How Should Christians Approach the 2024 Election?

[AlexB23]

Yes, Kamala boasts of her support for Abortion rights and Trump boast about things we ought not even mention.
I never thought it could get this bad. I now believe we really are embraced by the demonic, or should I say, we have embraced the demonic.
By that I mean an exaggerated concern for the ego, for "me and mine".

I believe both parties have embraced the demonic. The RNC had an opening to a 500 year old Hindu demon a few months ago, while the DNC boasts about aborting people to the 9th month. In other words, we must look to the Lamb instead of the donkey or elephant.

Guys, no major party is safe anymore, as both are run by elites in power. We must look to the third parties. If every Christian voted for the American Solidarity Party or some other third party with balanced ideologies, we could be out of this mess.

 

[AlexB23]

Perhaps a moderate candidate from either party would win by a landslide. Who knows?

Yeah, I was thinking this in the morning, that a moderate from either party could win by a landslide, and that for now, we need a moderate Republican to win in order to bring the GOP back to what it was like in the late 20th century.

 

[AlexB23]

Voting 3rd party is just adding votes for Democrats, who don't have our values.

In the end, we all have to do what we feel is right I'm just trying to help some

I don't want to see this country destroyed is all, and the Democrats are promising to do just that... And appear quite dedicated.

Our Marxist foreign policy is coming home to roost.

Maybe, we could get all the Democrats to vote 3rd party, so then the third party could win. Something ruined the Democratic party during the 1990s-2020s. I know what it is: "selfishness". The DNC is the party of selfishness. They may be selfless when it comes to trying to help out the poor, but even then, the trillion dollar tech companies such as Meta are owned by Democratic supporters. In other words, no party stands up for Christianity anymore.

Democrats say: "my body", or "this is my gender identity", or "my orientation to flaunt on TV".
Trump says: "Golden showers" or "size of a man's guy part"

Looks like neither candidate works well for the US.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Be careful of idolatry.. especially when it's more important to see some reflection of what you think you are behind the seal instead of a president in office who is competent for the job.

There's 350 million people whose lives depend on making the best decisions for their future and their children's future, not to mention things like how WW3 would affect everyone in the world.

Oh come on, he means " more Christ like". I know you know that.

 

[Stephen3141]

I read the article.
I don't like the prooftexting for each section.
A reference verse, doesn't begin to express historical Christian views on these seubjects.

Rather than focussing on individual moral-ethical characteristics of
the 2 presidential candidates, I would look at the larger issue of supporting
the fair rule of law that we have in America.

First Point:

This rule of law is what gives us "freedom of religion", and is much more basic,
as a protection of Christians and the exercise of the Christian faith, than trying
to find political candidates who are "Christian".

The problem that I have with Trump, is that he has repeatedly threatened judges,
and even their families, whenever they have pursued the due process of law,
in taking forward indictments against Trump for serious crimes.

Without the fair rule of law, and its due process, then great ideals and protections
of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights will not be upheld, and will not protect
Christians, living in this country.

Voting for a candidate who will uphold the fair rule of law and due process in
this country, should be the FIRST priority of American citizens who are Christians.
(We do not have the luxury, of having any orthodox Christian candidate to vote for.)
You may not like the voting record of Kamala Harris, but she has a history of
upholding the due process of law in America. Trump has the history of instigating
a lynch mob at the Capital Building, to actually hang by the neck his political
opponents. There is a clear separation between the candidates, on this point.
---------- ----------

Second Point:

This is a difficult point.
That is because it splits Christian groups into 2 pretty discrete sets, but it is
a topic that is rarely talked about, as a basic Christian belief (this is a crude
failure in Christian catechism/teaching, for the last 4 generations in America).
And, BOTH groups of Christians often use and appeal to the same labels,
although many do not embrace the same understanding of the topic.

The split is between anti-intellectual Christians, and historic Christians who
embrace the intellectual life (and formal logic...) as a good gift from God.
The split used to be denominational, with the Protestant Fundamentalists
strongly rejecting the goodness of the intellect, and the Evangelical and
"high church" Protestants, Catholic Christians, Eastern Orthodox Christians,
and Reformed Protestants as groups that embraced the goodness of the mind.

