Christ should be seperated and even insulated from the world and politics. Just go about seperately doing Christs stuff and examples and say very little. Though they also need to proclaim Christs truth and the gospel which is getting harder nowadays in the public square without being attacked. So maybe they are linked.

I don't think that's realistic, nor adviseable. A man doesn't light a lamp and hide it beneath a barrel.

 

[stevevw]

It's not quite a US issue, but rather the nature of religions that express moral sentiments. Politics is, in a sense, a public negotiation about what social values the nation will exhibit, and at the heart of the matter is what authority is legitimate. If someone is religious, that's not something that can realistically be compartmentalized. There are no part-time Christians, or Muslims, or Hindus, or secular humanists. So it is inevitable that religion and politics are going to step on each others toes, unless one is purely subjected to the other.

I like the analogy of 'stepping on each others toes'. It is like that. So you are saying that its inevitable that politics and relaigion will overlapp and conflict in society.

Because fundementally if its about morals and how society should ultimately be ordered then thats not just politics but actually morality or spiritual in that its about an ideological belief about what the world and reality is and how we should order ourselves within that world.

That is why protests and politics have become so personal and about life and death itself. I wonder if this is just a modern phenomena because of how the world is or has become in that all the news is about negative stuff all the time. Or this is a natural evolution of when a society that will ultimately come down to belief. About who is the god of this world.

Sounds more like Enlightenment humanism than authentic apostolic teaching to me, but there's room for debate.

It can be both though it seems that all truth stem back to biblical truth. You can point out truth principles that align with God in secular thinking without supporting the ideology behind it. That secular ideologies often align with Gods truth is no surprise and I think these truths stand on their own. They are not really the product of Enlightenment or historical ethics but natural truths we know of for just being humans and created by God.

In fact I think much of the truth principles in Constitutions, Declarations and HUman Rights stemmed from a time we were more biblically minded. Part of human and natural rights was that we were created in the image of God. Or had divine nature endowed by a creator of the universe.

This was a transcedent truth we use to base human worth and natural rights. That because they were endowed by a transcedent creator they were divine,. It acknowledge our spiritual and divine nature and that these natural rights could not be taken by humans based on their ideologies. Since this has been taken out we have a battle for who is god and what is the truth about human worth and rights.

So on the one hand there are independent truths morals we can all know which are reflected in the ideologies and politics. BUt without any transcedent basis beyond human ideas then it will inevitably conflict for whose ideology and truth is the way.

Bound to.

Yes

The state certainly does align with one set of beliefs or ideology over others. Pluralism is only theoretical, in practice states reflect dominant social philosophies of their day.

I agree

Which moral truths are universally recognized?

God put His laws in our hearts so its no surprise that they are universally recognised no matter what you call the ideology or philosophy that is theorising or proclaiming them.

Like the idea that human worth is beyond human ideas and that some transcedent basis is necessary otherwise we end up devaluing humans and fighting each other. But thats a hard one for atheists as there is not transcedent entity to ground morality and human worth. We as nations recognised this in our past. But now we reject it and thus a fight over who holds the truth to human worth and moral order.

Its a self evident and fullfilling truth of the ages which cannot be reasoned against and for which we have ample experiences of that show us this truth when we fail to uphold it.

It does not have to be the God of the bible. But it needs to be some transcedent entity that is worthy. But then there is only one truth and thats another debate. The point is this is a fundemental truth principle that comes from God and not humans who are fallible.

Legitimizing political violence isn't new, and its more a reaction of fear at the authoritarian rhetoric of Trump and Christian nationalists in general that is creating that response.

Yes I think the US is a unique nation in that they have a strong religious past and it is politicised. That a Christian political party can exist and actually do well. Or hold power based on being Christian. In some ways though Christianity is the Way as Christ said becoming politicised about Christianity as in trying to enforce it or any ideology is the very opposite. Christs Way was not the political or ideological way.

In saying that I do understand how Christian concerns can become political. Such as Christian organisations working in social welfare are often involved in advocating for the disadvantaged. Or speaking out of a policy is against their beliefs.

This is the challenge I think in the coming times. As mentioned earlier I think the earlier church did not get involved in politics or the secular ways. They actually insulated themselves to some degree when Paul kept reminding the church to stay away from such ideas. Holding church in secret and now making too much comotion.

But then going out into the world to preach the specific gospel. It was not politics but a simple good news repeated. Then also helping the poor often in quiet and creating the Christian community.

But the evil world is going to be evil, Christianity shouldn't be reactive and defensive..

Yes good way to put it. Though not too reactive lol. Maybe responsive. Sometimes reactive as in standing to Christs truth no matter what. Pointing out untruths if required. Which may mean saying nothing and showing Christs example to expose the evil.

Peter mentions that we should obey rulers and authorities. That just being Christ like in obedience and submission for good is enough to make the unjust look to God and expose the injustice.

.Christ said to repay evil with good, to pray for those who persecute us. The Christian nationalist rhetoric seems to be nothing more than an attempt to declare divine sanction for oppressive jingoistic behavior. It is, in my mind, a form of idolatry of the state.

I think in the US particulary but I also see it rising in other nations that politics and religion are becoming mixed. I mean the conflict in the middle east is religion full stop and not Christian. But most nations are conflicting over religious or ideological beliefs which are more or less religion.

Maybe this is the sign of the times as I mentioned earlier that the way we have cultivate society we have created the culture wars which fundementally are coming down to religion and ideological beliefs about how society and this world should be.

In some ways Christians fighting for Gods Kingdom on earth through politics is fighting to create a world kingdom and not Gods Kingdom. But at the same time there are other forces and principalities also fighting for this world.

Nows the time to shine Christ which is about another kind of Kingdom not of this world. Its the only way to differentiate.

The peace that Christians have enjoyed in America was bound to be a temporary reprieve. When Christ calls a man, he bid him come and die.

So do you think that Christians when called should stand form with Christ even if thats a political situation. We know that the world is what it is and theres no changing that. The world will progress until the end.

But if Christ is correct then like in the early church Christians will be persecuted. In the early church just preaching the gospel got you in trouble. Christians had to hide in many towns.

Where is the line. If the organisation you work for is promoting something against Christian beliefs do you quit. If Christians see an injustice that goes against their beliefs like abortion do they remain quiet.

I think in the old days the church was seperate and would give their position which held some respect. The church was always consulted at least. But now well its even hated.

I don't think that's realistic, nor adviseable. A man doesn't light a lamp and hide it beneath a barrel.

 

[stevevw]

I'm observing a protest against the undermining of the Constitution. The desire to not want a King is the same desire intent upon preserving the separation of powers and a representative government by the people and for the people.

Ok well maybe other people see it differently and don't think its that extreme. That Trump actually wants to be a King. The same people said him and Kirk were Hitlers and supported Nazis.

From what I have seen of the protests there were a fair number not just protesting about a King. But having signs supporting ANTIFA, equating Trump and Kirk as fascists and even calling for the stopping of those who support Trump and Kirks beliefs.

I don't think the protest reflected a protest about consitutional rights. Otherwise they would not be calling those who have a different belief fascists and want to deny their rights to hold those beliefs.

I don't see anyone at these protests claiming a fascist regime is stopping them from protesting. It would be disingenuous to mischaracterize that these people are claiming a fascist regime is stopping them from protesting and then criticize the legitimacy of their protests based on that mischaracterization.

