Is it unChristian to be supportive of Trump?

[Sketcher]

A lot of Facebook "friends" have told me I am a hypocrite for being for the travel ban. I know it is not a Muslim ban. But all over FB we see memes and articles about how the Christian thing to do is to welcome refugees in, no questions asked, and if we want a better vetting process or a wall, we're bad Christians. One "friend" told me how disturbing it was that someone (myself) who professes to practice a religion of love, would be ignorant and intolerant.

This is one of those issues where people have to be mature enough to bring forth facts and discuss them, rather than assign motives to people based on a fragment of an opinion that they read. Me, I think Trump goes too far on immigration. I believe the wall is a waste of money (research the tunnels the cartels have been using) and I have a serious problem with sending Christians who are trying to escape Syria back to Syria. Now fortunately, they did make it over, but it never should have happened in the first place. In terms of vetting, I think people should become acquainted with the vetting process we have already had in place before making claims that we're not vetting anyone. It seems that people are reading about what happened in Germany, and are assuming the exact same thing is happening in the US. It isn't. I for one have confidence in the system we already had. It would be easier for terrorists to get in via another country than by coming to America as refugees.

Also, concerning abortion and gay marriage, I'm getting real tired of being told I am not a real Christian by people who don't even go to church or read the bible. I actually had a friend say, "If you don't think gays should get married, you're not a real Christian." I feel like the bad guy. Thoughts?

If they said that with real conviction, then they've denied the faith by their own words. We have our creed here. And it doesn't include a provision that we must believe that two gay men can or should marry. If we look at the Bible, Jesus defined marriage as one man, one woman, for life (Matthew 19:4-9). Husband and wife, not husband and husband, or wife and wife. And it certainly doesn't end when the two decide to quit it in most circumstances, either. Now, to be generous to them, they might have thought that real Christians will have love in their hearts - and we will. However, this does not require subscribing to a definition of marriage that runs contrary to Scripture.

 

[ken777]

In terms of vetting, I think people should become acquainted with the vetting process we have already had in place before making claims that we're not vetting anyone. It seems that people are reading about what happened in Germany, and are assuming the exact same thing is happening in the US. It isn't. I for one have confidence in the system we already had. It would be easier for terrorists to get in via another country than by coming to America as refugees.

It is only the vetting procedures for people from the listed countries that are being questioned. Internal turmoil, lack of co operation, unverified documentation and other factors in these countries are cause for concern. Not all countries are the same when it comes to processing refugees.

The global terrorist situation has caused wide spread unease and any attempt to tighten screening will help to allay public fears. This is an important consideration.

 

[Sketcher]

The global terrorist situation has caused wide spread unease and any attempt to tighten screening will help to allay public fears. This is an important consideration.

I for one do not believe that policy should be decided by uninformed and terrorized people. I would prefer that people learn the facts, so policy changes will be informed rather than simply fear-driven.

 

[Albion]

I for one do not believe that policy should be decided by uninformed and terrorized people. I would prefer that people learn the facts, so policy changes will be informed rather than simply fear-driven.

Agreed. We've been treated to the anti-Trump forces preaching fear for a year at least and it's past time for it to stop.

 

[ken777]

I for one do not believe that policy should be decided by uninformed and terrorized people. I would prefer that people learn the facts, so policy changes will be informed rather than simply fear-driven.

Not "uninformed and terrorized" ... just concerned for the safety of their families. Most people would understand that.

The information that has been suppressed by the media is why these particular countries were selected. What are the conditions in these few countries that distinguish them from the other 40+ Muslim majority countries?

 

[Sketcher]

Not "uninformed and terrorized" ... just concerned for the safety of their families. Most people would understand that.

The information that has been suppressed by the media is why these particular countries were selected. What are the conditions in these few countries that distinguish them from the other 40+ Muslim majority countries?

I'm well aware why they're selected, they have serious problems with terrorists. I'm not opposed to stricter standards for some countries than others, especially when they have the problems these countries have. I am opposed to fear, uncertainty, and doubt concerning the vetting standards we already had in place.

 

[ken777]

I'm well aware why they're selected, they have serious problems with terrorists. I'm not opposed to stricter standards for some countries than others, especially when they have the problems these countries have. I am opposed to fear, uncertainty, and doubt concerning the vetting standards we already had in place.

The temporary travel ban only includes a few countries, so a general statement about vetting standards is not justified.

Information about conditions in the listed countries is not easily available through the media - you are more likely to find references to Muslims, Trump business interests, and other distracting details. How many actually know why Obama chose his "countries of concern"? It is more than just "serious problems with terrorists". It is also related to the availability of valid documentation, cooperation with the vetting officials, state sponsoring and safe havens for groups regarded as terrorist.

A temporary travel ban on the identified countries, while vetting procedures in these countries is assessed, makes a lot of sense to many of the people who elected the President to carry out such a program.