In the last "electronic screen" generations, there has been a general rejection of
the goodness of the intellect (despite all the surface language used), by the
younger generations in America. This rejection of logic to discuss and test and
come to valid conclusions about "reality" cuts across all Christian denominations
in North America. And, it's also not a strictly "religious" versus "secular" trend.
This spreading anti-intellectualism, is often misidentified as other things, and
tends to terrifically muddy the water in all sorts of discussions.

Some characteristics of Anti-intellectualism are...

1 Ignorance of the philosophical history of thinking about "primitives",
such as what our shared reality is, how we perceive it, what evidence is,
how we should test perceptions to prove its accuracy or inaccuracy,
what a fact is, what is merely personal opinion, what is merely gossip,
or what is merely an "explanation" that has not been carefully verified.

2 An incoherent rejection of our shared reality (that this even exists).
Although this is a philosophical model of extreme skeptics, it is a model that
requires a HUGE price up front, and if believed (as many younger Americans
seem to show that they believe it), makes accurate individual perceptions of
our shared reality impossible, and makes impossible evidence gathered from
our shared reality, testing of this evidence as accurate, a fair rule of law, a
fair due process of law, and finally it makes impossible JUSTICE. (By the way,
this worldview also makes impossible believing in a fixed body of orthodox
Christian doctrine, also.)

North American Christian groups have been doing an abyssmal job at teaching
about these philosophical primitives. The result is that ARGUMENTS of many
North American Christians, are logically incoherent (regardless of all the
language used about being "logical" and "intelligent" ...), and the "thinking"
of many North American Christians is unable to distinguish what our shared
reality is, and what truth is.

3 With this anti-intellectualism, come a horrendous naivete about stories
told (such as on social media, or "news" sources that pander in conspiracy
theories). THE ANTI-INTELLECTUAL North American CHRISTIAN GROUPS,
SEEM TO LOVE CONSPIRACY THEORIES. And THEY are the groups that are
least mentally equipped to recognize the mindlessness of these conspiracy
theories, and they are least likely to carefully research this social media gossip,
in order to (as the Apostle Paul said) "test all things -- hold on to what is true".
They have lost the ability of how to test an assertion, to see if it is true. (ALL
Christian groups quote "test all things -- hold on to what is true". But the anti-
intellectual Christian groups have lost the tools to do this.)
---------- ----------

Trump specifically appeals to the anti-intellectual Christian groups, such as
Protestant Fundamentalists. They generally ...

-- reject the hard sciences
-- embrace a young earth belief
-- do not read history, aggressively
-- do not study philosophy, and the long history of thinking, about thinking
-- do not value higher education
-- have less education
-- are having a harder and harder time finding well-paying jobs in the
increasingly high tech American economy
-- are more likely to embrace strange conspiracy theories for which no one
can find solid evidence (to prove them as true)
-- are more likely to be very frustrated in their position in the American economy
-- are more likely NOT to embrace the early creeds of the united Christian
Church, and so are more ungrounded, historically in their doctrine
-- are more likely to be influenced by a belief that God reveals truth directly
to each of us, and so denegrate historical biblical scholarship
-- are more likely to be susceptible to emotional rhetoric, and cult leaders
who appeal to their difficulty in competing in the high tech American economy.

But note that there are many people who do not read history (such as about Hitler,
and the Third Reich, and Moral Theory, and Epistemology...) who would rather
embrace violence and vigilantism and highly emotionally evocative "explanations"
of how the entire world is abusing them. This is why Trump appeals to the radical
cessesionists, radical preppers, disillusioned "Punisher" type vigilantes, and
white supremecists. If Trump lived in a Muslim country, he would appeal to
radical Islamic terrorist groups, as if THEY were the patriotic groups that were
fighting for freedom and justice.
---------- ----------

Trump is not for "law and order". He has shown open disdain for the fair rule of
law in America, and the due process that goes along with it.

Trump has filed over 60 lawsuits claiming massive voting fraud, in the 2020
election, but he has yet to produce ANY relevant and substantial evidence
to support these claims. So, the fair rule of law in America, has rejected all
these lawsuits as frivolous or even incoherent.

Trump has continually acted as if he is ABOVE the rule of law, and as if HE is
the authoritative interpreter of the fair rule of law in America. This is an attitude
of lawlessness.