Thats because I never characterised the protesters as saying that. I said that the narrative has been that Trump is a dictator, a Nazi and fascist. That the very fact that they are able to protest shows that there is no Nazi or fascist regime like they claim.

From what I have see there was a fair degree of this kind of narrative. I am sure most were good intentioned. But the whole iea of King reeks dictatorship and feeds the same narrative that has been told for 10 years now and its actually cultivating radicals of hate and division and even leading to violence.

What if I said the reality of the Trump administration is based on an unreality? Would you understand me?

No because we don't even know what is the reality you are speaking of. That is part of the problem. That all these subjective ideologies are being cited as reasons and they are not actually based in reality.

Heres a fundemental question. As far as I understand one of Trumps major policies was immigration. Was border security and stopping the floods of people coming over the border. There were tanglible evidence that this was a bad policy and harming the nation. He was voted in based on this policy. That is clear.

Now going about actually carrying that out will involve some degree of law enforcement. Are you saying none at all or that at least some difficult enforcement is going to be involved. Considering that we also have evidence that some of their people involved are organised criminals.

This is the reality --> There is a deception where people are being told in so many words that some are voting to make America great again and others are voting against making America great again. The actual meaning of what 'GREAT' entails is whatever Trump says it is since it is the Logo he pushes as his credo. It's not ideological.

You do realise this is a subjective and ideological belief. What do you say to all the other people who agree with Trump. Your more or less saying they are deluded.

This seems the very same thinking that lost them the election when they were calling Trump voters the same thing. Yet they rejected such ideas. What if they still believe the same. Do you double down and say they have been fooled. How do you know those protesting have not been fooled.

The corporate owned media is largely controlled by a handful of billionaires, and it is being used to shape public opinion. I'm pretty sure I can find people expressing sentiments like you are describing, but that doesn't mean it's an accurate depiction of the event.

From my point of view and looking into this I actually think the exact opposite was happening and still is to a degree and even the Left media has admitted that they were partisan to the Dems. See how the act same belief can be held by the opposing position. THis is all subjective and biased by political ideology rather than reality.

I am sure that both sides do it and its the nature of the beast today where media, narratives and words are the new reality. Though this seems to be coming to an end hopefully with more independents. But don't pretend that your on the side of reality and truth. I don't think either side are.

"If you think anyone's protest is legitimate, or that political action is legitimate, then this is not Christ". <-- This ends in a contradictory reasoning when compared to this --> "Sure if people are stepping over the line and abusing power then yes call them out".

Theres a difference between calling it out in the name of truth and not actually becoming politically about it. The Christian can call this out and proclaim a different kind of truth that does not align with any politics philosophically or ideologically.

I am pretty sure Christ spoke out against injustices. In fact He said anyone who dares harm the little children may as well tie a stone to them and drown in the sea. In fact the early church was rebuked for not looking after widows. Thats how the deacons began.

That's not what I see. I see a spiritual war where one must persevere in the faith that there is an incorruptible Love that is Eternal, and one will be persecuted by those who are ruled by deception. Therefore, all lies in the moral/immoral paradigm would serve to usurp from and subsequently undermine Love God with all your heart mind and soul and your neighbor as yourself.

OK so if say secular ideology has one set of morals (usually relative) and Christians or the bible or Christ have a different set. More importantly that they have a different fundemental basis. One is based in God beyond humans and the other this world and by humans as their own gods.

So when these morals and you could say 'Metaphysical' beliefs clash what should Christians do. Should they speak out against the untruth for example if they see it as harmful to children for example. Or say a church is supporting say marriage counselling in traditional marriage and the State is against such ideas being allowed to exist in the public square.

Should they retreat to only the private sphere. What if the secular ideology sees this as not harmful and actually good. Where is the line. How active should Christians be. Is not the State already acting like a King in that it dictates who can exist in the public square and to what degree.

That's inaccurate.

Citizens United vs FEC was a case brought before the supreme court where a 5 to 4 ruling allowed unlimited amounts of dark money into campaign superPACs in support of the argument that to not do so was inhibiting free speech regardless of the precedent of limits set forth by the FEC. In essence it was a shift towards autocracy wherein both parties would ultimately end up having to compete for rich corporate donors in order to have a viable chance of winning an election.

Please note that the democratic appointed justices all voted against Citizens united and the Republican appointed justices all voted in favor of citizens united.

These were the justices who voted in favor of superPACS and for the move to autocracy:

• Anthony Kennedy (authored the majority opinion)
• John Roberts (Chief Justice)
• Antonin Scalia
• Samuel Alito
• Clarence Thomas

These were the four justices who voted in favor of the FEC and against the move towards autocracy.

• Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the principal dissent, arguing that corporations are not "We the People" and should therefore not have the same free speech rights of individuals. He warned that the ruling risked undermining the integrity of elected institutions by enabling disproportionate corporate influence on elections.
• Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined the dissent and famously criticized the decision as the Court’s worst under Chief Justice Roberts, emphasizing concerns about money’s outsized role in politics.
• Justice Stephen Breyer also dissented, sharing similar concerns about the decision's implications for political equality and the potential for corruption.
• Justice Sonia Sotomayor

I was speaking more about how the Dems used lawfare to go after Trump and certain Christian and conservative groups and individuals. How they gas lighted the nation with Biden and selected the presidential candidate by a non democratic process. How they used the institutions to control people, the CIA ect. How they controlled media to only allow certain information and delete other ect ect ect. Its all on public record and even the media and many DEms admit this now.

Trumps only been in for a short time and as far as I can see he is doing exactly what he was voting in for. I think its a bit early though I am not US so I don't experience the political climate. Thats not saying Trump can become exactly the same. Both sides do it. They are influenced and biased towards their ideology. One siode says black and the other says white regardless of truth. Thats the way of the world.

In fact each cycle it gets worse and more polarised and extreme on both sides. Bot dark forces fighting in this world.

It's a fact that Trump is using his power to punish political opposition even corrupting the DOJ which is supposed to be apolitical. He also desires loyalty to him personally rather than to the constitution.

For example, Trump claims that he KNOWS the 2020 election was rigged and stolen by "democratic far left radicals" even though that has been debunked many times over. Nonetheless, if a person doesn't agree with his contention that the 2020 election was stolen from him, then that person cannot serve in his administration.

I think a lot can be said and the proof is in the pudding in that he accepted the reality and got on with things. Then came back and if he was so bad then why was he voted back in some overwhelmingly and actually gaining support. This speaks that the people were sick of the other parties failure and frankly lies such as Biden.

But also the lawfare in trying for years to frame Trump and even invent false narratives and then calpaign to undermine him and the government with on going smear campaign in opposition. So I don't think any side has the moral high ground. I don't think people are willing to put back the same administration they just rejected. Not this quick lol.

Donald Trump even signed an executive order specifically aimed at Chris Krebs involving the revocation of his security clearance and initiating an investigation into his official actions. Why? Because Krebs reported that the 2020 election was the most secure election in American history.

We've seen Trump's DOJ send people to a prison in El Salvador without any trial.

Trump fired the commissioner of the bureau of labor statistics because the bureau released a jobs report showing the U.S. economy added 73,000 jobs, which was well below expectations, and which also revised May and June job gains downward by a combined 258,000 jobs.

More recently, Trump fired an AG who refused to bring charges against former head of the FBI James Comey.

I can see the rest is about Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump. Honestly like I said earlier I think people create this boogyman in their own heads IMO psychologically. Its actually a modern phenomena due to postmodernism I think where reality is created by narratives and words. Tell yourself an dothers in words and it becomes the reality.