 

[ViaCrucis]

A lot of Facebook "friends" have told me I am a hypocrite for being for the travel ban. I know it is not a Muslim ban. But all over FB we see memes and articles about how the Christian thing to do is to welcome refugees in, no questions asked, and if we want a better vetting process or a wall, we're bad Christians. One "friend" told me how disturbing it was that someone (myself) who professes to practice a religion of love, would be ignorant and intolerant.

Also, concerning abortion and gay marriage, I'm getting real tired of being told I am not a real Christian by people who don't even go to church or read the bible. I actually had a friend say, "If you don't think gays should get married, you're not a real Christian." I feel like the bad guy. Thoughts?

If you actually do read Scripture, and you take your faith seriously, then yes you should find Donald Trump very troubling.

Can you be a Christian and support Donald Trump? Of course. Christians have supported all kinds of terrible people in positions of power in the past and were still Christians. Vlad the Impaler, Ivan the Terrible, and even Adolf Hitler.

The question isn't can you be a Christian and support Donald Trump. The question that you should be asking is should you?

Can you honestly take the words of Jesus Christ seriously, can you take the teachings and exhortations of the Apostles seriously, and the warnings and the statements of the ancient Prophets seriously and with all sincerity support the things Donald Trump says and wants to do, and what his administration seems to be working toward.

If you can support these things with a clear conscience, then fine.

I can't. I am compelled by two thousand years of Christian teaching, the clear and express words of Christ our God, the teachings of the Apostles, and the words of Holy and Sacred Scripture to oppose Donald Trump and his administration. Christ's dire warnings mentioned in Matthew ch. 25 are something I must take seriously, how I respond to the least of these matters, and if I support the oppression of the least of these, either explicitly or implicitly, then I will have to stand before Christ our God and Judge and give account for that. My conscience will not permit it.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ken777]

"The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong." Romans 13:4, NLT

One of the most important roles of government is to protect society and enforce law & order. This is a role very different to the one we have in our personal relationship to others. There is a tendency to confuse the two.

 

[SolomonVII]

I'm well aware why they're selected, they have serious problems with terrorists. I'm not opposed to stricter standards for some countries than others, especially when they have the problems these countries have. I am opposed to fear, uncertainty, and doubt concerning the vetting standards we already had in place.

Uncertainty and doubt comes about due to an unclear message and unreliable messengers. When a simple glance at publicly available Facebook pages would have allowed a proper vetting of the Sand Bernadino terrorists, and yet was not done, when any and all attempts to strengthen and validated the vetting processes are met with shrieks of Islamophobia and xenophobia, the fear mongering is mainly a province of the left, and not Trump.
What is good policy and what is bad policy is debatable. Certainty and assurance comes not just from criticizing the wall for example, but from assuring that government is working to counter tunnels as well.
People's fears become justified only when others throw up their hands in excasperaton and resignation and leave only the feeling that the problem looms larger than all possible solutions

 

[Hank Madden]

Some people (I said some) have a hard time cobbling together a coherent argument so they draw pictures and write a simple sentence and pass it off as political speech.

Ignore such simple sentences IMO.

Some are so angry with politics in general they "scream" rants using social media.

Ignore both IMO. It's not worth your time and resources to waste electronic ink. Respond with a cute cat meme or video.

If people directly call you "un-Christian" for your political choices, perhaps reassessing their status in your life may be in order.

Time and time again Jesus was asked to decide political questions. He refused. "My kingdom is not of this world." Hank

 

[jimmyjimmy]

A lot of Facebook "friends" have told me I am a hypocrite for being for the travel ban. I know it is not a Muslim ban. But all over FB we see memes and articles about how the Christian thing to do is to welcome refugees in, no questions asked, and if we want a better vetting process or a wall, we're bad Christians. One "friend" told me how disturbing it was that someone (myself) who professes to practice a religion of love, would be ignorant and intolerant.

Also, concerning abortion and gay marriage, I'm getting real tired of being told I am not a real Christian by people who don't even go to church or read the bible. I actually had a friend say, "If you don't think gays should get married, you're not a real Christian." I feel like the bad guy. Thoughts?

Is it "unChristian" to lock the doors of your house?

 

[Albion]

The question isn't can you be a Christian and support Donald Trump. The question that you should be asking is should you?

Can you honestly take the words of Jesus Christ seriously, can you take the teachings and exhortations of the Apostles seriously, and the warnings and the statements of the ancient Prophets seriously and with all sincerity support the things Donald Trump says and wants to do, and what his administration seems to be working toward.

Of course. The irony is that none of what is causing those who are wanting to overthrow the government to wet their pants these days is particularly unusual. We've lurched so far to the Left during the past decade or so that things like screening and limiting our immigrants, managing our borders, keeping an adequate level of financing for national defense purposes, restraining the growth of the federal bureaucracy, bringing the national debt into check, and so on, now seem controversial...but they are all what our country took for granted as good policy for most of our history.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Of course. The irony is that none of what is causing those who are wanting to overthrow the government to wet their pants these days is particularly unusual. We've lurched so far to the Left during the past decade or so that things like screening and limiting our immigrants, managing our borders, keeping an adequate level of financing for national defense purposes, restraining the growth of the federal bureaucracy, bringing the national debt into check, and so on, now seem controversial...but they are all what our country took for granted as good policy for most of our history.