Trump has used the language of Hitler, in Hitler's rise to power, as Hitler lived
out his fantasy dream of becoming the new world emperor, and ruling
everyone. Many of Trump's followers don't seriously read history, so do not
recognize this rhetoric, or how it lead to World War II.

Trump is an immoral profligate. He is not Christian. He is not even a principled
atheist.
---------- ----------

Articles like this one miss the point.
Trump is not for the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights.
Trump's "dictatorship" would remove freedom of religion from America,
and leave Christians living in a lawless state, such as Russia, or Communist China.

Stop being so naive.
The goal for Christians is to vote for a presidential candidate who will uphold the
fair rule of law in America. Not for a candidate who is filled with "love" or who
looks most like a Christian.

At least Harris will uphold the fair rule of law in America.

 

[Merrill]

I read the article.
I don't like the prooftexting for each section.
A reference verse, doesn't begin to express historical Christian views on these seubjects.

Rather than focussing on individual moral-ethical characteristics of
the 2 presidential candidates, I would look at the larger issue of supporting
the fair rule of law that we have in America.

First Point:

This rule of law is what gives us "freedom of religion", and is much more basic,
as a protection of Christians and the exercise of the Christian faith, than trying
to find political candidates who are "Christian".

The problem that I have with Trump, is that he has repeatedly threatened judges,
and even their families, whenever they have pursued the due process of law,
in taking forward indictments against Trump for serious crimes.

Without the fair rule of law, and its due process, then great ideals and protections
of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights will not be upheld, and will not protect
Christians, living in this country.

Voting for a candidate who will uphold the fair rule of law and due process in
this country, should be the FIRST priority of American citizens who are Christians.
(We do not have the luxury, of having any orthodox Christian candidate to vote for.)
You may not like the voting record of Kamala Harris, but she has a history of
upholding the due process of law in America. Trump has the history of instigating
a lynch mob at the Capital Building, to actually hang by the neck his political
opponents. There is a clear separation between the candidates, on this point.
---------- ----------

Second Point:

This is a difficult point.
That is because it splits Christian groups into 2 pretty discrete sets, but it is
a topic that is rarely talked about, as a basic Christian belief (this is a crude
failure in Christian catechism/teaching, for the last 4 generations in America).
And, BOTH groups of Christians often use and appeal to the same labels,
although many do not embrace the same understanding of the topic.

The split is between anti-intellectual Christians, and historic Christians who
embrace the intellectual life (and formal logic...) as a good gift from God.
The split used to be denominational, with the Protestant Fundamentalists
strongly rejecting the goodness of the intellect, and the Evangelical and
"high church" Protestants, Catholic Christians, Eastern Orthodox Christians,
and Reformed Protestants as groups that embraced the goodness of the mind.

In the last "electronic screen" generations, there has been a general rejection of
the goodness of the intellect (despite all the surface language used), by the
younger generations in America. This rejection of logic to discuss and test and
come to valid conclusions about "reality" cuts across all Christian denominations
in North America. And, it's also not a strictly "religious" versus "secular" trend.
This spreading anti-intellectualism, is often misidentified as other things, and
tends to terrifically muddy the water in all sorts of discussions.

Some characteristics of Anti-intellectualism are...

1 Ignorance of the philosophical history of thinking about "primitives",
such as what our shared reality is, how we perceive it, what evidence is,
how we should test perceptions to prove its accuracy or inaccuracy,
what a fact is, what is merely personal opinion, what is merely gossip,
or what is merely an "explanation" that has not been carefully verified.

2 An incoherent rejection of our shared reality (that this even exists).
Although this is a philosophical model of extreme skeptics, it is a model that
requires a HUGE price up front, and if believed (as many younger Americans
seem to show that they believe it), makes accurate individual perceptions of
our shared reality impossible, and makes impossible evidence gathered from
our shared reality, testing of this evidence as accurate, a fair rule of law, a
fair due process of law, and finally it makes impossible JUSTICE. (By the way,
this worldview also makes impossible believing in a fixed body of orthodox
Christian doctrine, also.)