Or say it enough and you begin to believe its true. This is how the media works with fake news and some people get in a bubble and their word is created by what people say or experience.

For me, as a Christian, I am deeply bothered by the treatment of immigrants being documented by citizens. I keep thinking about Jesus saying when you saw me naked you clothed me and when you saw me hungry you fed me, and that what you do unto the least of my brethren, you do unto me.

Yes but we can do that without all the politics. In fact we do that despite both sides politics. If we waited for world politics to align with Christ we would never be able to act. We act independentlyof any politics. Though politics can overlap it is not the basis for why we help the needy.

Christ also said give unto Ceasar what is Ceasars and to God what is Gods. So He knew there was a political system that ran society for its basics as would be needed for any large group of people living together. In fact I think this is fundementally Gods way. Why Peter said obey the rulers and authorities because they are Gods instruments.

We can speak out against injustice and falsehoods that may cross our paths. Not doing so is almost a sin. But we need to be tactful and navigate the world carefully. Certainly not get too political. I think some believe they can be Christian and political in this world. I don't think so. ITs too conflicted.

But heres the reality. Sooner or later and it seems to me sooner rather than later no matter whether Christians are political. Even when they are not and minding their own bussiness and doing good. They will be politicised from the world as the world will hate them.

In fact when a Christian is doing this Christ like work in helping the needy and being a good example and obedient many will hate them for this very reason. Not because of politics but because it reflects Christs truth which conflicts with their politics.

In the end the world will come looking for those who stand with Christ and example Him. We are either for Christ or not and Christians will be called more and more to declare their alligence and faith to God.

 

[Richard T]

I doubt these were from Idaho. They pay people and bus them in.

That would be a long bus trip and require lots of funds. I don't think many are happy that Qatar is going to have part of a base and train in Idaho.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

No kings, like that thing between Jeroboam and Rehoboam.

1 Kings 12:16 was probably the most democratic passage in the age of kings.

 

[childeye 2]

Ok well maybe other people see it differently and don't think its that extreme. That Trump actually wants to be a King. The same people said him and Kirk were Hitlers and supported Nazis.

I think people protesting Trump are protesting the centralizing of power as in a dictatorship.

From what I have seen of the protests there were a fair number not just protesting about a King. But having signs supporting ANTIFA, equating Trump and Kirk as fascists and even calling for the stopping of those who support Trump and Kirks beliefs.

Well fascism would be consistent with a dictatorship. Corporate media is owned by billionaires, so they can display whatever videos will support a certain narrative about the protesters.

I don't think the protest reflected a protest about consitutional rights. Otherwise they would not be calling those who have a different belief fascists and want to deny their rights to hold those beliefs.

I think the protests are against Trump being a fascist and a wannabe dictator.

Thats because I never characterised the protesters as saying that. I said that the narrative has been that Trump is a dictator, a Nazi and fascist. That the very fact that they are able to protest shows that there is no Nazi or fascist regime like they claim.

But we see Trump out of his own mouth saying he wants to use the military against "far left radicals". He's also centralizing power with the SCOTUS in tow. We've already seen Trump sending people to foreign prisons without due process. He lied about the election being stolen and we watched as people attacked the capitol because they believed him. I don't believe he has any qualms about using the military against those in this country whom he deems as not his own people.

From what I have see there was a fair degree of this kind of narrative. I am sure most were good intentioned. But the whole iea of King reeks dictatorship and feeds the same narrative that has been told for 10 years now and its actually cultivating radicals of hate and division and even leading to violence.

Well people don't want a dictator. I think the fears are valid. We saw him plot with other Republicans to try and overturn the valid vote of the people based on the lie that the election was stolen by far-left radical democrats. He's now saying he wants to use the military against far-left radicals.

Heres a fundemental question. As far as I understand one of Trumps major policies was immigration. Was border security and stopping the floods of people coming over the border. There were tanglible evidence that this was a bad policy and harming the nation. He was voted in based on this policy. That is clear.
Now going about actually carrying that out will involve some degree of law enforcement. Are you saying none at all or that at least some difficult enforcement is going to be involved. Considering that we also have evidence that some of their people involved are organised criminals.

This is the reality and it's documented.

Trump wanted a forty-to-fifty-foot impenetrable wall made of steel and hardened concrete. Most people saw this as impractical particularly since there was already bipartisan legislation and funding for the steel bollard border fence that was being built during both the Bush and Obama administration. Trump didn't like people disagreeing with his wall idea, so he then declared--> whoever wasn't for his wall was not for border security --> and subsequently was for open borders--> and inevitably were also for crime brought by immigrants. <-- that is how the FALSE narrative that democrats were for open borders and crime, was formed.

Incidentally, when Trump became president, the army of engineers had to convince him that the border fence was more practical. He eventually caved, but insisted that the bollard fence be made ten feet higher and that it be called a wall.

More reality.

When people say, "we didn't have border security" under Biden, it is contradicted by the numbers of encounters by border patrol agents during the Biden administration. So, assuming people are referring to the high number of 'got-aways' under the Biden administration, it's fair to say there was less border security than under the current administration.

The Biden administration was just following the asylum laws. The problem for the Biden administration was that the requirements of judges and detention centers was grossly underfunded. Congress appropriated about 45 billion dollars for border security during the Biden administration, and Biden had assigned approximately 1500 troops to help in securing the border.

This blame the Democrats for open borders was all propaganda. There was bipartisan support for the senate border act. That bill would have made the necessary changes in asylum laws to deal with the large numbers of asylum seekers and refugees as well as allocate the funds necessary to make the system functional.

Currently, the congress has appropriated approximately 140 billion dollars for border security under the Trump administration, and Trump has assigned approximately 8,000 troops to help in securing the border.

You do realise this is a subjective and ideological belief.
What do you say to all the other people who agree with Trump. Your more or less saying they are deluded.

Trump was conveying in his own words that some are voting to make America great and others are voting against making America being great. It's just a fact that he says that. It could be the subjective belief of a delusional mind, a malignant Narcissist, or the tactical propaganda of a demagogue, but I don't believe it's an ideology.

Also, a logo is just a logo, not an ideology. Trump has said he made America great. That is why he said America wasn't great anymore after Biden became president. He now has a new Logo on his hat "Trump was right about everything".

One thing is for sure, I don't see lying to people who believe whatever you say as an ideological belief. When Trump says he could shoot somebody on fifth avenue and wouldn't lose a vote, I think those followers he's referring to would qualify as deluded. As a similar example, when people attacked the capitol building, they were under the delusion that the election had been stolen by far-left radical democrats based entirely on belief in what Trump said.

This seems the very same thinking that lost them the election when they were calling Trump voters the same thing. Yet they rejected such ideas.

The statement that Trump lies, and "his" people believe him is not an idea; it's an observable fact. It would be the pride in mankind that would reject the objective truth rather than admit we were fooled. Attacking the messenger is not uncommon; The True image of God sent by God was crucified by both religious and secular authorities.

What if they still believe the same. Do you double down and say they have been fooled. How do you know those protesting have not been fooled.

I like to reason upon facts. I know that negative prejudice violates the truth of love others as yourself. If I don't have enough facts, I will either apply positive prejudice or stay neutral. I would not say they have been fooled without evidence, since that would be slander. I know some people were fooled into believing the slander that they were eating the cats and the dogs for example.