North American Christian groups have been doing an abyssmal job at teaching
about these philosophical primitives. The result is that ARGUMENTS of many
North American Christians, are logically incoherent (regardless of all the
language used about being "logical" and "intelligent" ...), and the "thinking"
of many North American Christians is unable to distinguish what our shared
reality is, and what truth is.

3 With this anti-intellectualism, come a horrendous naivete about stories
told (such as on social media, or "news" sources that pander in conspiracy
theories). THE ANTI-INTELLECTUAL North American CHRISTIAN GROUPS,
SEEM TO LOVE CONSPIRACY THEORIES. And THEY are the groups that are
least mentally equipped to recognize the mindlessness of these conspiracy
theories, and they are least likely to carefully research this social media gossip,
in order to (as the Apostle Paul said) "test all things -- hold on to what is true".
They have lost the ability of how to test an assertion, to see if it is true. (ALL
Christian groups quote "test all things -- hold on to what is true". But the anti-
intellectual Christian groups have lost the tools to do this.)
---------- ----------

Trump specifically appeals to the anti-intellectual Christian groups, such as
Protestant Fundamentalists. They generally ...

-- reject the hard sciences
-- embrace a young earth belief
-- do not read history, aggressively
-- do not study philosophy, and the long history of thinking, about thinking
-- do not value higher education
-- have less education
-- are having a harder and harder time finding well-paying jobs in the
increasingly high tech American economy
-- are more likely to embrace strange conspiracy theories for which no one
can find solid evidence (to prove them as true)
-- are more likely to be very frustrated in their position in the American economy
-- are more likely NOT to embrace the early creeds of the united Christian
Church, and so are more ungrounded, historically in their doctrine
-- are more likely to be influenced by a belief that God reveals truth directly
to each of us, and so denegrate historical biblical scholarship
-- are more likely to be susceptible to emotional rhetoric, and cult leaders
who appeal to their difficulty in competing in the high tech American economy.

But note that there are many people who do not read history (such as about Hitler,
and the Third Reich, and Moral Theory, and Epistemology...) who would rather
embrace violence and vigilantism and highly emotionally evocative "explanations"
of how the entire world is abusing them. This is why Trump appeals to the radical
cessesionists, radical preppers, disillusioned "Punisher" type vigilantes, and
white supremecists. If Trump lived in a Muslim country, he would appeal to
radical Islamic terrorist groups, as if THEY were the patriotic groups that were
fighting for freedom and justice.
---------- ----------

Trump is not for "law and order". He has shown open disdain for the fair rule of
law in America, and the due process that goes along with it.

Trump has filed over 60 lawsuits claiming massive voting fraud, in the 2020
election, but he has yet to produce ANY relevant and substantial evidence
to support these claims. So, the fair rule of law in America, has rejected all
these lawsuits as frivolous or even incoherent.

Trump has continually acted as if he is ABOVE the rule of law, and as if HE is
the authoritative interpreter of the fair rule of law in America. This is an attitude
of lawlessness.

Trump has used the language of Hitler, in Hitler's rise to power, as Hitler lived
out his fantasy dream of becoming the new world emperor, and ruling
everyone. Many of Trump's followers don't seriously read history, so do not
recognize this rhetoric, or how it lead to World War II.

Trump is an immoral profligate. He is not Christian. He is not even a principled
atheist.
---------- ----------

Articles like this one miss the point.
Trump is not for the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights.
Trump's "dictatorship" would remove freedom of religion from America,
and leave Christians living in a lawless state, such as Russia, or Communist China.

Stop being so naive.
The goal for Christians is to vote for a presidential candidate who will uphold the
fair rule of law in America. Not for a candidate who is filled with "love" or who
looks most like a Christian.

At least Harris will uphold the fair rule of law in America.

Some of this is correct, and much of it is flat-out-wrong, and totally missing the point.

Trump does not directly appeal to those who embrace young earth, suspicion of science, etc. Some of those people indeed support him, but Trump has never been any kind of Christian Nationalist or religious-right figure. He isn't Pat Robertson or even Pat Buchanan

And the political left is far more anti-scientific and illogical than the right. Cases in point:

They believe

1. There is no such thing as biological sex, or at the very least, sex isn't binary. This is categorically untrue on every level
2. Men can have babies
3. Every instance of disparate outcome must be the result of explicit or implicit racism. This is illogical nonsense and does not withstand any scrutiny
4. That we can turn off all nuclear, coal, and gas plants in the country and run on solar and wind. Complete and utter nonsense, and a dangerous idea. Absolutely no science backs this up

on the policy level, some of the things that Harris and others push are complete nonsense, such as

1. Giving new homebuyers $25,000 for a downpayment will lower housing costs. This is complete nonsense and violates basic pricinples of economics. It will do the opposite.
2. Taxing unrealized capital gains is a good idea, while virtually ever economist of any merit agrees that this would be a total disaster.
3. That defunding the police is a good idea. I don't even need to comment on this one

The Biden Harris administration routinely flouted the law and constitution, and his efforts were struck down by SCOTUS (vaccine mandates, forgiving the student loans of his supporters using taxpayer money, etc.). The administration refused to enforce border security for three years, and Democrats have created "sanctuary cities", which is a violation of state and federal law

so just stop with this nonsense rhetoric that Harris will "enforce the law"

and that her far-left supporters are somehow intellectual. They are not.

 

[Stephen3141]

Some of this is correct, and much of it is flat-out-wrong, and totally missing the point.

Trump does not directly appeal to those who embrace young earth, suspicion of science, etc. Some of those people indeed support him, but Trump has never been any kind of Christian Nationalist or religious-right figure. He isn't Pat Robertson or even Pat Buchanan

And the political left is far more anti-scientific and illogical than the right. Cases in point:

They believe

1. There is no such thing as biological sex, or at the very least, sex isn't binary. This is categorically untrue on every level
2. Men can have babies
3. Every instance of disparate outcome must be the result of explicit or implicit racism. This is illogical nonsense and does not withstand any scrutiny
4. That we can turn off all nuclear, coal, and gas plants in the country and run on solar and wind. Complete and utter nonsense, and a dangerous idea. Absolutely no science backs this up

on the policy level, some of the things that Harris and others push are complete nonsense, such as

1. Giving new homebuyers $25,000 for a downpayment will lower housing costs. This is complete nonsense and violates basic pricinples of economics. It will do the opposite.
2. Taxing unrealized capital gains is a good idea, while virtually ever economist of any merit agrees that this would be a total disaster.
3. That defunding the police is a good idea. I don't even need to comment on this one

The Biden Harris administration routinely flouted the law and constitution, and his efforts were struck down by SCOTUS (vaccine mandates, forgiving the student loans of his supporters using taxpayer money, etc.). The administration refused to enforce border security for three years, and Democrats have created "sanctuary cities", which is a violation of state and federal law

so just stop with this nonsense rhetoric that Harris will "enforce the law"

and that her far-left supporters are somehow intellectual. They are not.

We differ on many beliefs.

But, I still hold that Harris will uphold the fair rule of law in America, while
Trump will try to subvert it.

I would not consider that the examples that you give of Biden "flouting" the law,
are what you claim. COVID-19 vaccines were attempts to stop a pandemic.
Forgiving college debt, was an attempt to help.
In both cases, Biden holds to whatever legal appeals are entered, and
whatever the courts decide on these points. This is not "flouting"
the law.

The example of Trump threatening judges, and their families, is a
direct attack on the fair rule of law in America. This is what the
Italian Mafia did.

As for Trump appealing to anti-intellectuals, I hold by this assertion.
Trump does not have to say "I am appealing to anti-intellectuals"
to appeal to anti-intellectuals. Christian groups that have a more
respectable history of embracing the intellect (such as historical Evangelicals),
have had an increasingly hard time justifying voting for Trump. This includes
readers of Christianity Today, probably the most prominent Evangelical
magazine in America.

As I said, anti-intellectualism cuts across all sorts of groups in America.
There is no need to argue that, because all anti-intellectuals do not
support Trump, we could say that he does not appeal to anti-intellectuals.

When it comes to populations that believe conspiracy theories, I think
that there is a heavy correlation between supporters of Tucker Carlson,
and the Fundamentalist Bible Belt (to use an old term). And, many of
the "swing" states are Bible Belt states. These have a general history
of being lesser educated, and more in support of Christian nationalism.
And with regard to biblical scholarship, the Fundamentalists have a
history of NOT having good critical Bible study skills. I see this as a function
of their anti-intellectualism, rather than some sort of guiding light of
their theology. Theologies that mostly express themselves in emotional
slogans, and politicians who mostly express themselves in emotional
slogans, have much in common. These groups also correlate heavily with
people who do not believe that air pollution is causing global warming,
and that that is contributing to massive shifts in destructive weather.