Also, when Trump tells us who to be afraid of such as "the enemy within", or when he slanders those who opposes him and speak out against him, which he typically does, it's easily proven that he is resorting to an ad hominem attack, which is a logical fallacy.

As for those who believe he wants to become a dictator, and so they protest, there is plenty of evidence where Trump has conveyed he would use the military to take care of "the enemy within". There is factual evidence that his DOJ pursues prosecution of people they know are innocent.

From my point of view and looking into this I actually think the exact opposite was happening and still is to a degree and even the Left media has admitted that they were partisan to the Dems. See how the act same belief can be held by the opposing position. THis is all subjective and biased by political ideology rather than reality.

I am sure that both sides do it and its the nature of the beast today where media, narratives and words are the new reality. Though this seems to be coming to an end hopefully with more independents. But don't pretend that your on the side of reality and truth. I don't think either side are.

It depends on how we qualify "sides". There is a Spirit of Truth in the world as you know. In the spiritual war it's about persevering in the Love that would sacrifice oneself to save others. The other side is busy sacrificing others to save themselves. I'm not saying there's not spin; I still recall Putin saying that people should join the military to defeat Ukrainians because no greater Love can be shown than to lay down your life for your friends.

Theres a difference between calling it out in the name of truth and not actually becoming politically about it. The Christian can call this out and proclaim a different kind of truth that does not align with any politics philosophically or ideologically.

Hmmm. Politics are inevitable, and good policy is good politics. I'd articulate it as; there are those who can be entrusted to genuinely serve the people in wisdom, and those who desire power to be the boss over others and be served.

I am pretty sure Christ spoke out against injustices. In fact He said anyone who dares harm the little children may as well tie a stone to them and drown in the sea. In fact the early church was rebuked for not looking after widows. Thats how the deacons began.

Jesus said you can't serve God and Mammon. What would Jesus say about the migrants who come here hoping for a better life? He would not say they're mostly insane people and criminals bringing crime, eating our pets, taking our jobs, and costing us too much money to care for them.

OK so if say secular ideology has one set of morals (usually relative) and Christians or the bible or Christ have a different set. More importantly that they have a different fundemental basis. One is based in God beyond humans and the other this world and by humans as their own gods.

So when these morals and you could say 'Metaphysical' beliefs clash what should Christians do. Should they speak out against the untruth for example if they see it as harmful to children for example. Or say a church is supporting say marriage counselling in traditional marriage and the State is against such ideas being allowed to exist in the public square.

Should they retreat to only the private sphere. What if the secular ideology sees this as not harmful and actually good. Where is the line. How active should Christians be. Is not the State already acting like a King in that it dictates who can exist in the public square and to what degree.

Truth is not impotent. I'm pretty sure that secularist society does not disagree with treat others as you would want to be treated.

I was speaking more about how the Dems used lawfare to go after Trump and certain Christian and conservative groups and individuals. How they gas lighted the nation with Biden and selected the presidential candidate by a non democratic process. How they used the institutions to control people, the CIA ect. How they controlled media to only allow certain information and delete other ect ect ect. Its all on public record and even the media and many DEms admit this now.

Sounds like you're repeating spin to me.

Trumps only been in for a short time and as far as I can see he is doing exactly what he was voting in for.

I think there were probably three reasons people voted for Trump. They believed Trump's rhetoric about immigration and bringing down the price of groceries, and they didn't want a black woman as president.

We know overall prices of groceries are still rising, some items more than others. Border statistics are more complicated.

There were reportedly 2 million immigrants who self-deported when Trump became president compared to 1.6 million in the Biden administration. The forced deportation numbers are going to be skewed because under Biden the border patrol was encountering a significantly higher number of people at the border. Meanwhile Trump is trying to remove them from the interior, with questionable legal actions such as sending them to Sudan or Vietnam without any due process.

But overall, despite Trump having been appropriated 140 billion compared to Biden's 40 billion, the current pace under the Trump administration is not generating any significant numbers of forced deportations than under the Obama or Biden administrations. But like I said, there were higher numbers of people trying to cross the border during the Biden administration than under the Trump administration.

I think a lot can be said and the proof is in the pudding in that he accepted the reality and got on with things. Then came back and if he was so bad then why was he voted back in some overwhelmingly and actually gaining support. This speaks that the people were sick of the other parties failure and frankly lies such as Biden.

But also the lawfare in trying for years to frame Trump and even invent false narratives and then calpaign to undermine him and the government with on going smear campaign in opposition. So I don't think any side has the moral high ground. I don't think people are willing to put back the same administration they just rejected. Not this quick lol.

I have no idea where you got the idea that people were framing Trump. I'm just going to say you should avoid believing bad things said about others without any proof. My beef with the Biden administration is Trump should have been charged and tried immediately after finding out that he tried to get Pence to overturn a fair election.

I can see the rest is about Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump. Honestly like I said earlier I think people create this boogyman in their own heads IMO psychologically.

I realize it may be hard to believe such a man exists, but he's real alright. No one created him in their minds even though it seems improbable. You can find countless videos showing him slandering others. I'd challenge you to find some other public figure who even comes close to slandering others more than this man.

Its actually a modern phenomena due to postmodernism I think where reality is created by narratives and words. Tell yourself an dothers in words and it becomes the reality.

Or say it enough and you begin to believe its true. This is how the media works with fake news and some people get in a bubble and their word is created by what people say or experience.

Propaganda is effective, but if we would just stop believing and spreading slander, such lies of the devil will have no effect upon the soul. It's wickedness to want to believe bad things said about others without proof.

 

[Pepperdoodle]

It might depend on where a person sits politically.
I always see the Left leaning administrations/President's as edging more toward as much control as they can get.
The Left leanings hate for Trump have brought this on. If it was a different republican in office instead, they wouldn't be doing this.
The catalyst for all of this is their hate for him through the last 8+ years.
I don't like the guy myself and didn't vote for Harris or Trump, but I don't get why they think this kind of thing is a good effort. They are fine if their leaders want to push for more control (a "king"), to get as much control, as much as they can. This no kings thing is based in hate and hypocrisy

I think a Christian should point out their hate and hypocrisy to them as often as possible. Their leaders are just as, or more, power hungry than they think Trump is.
Prayer of course, asking God to work in hearts, perspectives and attitudes of all is good.

 

[childeye 2]

Yes but we can do that without all the politics. In fact we do that despite both sides politics. If we waited for world politics to align with Christ we would never be able to act. We act independentlyof any politics. Though politics can overlap it is not the basis for why we help the needy.

If I am to believe that to know God is because He gave me of His Spirit of brotherly Love, then it's God that causes me to care about others, not politics. But caring for the poor is still good policy. And slandering them as vermin is not.

Christ also said give unto Ceasar what is Ceasars and to God what is Gods. So He knew there was a political system that ran society for its basics as would be needed for any large group of people living together. In fact I think this is fundementally Gods way. Why Peter said obey the rulers and authorities because they are Gods instruments.

Of course, you're right about Caesar and that form of currency called mammon. I think God is ultimately in charge, but I also know it's not His Spirit that slanders others. Whether it's the Holy Spirit or not I can't say for sure, but I end up asking myself this question--> What if God gave America a slanderer leader as a witness to show those who love slander and those who don't?

But heres the reality. Sooner or later and it seems to me sooner rather than later no matter whether Christians are political. Even when they are not and minding their own bussiness and doing good. They will be politicised from the world as the world will hate them.