I see the supporters of Fox News, Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones, and the
Russia Today talking heads, as heavily correlating with anti-intellectuals.
This does not mean that they are liberals. I see the supporters of these
gossip channels, as not having the intellectual tools to carefully read
the top 20 news channels, and figure out who the outliers are, and
where the center of gravity is.

There are other groups and trends that make the analysis of Trump's
appeal, more difficult.
---------- ----------

I think that the characteristic of anti-intellectualism, is a more efficient
cutting plane through Protestants, than many others, when one is looking
for an explanation of who supports Trump.

And, unfortunately, North American Christians still almost all refuse to
carefully examine the place of the intellect in historic Christianity, and
refuse to call a spade a spade, when it comes to identifying anti-intellectual
Christian groups.

 

[John G.]

I say...thank you for picking up the slack where most Americans do not want to participate in such as, but not limited to, these jobs:

farmworkers
crop picker
manufacturing
construction laborers
food processors
factory workers
dishwashers
housekeepers
bussers
childcare
housecleaning

Hiring undocumented immigrants is illegal. Employers who do so risk facing legal consequences but they do so for a reason, to lower the cost of your everyday goods and services.

What the American government SHOULD do is to admit workers (not immigrants) to work for a specified time period and then leave.
This would work well for all concerned without artificially altering the ethnic, religious and linguistic composition of the USA.

 

[Merrill]

We differ on many beliefs.

But, I still hold that Harris will uphold the fair rule of law in America, while
Trump will try to subvert it.

I would not consider that the examples that you give of Biden "flouting" the law,
are what you claim. COVID-19 vaccines were attempts to stop a pandemic.
Forgiving college debt, was an attempt to help.
In both cases, Biden holds to whatever legal appeals are entered, and
whatever the courts decide on these points. This is not "flouting"
the law.

The example of Trump threatening judges, and their families, is a
direct attack on the fair rule of law in America. This is what the
Italian Mafia did.

As for Trump appealing to anti-intellectuals, I hold by this assertion.
Trump does not have to say "I am appealing to anti-intellectuals"
to appeal to anti-intellectuals. Christian groups that have a more
respectable history of embracing the intellect (such as historical Evangelicals),
have had an increasingly hard time justifying voting for Trump. This includes
readers of Christianity Today, probably the most prominent Evangelical
magazine in America.

As I said, anti-intellectualism cuts across all sorts of groups in America.
There is no need to argue that, because all anti-intellectuals do not
support Trump, we could say that he does not appeal to anti-intellectuals.

When it comes to populations that believe conspiracy theories, I think
that there is a heavy correlation between supporters of Tucker Carlson,
and the Fundamentalist Bible Belt (to use an old term). And, many of
the "swing" states are Bible Belt states. These have a general history
of being lesser educated, and more in support of Christian nationalism.
And with regard to biblical scholarship, the Fundamentalists have a
history of NOT having good critical Bible study skills. I see this as a function
of their anti-intellectualism, rather than some sort of guiding light of
their theology. Theologies that mostly express themselves in emotional
slogans, and politicians who mostly express themselves in emotional
slogans, have much in common. These groups also correlate heavily with
people who do not believe that air pollution is causing global warming,
and that that is contributing to massive shifts in destructive weather.

I see the supporters of Fox News, Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones, and the
Russia Today talking heads, as heavily correlating with anti-intellectuals.
This does not mean that they are liberals. I see the supporters of these
gossip channels, as not having the intellectual tools to carefully read
the top 20 news channels, and figure out who the outliers are, and
where the center of gravity is.

There are other groups and trends that make the analysis of Trump's
appeal, more difficult.
---------- ----------

I think that the characteristic of anti-intellectualism, is a more efficient
cutting plane through Protestants, than many others, when one is looking
for an explanation of who supports Trump.

And, unfortunately, North American Christians still almost all refuse to
carefully examine the place of the intellect in historic Christianity, and
refuse to call a spade a spade, when it comes to identifying anti-intellectual
Christian groups.