In fact when a Christian is doing this Christ like work in helping the needy and being a good example and obedient many will hate them for this very reason. Not because of politics but because it reflects Christs truth which conflicts with their politics.

In the end the world will come looking for those who stand with Christ and example Him. We are either for Christ or not and Christians will be called more and more to declare their alligence and faith to God.

Yeah, it seems the winner in this world is going to be the loser in heaven.
Mark 8:36
For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

 

[FireDragon76]

Maybe there should be a One King rally, one king-Jesus

That doesn't require a rally, though. A rally, in this particular culture moment, might not even be dignifying that.

The Church survived hundreds of years just meeting in houses, and much of the worship was done in secrecy.

 

[childeye 2]

It might depend on where a person sits politically.
I always see the Left leaning administrations/President's as edging more toward as much control as they can get.

Based on what?

Citizens United vs FEC was a case brought before the supreme court where a 5 to 4 ruling allowed unlimited amounts of dark money into campaign superPACs in support of the argument that to not do so was inhibiting free speech regardless of the precedent of limits set forth by the FEC. In essence it was a major shift towards autocracy wherein both parties would ultimately end up having to compete for rich corporate donors in order to have a viable chance of winning an election.

Please note that the democratic appointed justices all voted against Citizens united and the Republican appointed justices all voted in favor of citizens united.

These were the justices who voted in favor of superPACS and for the move to autocracy:

• Anthony Kennedy (authored the majority opinion)
• John Roberts (Chief Justice)
• Antonin Scalia
• Samuel Alito
• Clarence Thomas

These were the four justices who voted in favor of the FEC and against the move towards autocracy.

• Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the principal dissent, arguing that corporations are not "We the People" and should therefore not have the same free speech rights of individuals. He warned that the ruling risked undermining the integrity of elected institutions by enabling disproportionate corporate influence on elections.
• Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined the dissent and famously criticized the decision as the Court’s worst under Chief Justice Roberts, emphasizing concerns about money’s outsized role in politics.
• Justice Stephen Breyer also dissented, sharing similar concerns about the decision's implications for political equality and the potential for corruption.
• Justice Sonia Sotomayor

The Left leanings hate for Trump have brought this on.

Can we try to speak without slandering someone? Why blame the "left" for disliking Trump who openly says that it's the far left that he wants to use the military against? Who he also said stole the election from him which culminated in the attack on the capitol.

If it was a different republican in office instead, they wouldn't be doing this.

What other Republican has slandered others like Trump has? What other Republican tried to get their vice president to overturn a fair election? Trump even slanders other Republicans who don't agree he won in 2020.

The catalyst for all of this is their hate for him through the last 8+ years.

I believe it's when he first came down the escalator and slandered immigrants.

I don't like the guy myself and didn't vote for Harris or Trump, but I don't get why they think this kind of thing is a good effort.

What else do we the people have without resorting to violence?

They are fine if their leaders want to push for more control (a "king"), to get as much control, as much as they can. This no kings thing is based in hate and hypocrisy

Like I said can you please try to avoid spreading slander? I just saw you say something bad about others without any evidence. "Who" is "their" leaders? Qualify your terms and show proof of your claims so that you are forthright and credible.

I think a Christian should point out their hate and hypocrisy to them as often as possible. Their leaders are just as, or more, power hungry than they think Trump is.

When we hear bad things said about others, we should require proof. And if we say bad things about others, we should provide proof and not succumb to negative prejudice.

Prayer of course, asking God to work in hearts, perspectives and attitudes of all is good.

Yes, and particularly pray that when slander comes knocking on the door of the heart that we will feel the Holy Spirit grieve.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I doubt these were from Idaho. They pay people and bus them in.

lol, anything to help yourselves avoid confronting the reality that a lot of sincere, normal Americans have a problem with the President, eh? What demonization of the other side won't you guys believe?

I don't do protests of any sort, but anecdotally, more people I've known personally have attended these No Kings protests than any other sort of political gathering I'm aware of.

 

[Lukaris]

The article I have included shows thousands in Boise for the "no kings' rally.

Thousands of Idahoans turn out for Boise's anti-Trump No Kings protest at state Capitol building • Idaho Capital Sun

Saturday’s Boise, Idaho, No Kings protest coincided with hundreds of other No Kings rallies held in cities across the country.

idahocapitalsun.com

So I have to ask: What should the Christian response be? To me it certainly is not as House Speaker Johnson declared as un-American. To me all Christians response instead should be one of humility. That the waves of rudeness and pride that promote MAGA or various forms of liberalism should be softened. That compromise and conciliatory actions should flow from both sides. That lawfare should stop and that common sense should prevail.

I will be frank. The overall maga plan is likley to fail. Tariffs are inflationary, job creation is dwindling and maybe going negative, and the preference of the rich over those seeking help with health care or other aids they have had in the past are going to sting. The GOP thought the shutdown would be blamed on dems. Guess what, Trump and the GOP are getting plenty of blame too. Who's winning the blame game over the shutdown? Here's what a new AP-NORC poll shows

The ICE raids and military deployments are over the top and unpopular with a majority. https://www.npr.org/2025/09/27/nx-s1-5553536/npr-ipsos-law-enforcement-poll-national-guard
Ameicans too are increasingly in support of a policy of immigration that does not align itself with Trump. American Support for Legal Immigration Reaches New Heights

The no kings rally is in part because many do believe that Trump is becoming too authoritiarian. Recently a group of former intelligence and security officers used the analytics that they previously used to monitor foriegn governments. Their conclusion when they looked inward at Ameria was that the USA is working towards authoritarian rule. US ‘on a trajectory’ toward authoritarian rule, ex-officials warn

Of course I cite PBS, and former emplyoyees might hold a grudge or are just liberals and can be ignored. The rally though says plenty. Trump needs to become a statesman and work more with the opposition. A democratic America will never become a Christian nationalist nation without the heart and minds of the people. It is not just that politics are failing in the maga era, the church too has failed to win hearts and minds to Jesus. So I do hope we can go back to the gospel and not be boxed into some political scheme that is likely to fall flat at best, and be a total disaster at worst.

Again some will not draw my conclusions. It is great to be optimistic but to what end? I would say that I wish I had your faith, but that is not true. The status quo or even the direction we are heading even if a successful MAGA outcome, is not what America needs. Why? because it is not requiring the humility that can turn a nation to God.

There is no ability to cooperate politically in America today and there are Christian political enemies on both sides. It is truly a challenge to be a faithful witness whatever a person’s politics are.

Our Lord’s commandments ( Matthew 22:36-40, Matthew 19:16-19, Matthew 7:12 per Matthew 7:1-12 etc) are beyond politics. A Christian must try to act politically within the Lord’s commandments but bitter political disagreements are the status quo.

Ecclesiastes 12:1-14

 

[stevevw]

I think people protesting Trump are protesting the centralizing of power as in a dictatorship.

Ok and what makes them think its a dictatorship. I thought Trump was elected fairly and is merely acting on the policies he was elected for. It seems most people support Trumps immigration policy. That is what he was elected for and now he carrying out that promise. In fact it seems most still approve of this policy now he is acting on it.

Polls Show Americans Overwhelmingly Support President Trump’s Mass Deportations
Per a Harvard/Harris poll taken October 1 – October 2, 56% of registered voters support deporting all illegal aliens, and a whopping 78% support deporting criminal illegal aliens.