This is the classic case of a left-wing partisan living in a blue state looking down on the rest of the country as a bunch of illiterate and intolerant hicks. You aren't simply talking about fundamentalists living in backwaters, you are casting a general charge against a good portion of the country, which you believe is uneducated, unenlightened, and confused about religion.

you need to get your pride in check

and that isn't a winning political rhetoric. People like Trump win elections because partisan Democrats living in coastal blue states view the rest of the country as worthless "fly-over" country, and think anyone who wasn't born upper-middle-class and went to a private school is ignorant.

As I mentioned above, there is plenty of anti-intellectualism on the political left as well, and also within liberal churches and denominations, who believe things like gay lifestyles are endorsed in the Bible, Jesus was gay, whatever. All of that is nonsense.

Trump doesn't appeal to people because he has some stupid message for uneducated individuals. He is tapping into the frustrations of the working class, who were sold down the river by things like NAFTA and Asian trade agreements. He is promising to fix the border situation--which liberals living in Boston don't have to deal with. He is appealing to small business owners through his tax policies and deregulation efforts. He wants the country to produce more energy, not shut down the oil and gas sector. He is viewed as friendly to Christians, while Harris and the Dems are viewed as hostile.

Democrats just don't get it, and this is because they live in bubbles and echo-chambers.

I would prefer a different candidate than Trump for sure, and have plenty of issues with some of his policies. But Harris views people like me as political criminals.

 

[truthpls]

Trump:
Immigration
"We're going to have the largest deportation in the history of our country,"
Harris:
Immigration
“We can create an earned pathway to citizenship and secure our border.”

Now which one sounds more loving? Which one is more Christ- like? Which one adheres more to sound Christian doctrine?

Well, a strong man armed keeps his house safe. If leaders allow insane people and criminals and terrorists and killers and potential enemies (as well as nice normal poor people) to bypass laws and overrun a country, I don't think that is Christ like. It forces law abiding people, for one thing to pay. It endangers people as we know there are many rapes and thefts etc. Now if Harris was saying something like 'People who come legally can earn a pathway to citizenship' fine. I think it is perfectly Christian to protect your family and homes. But it seems wrong to try to apply 'christian' standards to a depraved and evil God hating government. That is a bit like asking which mayor is more 'godly' the mayor of Sodom, or Gomorrah?

 

[Hazelelponi]

...

because partisan Democrats living in coastal blue states view the rest of the country as worthless "fly-over" country, and think anyone who wasn't born upper-middle-class and went to a private school is ignorant.

 

[Hazelelponi]

We differ on many beliefs.

But, I still hold that Harris will uphold the fair rule of law in America, while
Trump will try to subvert it.

I would not consider that the examples that you give of Biden "flouting" the law,
are what you claim. COVID-19 vaccines were attempts to stop a pandemic.
Forgiving college debt, was an attempt to help.
In both cases, Biden holds to whatever legal appeals are entered, and
whatever the courts decide on these points. This is not "flouting"
the law.

The example of Trump threatening judges, and their families, is a
direct attack on the fair rule of law in America. This is what the
Italian Mafia did.

As for Trump appealing to anti-intellectuals, I hold by this assertion.
Trump does not have to say "I am appealing to anti-intellectuals"
to appeal to anti-intellectuals. Christian groups that have a more
respectable history of embracing the intellect (such as historical Evangelicals),
have had an increasingly hard time justifying voting for Trump. This includes
readers of Christianity Today, probably the most prominent Evangelical
magazine in America.

As I said, anti-intellectualism cuts across all sorts of groups in America.
There is no need to argue that, because all anti-intellectuals do not
support Trump, we could say that he does not appeal to anti-intellectuals.

When it comes to populations that believe conspiracy theories, I think
that there is a heavy correlation between supporters of Tucker Carlson,
and the Fundamentalist Bible Belt (to use an old term). And, many of
the "swing" states are Bible Belt states. These have a general history
of being lesser educated, and more in support of Christian nationalism.
And with regard to biblical scholarship, the Fundamentalists have a
history of NOT having good critical Bible study skills. I see this as a function
of their anti-intellectualism, rather than some sort of guiding light of
their theology. Theologies that mostly express themselves in emotional
slogans, and politicians who mostly express themselves in emotional
slogans, have much in common. These groups also correlate heavily with
people who do not believe that air pollution is causing global warming,
and that that is contributing to massive shifts in destructive weather.