Polls Show Americans Overwhelmingly Support President Trump’s Mass Deportations | Homeland Security

The American people overwhelmingly support President Donald J. Trump’s and United States Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem’s mass deportation of illegal aliens from the country, according to two national polls.

www.dhs.gov

Well fascism would be consistent with a dictatorship. Corporate media is owned by billionaires, so they can display whatever videos will support a certain narrative about the protesters.

And you don't think both sides do it. I would suggest under the last administration the media was primarily controlled by them. Trump has been in for 5 minutes. He hasn't had time to but off the media yet lol.

I think the protests are against Trump being a fascist and a wannabe dictator.

That I think is the problem that is causing the violence. People are using such language and its fueling radicals.

But we see Trump out of his own mouth saying he wants to use the military against "far left radicals".

You know Trump he is brash lol. I think he meant those who break the law. I think the US has a strong constitution.

He's also centralizing power with the SCOTUS in tow. We've already seen Trump sending people to foreign prisons without due process. He lied about the election being stolen and we watched as people attacked the capitol because they believed him. I don't believe he has any qualms about using the military against those in this country whom he deems as not his own people.

I am glad you said its based on your belief. What do you say to those who disagree. Who believe he is doing the right thing in dealing with these issues. They are not easy to deal with. My nation went through similar and people were saying the government were trying to control everyone. Yet now we all agree it was the right thing to do as a whole.

Well people don't want a dictator. I think the fears are valid. We saw him plot with other Republicans to try and overturn the valid vote of the people based on the lie that the election was stolen by far-left radical democrats. He's now saying he wants to use the military against far-left radicals.

Why is is so bad to use the military if needed against such radicals. Violence and terror has gone up 500% or more. What do they do just let it happen. I think no matter how they dealt with this issue people were going to used violence to stop it as they fundementally disagree with the immigration policy.

This is the reality and it's documented.

Trump wanted a forty-to-fifty-foot impenetrable wall made of steel and hardened concrete. Most people saw this as impractical particularly since there was already bipartisan legislation and funding for the steel bollard border fence that was being built during both the Bush and Obama administration.

Thats interesting that both parties seen building some sort of barrier was important. This shows that fundementally they agree that people should not be coming into the US illegally. That removing illegals is the right thing to do.

Trump didn't like people disagreeing with his wall idea, so he then declared--> whoever wasn't for his wall was not for border security --> and subsequently was for open borders--> and inevitably were also for crime brought by immigrants. <-- that is how the FALSE narrative that democrats were for open borders and crime, was formed.

At the end of the day it got to a point where it was causing damage and harm and something had to be done. If everyone agrees that a wall needs to be built because stopping organised crime and others coming illegal is near impossible and that it damages the US. Then surely there should be agreement on dealing with the problem.

Incidentally, when Trump became president, the army of engineers had to convince him that the border fence was more practical. He eventually caved, but insisted that the bollard fence be made ten feet higher and that it be called a wall.

When he does something he really does something lol.

More reality.

When people say, "we didn't have border security" under Biden, it is contradicted by the numbers of encounters by border patrol agents during the Biden administration. So, assuming people are referring to the high number of 'got-aways' under the Biden administration, it's fair to say there was less border security than under the current administration.

Ok. Now I think the problem has become something of an issue that has to be dealt with.

The Biden administration was just following the asylum laws. The problem for the Biden administration was that the requirements of judges and detention centers was grossly underfunded. Congress appropriated about 45 billion dollars for border security during the Biden administration, and Biden had assigned approximately 1500 troops to help in securing the border.

This blame the Democrats for open borders was all propaganda. There was bipartisan support for the senate border act. That bill would have made the necessary changes in asylum laws to deal with the large numbers of asylum seekers and refugees as well as allocate the funds necessary to make the system functional.

Maybe. But as I mentioned the language and narratives have suggested or implied that illegals were not illegals. Thus leading to radical groups and individuals believing they should stop the government from cracking down on illegals or have the right to stay in the US.

Currently, the congress has appropriated approximately 140 billion dollars for border security under the Trump administration, and Trump has assigned approximately 8,000 troops to help in securing the border.

I don't know what the solution. Yes if officers are being abusive of their power or breaking the law themselves then they should face justice.

But also I think as this situation has been left for so long and got out of hand and some fundementally disagree with deporting illegals fullstop. Even if the officers were angels there would still be violence to stop the government.

Trump was conveying in his own words that some are voting to make America great and others are voting against making America being great. It's just a fact that he says that. It could be the subjective belief of a delusional mind, a malignant Narcissist, or the tactical propaganda of a demagogue, but I don't believe it's an ideology.

But don't both sides do this.

This is not just the US but a worldwide phenomena. The same divide is happening between the Left and Right in many western nations. Which to me speaks of a culture wide war and divide. Rather than any specific politician or group. Especially on the hot button issues like immigration which has become the biggest issue all over the world.

Also, a logo is just a logo, not an ideology. Trump has said he made America great. That is why he said America wasn't great anymore after Biden became president. He now has a new Logo on his hat "Trump was right about everything".

Lol he knows how to get under peoples skins. I think he is half joking. I think all politicians think they are right about everything. That is the nature of the beast in that politics has become partisan. So oppositions don't want to admit being wrong and will make the opposition look bad. Rather than having any genuine ideas about making things great. Time is always the reality checker.

One thing is for sure, I don't see lying to people who believe whatever you say as an ideological belief. When Trump says he could shoot somebody on fifth avenue and wouldn't lose a vote, I think those followers he's referring to would qualify as deluded. As a similar example, when people attacked the capitol building, they were under the delusion that the election had been stolen by far-left radical democrats based entirely on belief in what Trump said.

Yeah both sides do it and it seems they are getting more polarised and the radical fringes are coming to the center and dictating parties. This is what happens when societies breakdown. I am just glad I don't subscribe to either ideology and Jesus is the way. Gods Kingdom is the only rule in this world.

The statement that Trump lies, and "his" people believe him is not an idea; it's an observable fact. It would be the pride in mankind that would reject the objective truth rather than admit we were fooled. Attacking the messenger is not uncommon; The True image of God sent by God was crucified by both religious and secular authorities.

Yes and thats why I don't trust either parties or any political ideologies. The are fundementally at war with Christ and subscribing to them would be promoting and cultivating the dark principalities and invisible forces that aim to defy and undermine Christ and Christianity.

I like to reason upon facts.

Yes this is vital. I think its natural that people will lean on their ideas and beliefs. In some ways fundementally this is not a case of facts but belief. Beliefs about who we are, what is beyond, and how we should order society.

I know that negative prejudice violates the truth of love others as yourself. If I don't have enough facts, I will either apply positive prejudice or stay neutral. I would not say they have been fooled without evidence, since that would be slander. I know some people were fooled into believing the slander that they were eating the cats and the dogs for example.

Do you think as the bible says 'some will look and listen but not see and hear my words'. That the world is primarily against Christs truth and Gods Kingdom. How could Christians even proclaim this today without being attacked as bigoted or hateful.

Also, when Trump tells us who to be afraid of such as "the enemy within", or when he slanders those who opposes him and speak out against him, which he typically does, it's easily proven that he is resorting to an ad hominem attack, which is a logical fallacy.

Probably so. But both sides do it so much that its hard to tell anything is truth lol. I think fundementally this is a fight in the world. Between two principalities fighting for world order.

But neither are Gods way. I think it best to not get too involved. Yes speak out against injustice. But we can do that from the sidelines.

As for those who believe he wants to become a dictator, and so they protest, there is plenty of evidence where Trump has conveyed he would use the military to take care of "the enemy within". There is factual evidence that his DOJ pursues prosecution of people they know are innocent.

This sounds like an escalation of the situation.

It reminds me of the situation in Ireland where both sides really believed they were on the right side and kept killing each other tit for tat. Untill they got sick of blowing each other up. The reality of the deaths and destruction hit home to both sides.

It depends on how we qualify "sides". There is a Spirit of Truth in the world as you know. In the spiritual war it's about persevering in the Love that would sacrifice oneself to save others. The other side is busy sacrificing others to save themselves. I'm not saying there's not spin; I still recall Putin saying that people should join the military to defeat Ukrainians because no greater Love can be shown than to lay down your life for your friends.

Trust Putin lol. These world leaders use Christs truth and twist it to their advantage. Because we all know this fundemental truth that there is no greater love to lay down your life for another. Though many deny this and this as stupid logic.

But all world leaders will be promoting or wanting to install a world according to the ideology that party believes..

Hmmm. Politics are inevitable, and good policy is good politics. I'd articulate it as; there are those who can be entrusted to genuinely serve the people in wisdom, and those who desire power to be the boss over others and be served.

I don't think politics is inevitable. Certainly any Christian community should not be governed by the political ideologies of the day. They are ideologies that happen to align with some Christian truths and values.

But ideologically they are different and its the belief component that is what we should not be subscribing to. Such as Marxism, Socialism, Conservatism, materialism, capitalism, libralism, feminism ect.

Jesus said you can't serve God and Mammon. What would Jesus say about the migrants who come here hoping for a better life? He would not say they're mostly insane people and criminals bringing crime, eating our pets, taking our jobs, and costing us too much money to care for them.

I think He would have something to say about the nations these people are fleeing from. I don't think he would get involved. He would know this is something that cannot be intervened in and has to be what it has to be. This is the world rising up against Christ.

His kingdom is not on this earth that we are to create some equal and peaceful utopia through political means. In fact that is what the Pharisees wanted. He avoided such traps.

Truth is not impotent. I'm pretty sure that secularist society does not disagree with treat others as you would want to be treated.

Yes this is a fundemental intuition we all have. Though it can be snuffed out by worldly power and self presevation and money. Thats the problem. There is a battle between flesh and spirit. If the whole system in of the world then we can point out the injustice and truth which is not political without subscribing to the political ideology.

Sounds like you're repeating spin to me.

So you don't think both sides do it. They would not be politicians if they didn't. It use to be that parties agreed more. But in recent years its become polarised. Neither part will admit they are wrong or the other is right lol. One says black and the says white.

I think there were probably three reasons people voted for Trump. They believed Trump's rhetoric about immigration and bringing down the price of groceries, and they didn't want a black woman as president.

That sounds a bit shallow and also doing the oppositions thinking. Why don't you actually look at what they said. I think it was much more nuenced.

We know overall prices of groceries are still rising, some items more than others. Border statistics are more complicated.

Like I said only time will tell.

There were reportedly 2 million immigrants who self-deported when Trump became president compared to 1.6 million in the Biden administration. The forced deportation numbers are going to be skewed because under Biden the border patrol was encountering a significantly higher number of people at the border. Meanwhile Trump is trying to remove them from the interior, with questionable legal actions such as sending them to Sudan or Vietnam without any due process.

Yes its a messy business. If there is any injustice then people will be sued. The truth always comes out in the end.

But overall, despite Trump having been appropriated 140 billion compared to Biden's 40 billion, the current pace under the Trump administration is not generating any significant numbers of forced deportations than under the Obama or Biden administrations. But like I said, there were higher numbers of people trying to cross the border during the Biden administration than under the Trump administration.

Do you think this crackdown is deterring people and organised crime from trafficking people over the border.

 

[mindlight]

The article I have included shows thousands in Boise for the "no kings' rally.

Thousands of Idahoans turn out for Boise's anti-Trump No Kings protest at state Capitol building • Idaho Capital Sun

Saturday’s Boise, Idaho, No Kings protest coincided with hundreds of other No Kings rallies held in cities across the country.

idahocapitalsun.com

So I have to ask: What should the Christian response be? To me it certainly is not as House Speaker Johnson declared as un-American. To me all Christians response instead should be one of humility. That the waves of rudeness and pride that promote MAGA or various forms of liberalism should be softened. That compromise and conciliatory actions should flow from both sides. That lawfare should stop and that common sense should prevail.

I will be frank. The overall maga plan is likley to fail. Tariffs are inflationary, job creation is dwindling and maybe going negative, and the preference of the rich over those seeking help with health care or other aids they have had in the past are going to sting. The GOP thought the shutdown would be blamed on dems. Guess what, Trump and the GOP are getting plenty of blame too. Who's winning the blame game over the shutdown? Here's what a new AP-NORC poll shows

The ICE raids and military deployments are over the top and unpopular with a majority. https://www.npr.org/2025/09/27/nx-s1-5553536/npr-ipsos-law-enforcement-poll-national-guard
Ameicans too are increasingly in support of a policy of immigration that does not align itself with Trump. American Support for Legal Immigration Reaches New Heights

The no kings rally is in part because many do believe that Trump is becoming too authoritiarian. Recently a group of former intelligence and security officers used the analytics that they previously used to monitor foriegn governments. Their conclusion when they looked inward at Ameria was that the USA is working towards authoritarian rule. US ‘on a trajectory’ toward authoritarian rule, ex-officials warn

Of course I cite PBS, and former emplyoyees might hold a grudge or are just liberals and can be ignored. The rally though says plenty. Trump needs to become a statesman and work more with the opposition. A democratic America will never become a Christian nationalist nation without the heart and minds of the people. It is not just that politics are failing in the maga era, the church too has failed to win hearts and minds to Jesus. So I do hope we can go back to the gospel and not be boxed into some political scheme that is likely to fall flat at best, and be a total disaster at worst.

Again some will not draw my conclusions. It is great to be optimistic but to what end? I would say that I wish I had your faith, but that is not true. The status quo or even the direction we are heading even if a successful MAGA outcome, is not what America needs. Why? because it is not requiring the humility that can turn a nation to God.

Charlie Kirk compared Trump with Samson. A degenerate who did the right thing in the end. Trump doubts if he will go to heaven. It all depends on his humility before God in the end. But lets look at his fruit before deciding whether to crown him absolute Emperor of the World.

Trump is a liar (Stolen election lie), a fraudster (see his criminal record), has major conflicts of interest (getting rich off the DOJ - come on!!!) and his personal record with women is not the best (lets see where the Epstein thing goes). His America First tariff policy is rushed and will probably generate inflation. His whole approach favors the super rich and is not helping social mobility. he does not care about the poor or the environment. He lacks grace in dealing with his enemies and mistakes ruthlessness with true power, which must also include mercy.

That said despite all his faults he seems to be getting some important things done. The decimation of Woke society is something healthy, though in Europe the movement is still the other way (Sarah Mullally as the new Archbishop of Canterbury for example). We may have a temporary peace in the Middle East looming. Irans nuclear program is on fire. NATO members are stepping up with qualitative and quantitative improvements to their militaries. He did this without splitting the alliance as I feared he might though maybe in the long term this new military power will make Europe far more independent of the USA. Given the current foolishness guiding many European politicians this might not be the best way forward e.g. their policy on Palestine and weakness re the Muslim lobby. He wants to end the war in Ukraine and is taking the steps to make that happen. Pro-Abortion is now no longer a federal stance. He understands what China has been getting away with and is an effective counter force.