I see the supporters of Fox News, Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones, and the
Russia Today talking heads, as heavily correlating with anti-intellectuals.
This does not mean that they are liberals. I see the supporters of these
gossip channels, as not having the intellectual tools to carefully read
the top 20 news channels, and figure out who the outliers are, and
where the center of gravity is.

There are other groups and trends that make the analysis of Trump's
appeal, more difficult.
---------- ----------

I think that the characteristic of anti-intellectualism, is a more efficient
cutting plane through Protestants, than many others, when one is looking
for an explanation of who supports Trump.

And, unfortunately, North American Christians still almost all refuse to
carefully examine the place of the intellect in historic Christianity, and
refuse to call a spade a spade, when it comes to identifying anti-intellectual
Christian groups.

Historic enough?

Archbishop Vigano: Open Letter to American Catholics - Catholic Family News

PDF Button Editors Note: With the US Election quickly approaching, we wanted to highlight Archbishop Vigano’s latest Open Letter to American Catholics. OPEN LETTER To American Catholics on the Eve of the 2024 Presidential Election The great march of mental destruction will go on. Everything will...

catholicfamilynews.com

"No; in this election you must choose between two radically opposed ways of conceiving the government of your Nation: you are called to choose between democracy and dictatorship, between freedom and slavery.

On one side we have candidate Donald J. Trump, who, despite serious problems in his positions – especially in the matter of abortion and assisted procreation – has as his objective the common good and the protection of the fundamental freedoms of citizens. In Donald Trump’s America, every Catholic can practice their Faith and educate their children in it without interference from the State.

On the other side we have a candidate and a party that promotes everything that directly opposes the Faith and Morals of the Catholic Church. In Kamala Harris’ America, Catholics – but also Protestants – are considered fundamentalists to be marginalized and eliminated, and their children are considered the property of the State, which arrogates to itself the right to lead them astray from an early age in both body and soul. Trump’s America can become great and prosperous again. Harris’ America is destined for invasion and for moral, social, and economic destruction: the most ferocious dictatorship.

Look at your country! Your cities have become dumps filled with derelicts and criminals, drug dealers and addicts, prostitutes and robbers. Your schools are dens of indoctrination and corruption from kindergarten onwards."

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Health-Related Concerns of Older Adults Before the 2024 Election

This national cohort survey of older adults assesses which health-related concerns they consider to be most salient in the 2024 election.

jamanetwork.com

The Presidential Election’s High Stakes for the Future of Medicine

This Viewpoint examines how the outcome of the 2024 US presidential election could affect the future of medicine and public health, particularly the antimedicine proposals found in the Republican Party’s Project 2025 playbook.

jamanetwork.com

Health Is on the Ballot in the Presidential Election

This JAMA Forum discusses the markedly different records and divergent campaign messages of the 2 major party presidential candidates on the issues of health care access, prescription drug prices, reproductive rights, migrant health, gun violence, health and safety agency powers, and pandemic...

jamanetwork.com

Guiding Child Health Policy With Science

Children today are growing up in a world that feels increasingly polarized and at risk from natural and manufactured threats, such as poverty, pandemics, war, and climate change. They face increasing mortality rates in 44 of 50 states.1 Many children live in neighborhoods with limited access to...

jamanetwork.com

 

[FutureAndAHope]

I am an Australian but have had time off work due to recovering from an operation and have been able to follow the US election in detail, watching the types of policies that both candidates are putting forward. As a Christian it is clear Trump is the best candidate by a long shot. Trump consistently puts forward godly policy, like preventing Transgender Athletes competing against women in sport, stopping gender treatment for young people. Harris pushes sinful policies, one of her ads supporting pornography, along with her continual pushing of woke sexual ideology. In my opinion she is incompetent as a leader, often unable to speak clearly or concisely. Trump and Vance are clear speakers, with a clear head. The US media constantly pushes blatant lies about Trump to derail him, while trying to make Harris look good. If Trump does not win it will be a travesty against heaven.