 

[bèlla]

I think Christians and the church of Christ should be seperated and even insulated from the world and politics. Just go about seperately doing Christs stuff and examples and say very little. Though they also need to proclaim Christs truth and the gospel which is getting harder nowadays in the public square without being attacked. So maybe they are linked.

No good will come of this. It’s difficult for many to fathom how you can falsely align with an ideology while working against it in secret. But that’s generally how organizations are overthrown and the government has a lengthy practice of doing the same. He pretends to be quasi christian while demonstrating questionable behavior and implementing policies that harm the poor and vulnerable. And he uses figures like Kirk as a battering to punish dissenters who speak against the ideal. The common denominator is christian support. Not everyone agrees of course. But there’s enough who do to make the situation look bad.

And there’s a cultish undertone to all of this. Watching political discourse among believers is like seeing people bewitched or caught in a stupor. Everything they say is infused with the party and they’re unable to think outside of those terms. Sometimes it feels Orwellian and others like A Clockwork Orange. Their allegiance is to politics not the church and when the two conflict they usually align with the party and shouldn’t be trusted.

Ok well maybe other people see it differently and don't think its that extreme. That Trump actually wants to be a King. The same people said him and Kirk were Hitlers and supported Nazis.

The White House posted this image of Trump in February of this year. You might assume they’re trolling if you haven’t seen earlier examples of the same (2017 & 2018). I don’t expect you to understand what the judgment tarot card represents. But you’ll notice he’s holding a scepter and an orb and the flag is his throne. if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth.

Life imitates art far more than art imitates life. —Oscar Wilde

~bella

 

[Postvieww]

It's a fact that Trump is using his power to punish political opposition even corrupting the DOJ which is supposed to be apolitical. He also desires loyalty to him personally rather than to the constitution.

I would be curious to know if you posted anything calling out the Biden administration or rogue AG’s doing exactly what you accuse this administration of. IMO it is quite hypocritical for some to glory in the multiple prosecutions of Trump under the cry of no one is above the law while claiming political prosecutions when actual laws provably have been broken by some on the left.

For example, Trump claims that he KNOWS the 2020 election was rigged and stolen by "democratic far left radicals" even though that has been debunked many times over. Nonetheless, if a person doesn't agree with his contention that the 2020 election was stolen from him, then that person cannot serve in his administration.

Donald Trump even signed an executive order specifically aimed at Chris Krebs involving the revocation of his security clearance and initiating an investigation into his official actions. Why? Because Krebs reported that the 2020 election was the most secure election in American history.

It is an absolute joke for anyone to claim the 2020 election was “the most secure election in American history “. In past years even some Democrats publicly stated mail in ballots were opportunity for fraud. Just with the unusual surge in the number of ballots claimed to have been cast is cause for question alone. Never before or since did we have that many voters in a national election.

More recently, Trump fired an AG who refused to bring charges against former head of the FBI James Comey.

Good for him! Check into that AG’s conflicts of interest and connections to Comey. Comey is on video lying under oath. Let the no one is above the law slogan actually work.

For me, as a Christian, I am deeply bothered by the treatment of immigrants being documented by citizens. I keep thinking about Jesus saying when you saw me naked you clothed me and when you saw me hungry you fed me, and that what you do unto the least of my brethren, you do unto me.

I see you make no mention of gang members, human traffickers, drug dealers, sexual abusers of women and children. No where in scripture are unrepentant law breakers coddled and rewarded for their crimes without consequences. These are the types that are the priority targets of ICE. Just watch some of the videos of reporters covering these ICE protesters and you will find many unhinged, uneducated in facts , violent in many cases and sometimes paid protestors who only scream and shout talking points not even at times able to articulate why they are there.

 

[Postvieww]

think there were probably three reasons people voted for Trump. They believed Trump's rhetoric about immigration

Border is now secure!

and bringing down the price of groceries,

My eggs are cheaper. Everyone was freaking out over the price of eggs.

and they didn't want a black woman as president.

This is absolutely absurd. The truth is the country did not want an incompetent president. Her skin color and gender were not factors. There are competent CONSERVATIVE black women I would have voted for had they been the candidate. Kamala was not the candidate by the the votes of her party! She was installed as candidate by an undemocratic process. Kamala was not a competent VP and had no qualifications to be President.

 

[stevevw]

No good will come of this. It’s difficult for many to fathom how you can falsely align with an ideology while working against it in secret. But that’s generally how organizations are overthrown and the government has a lengthy practice of doing the same. He pretends to be quasi christian while demonstrating questionable behavior and implementing policies that harm the poor and vulnerable. And he uses figures like Kirk as a battering to punish dissenters who speak against the ideal. The common denominator is christian support. Not everyone agrees of course. But there’s enough who do to make the situation look bad.

And there’s a cultish undertone to all of this. Watching political discourse among believers is like seeing people bewitched or caught in a stupor. Everything they say is infused with the party and they’re unable to think outside of those terms. Sometimes it feels Orwellian and others like A Clockwork Orange. Their allegiance is to politics not the church and when the two conflict they usually align with the party and shouldn’t be trusted.

The allegiance should not even by the church or politics. I think both parties or rather all worldly political entities do the same but in their own ideologies. Both sides really believe they are right and the other side is wrong. But this is a bigger version of many divides or identity groups within modern society.

That is the culture war that has been brewing for years. Even churches get political with each other now like they are opposing identies with the broad church of God. But like you say mostly they are more aligned with secular ideas and use religion to justify their different positions. How can there be so many divided groups libing in the one church and society.

The White House posted this image of Trump in February of this year. You might assume they’re trolling if you haven’t seen earlier examples of the same (2017 & 2018). I don’t expect you to understand what the judgment tarot card represents. But you’ll notice he’s holding a scepter and an orb and the flag is his throne. if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth.

Life imitates art far more than art imitates life. —Oscar Wilde

~bella

View attachment 371957
View attachment 371958
View attachment 371959

This is spooky stuff lol. I remember something about Trump and South Park lol. Maybe Trump is the anti Christ. Doesn't the bible say that the anti Christ will bring peace to the middle east of 7 years. Then it will be broken half way through. If that happens I am heading for the hills lol.

Let me ask a serious question that I have been pondering since Kirks death. Before his death I think many Christians and conservatives at least agreed with the values Kirk stood for. Such as traditional marriage and family, the importance of mothers and fathers, anti abortion and trans ideology ect. Or the right to free speech and open dialogue.

Since his death I hear some people saying anyone who supports Kirks beliefs is spreading hate. Kirk seemed to align with Trump or Trump with Kirk and Christians. How do Christians and conservatives reconsile this.

What if people were to go out in public and speak of the same beliefs. Is this now a problem for Christians. Should they be careful or keep quiet in how they speak about their beliefs.

Do you think there is a conflict between the ideas and beliefs of the public secular square and Christian beliefs. Which may align with conservative views at times. Where is the line. Is Christian belief seen as a threat in the public square now by those who don't believe. Is Christianity a casualty of the culture wars.

 

[Clare73]

You asked what the problem is and my response in all honesty is referencing the spiritual battle. For example, the courts can't stop the slander that happens on this forum. We have to bring our very thoughts into captivity just like scripture says.

The moderators can stop it.

 

[childeye 2]

The moderators can stop it.

You do realize I'm talking about slandering people like other voters, illegal immigrants and public figures, right?