No, the irony is in thinking that spending over half a trillion dollars a year on military spending is an "adequate level of financing" and that those who want to keep spending this much--or even raise the amount--are at all interested bringing the national debt into check; or those who want to restrain growth of the federal government and advocate for "smaller government" all the while trying to get as involved in the personal lives of citizens by saying who can marry who, who can love who, and what people can do in their own private lives. American conservatives and Republicans want small government the same way a child wants discipline, American conservatives and Republicans want to be "fiscally conservative" when it comes to social welfare programs but not when it comes to spending outrageous and ludicrous amounts of money unnecessarily on the largest military planet earth has ever conceived.

If you want to paint calling immigrants evil rapists, and propagating lies against immigrants, and banning people based on nation of origin and call that "border security" you are more than welcome to do so. Some of us plan to keep living in the real world, not the land of alternative facts where lord tinyhands has the biggest hands, and baseless conspiracy theory is supposed to be believed by mere fiat.

Also, who wants to overthrow the government? Who is wanting that? I mean in reality, not what people like Rush Limbaugh or the lunatic psychopaths who write for Breitbart might be saying.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[pat34lee]

How long will conservative Christians be willing to make excuses for a president who has reduced the federal government to an ongoing "soap opera" in his first 40 days?

The only soap opera or better yet, circus act, is the Democrats. How long will they continue to hate and stomp their feet and foam at the mouth because they lost the election? Time to grow up people. If you can't handle it, there are places where you can go voluntarily and rest for a few months or years.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The only soap opera or better yet, circus act, is the Democrats. How long will they continue to hate and stomp their feet and foam at the mouth because they lost the election? Time to grow up people. If you can't handle it, there are places where you can go voluntarily and rest for a few months or years.

Anyone who thinks this is about being mad about election results has literally no idea what they are talking about. Also, can't help but notice the humor in talking about "foot stomping" after eight years of constant foot stomping and whining fits from the right.

Let me guess, this is where someone tells me that I'm supposed to respect Donald Trump because he's the president, and this will come from someone who spent eight years talking about a Muslim Kenyan Obama and "death panels".

-CryptoLutheran

 

[pat34lee]

My conscience will not permit it.
-CryptoLutheran

Only one question matters then.

Would your conscience have permitted voting for Hillary?
If yes, then whatever standards you are using are not Christian or biblical.
If no, then you wasted your vote on someone with no chance of winning or you voted for nobody.

 

[Albion]

No, the irony is in thinking that spending over half a trillion dollars a year on military spending is an "adequate level of financing" and that those who want to keep spending this much--or even raise the amount--are at all interested bringing the national debt into check

Well, it won't be easy to accomplish both, even if both are desirable. But that's no reason to harrumpf the effort from the first day of the current administration forward. Let's see what can be done before snarling at the effort. And it must be said that the share of the national budget devoted to national defense has been much higher through most of our history. Obama reduced it drastically, so it's not reasonable to talk as though some great move towards militarism or imperialism is underway if the administration wants to bring things back into balance. Every military man I've heard address it has said that we are down to dangerously low levels now with outdated equipment, the need to make the same men take six or seven tours of duty in the Middle East, personnel being forced to cannibalize some equipment in order to keep other machines working, and etc.

or those who want to restrain growth of the federal government and advocate for "smaller government" all the while trying to get as involved in the personal lives of citizens by saying who can marry who, who can love who, and what people can do in their own private lives.

If you think that Trump is the agent of all that, you just haven't been paying attention.

If you want to paint calling immigrants evil rapists

Trump did not do that, either.

and banning people based on nation of origin and call that "border security" you are more than welcome to do so.

Thank you but Obama did the same thing and it's been done many times in the past. This one was temporary and nothing special. But you have all the propaganda lines down pat, I see.

 

[pat34lee]

Anyone who thinks this is about being mad about election results has literally no idea what they are talking about. Also, can't help but notice the humor in talking about "foot stomping" after eight years of constant foot stomping and whining fits from the right.

Let me guess, this is where someone tells me that I'm supposed to respect Donald Trump because he's the president, and this will come from someone who spent eight years talking about a Muslim Kenyan Obama and "death panels".

-CryptoLutheran

Every problem Obama had were of his own making, from hiding his past to trying to destroy the economy. Sorry you couldn't see it, but blinders are hell on peripheral vision.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Only one question matters then.

Would your conscience have permitted voting for Hillary?

I did vote for Hillary, I would have preferred voting for Sanders but that didn't happen. So I voted for someone who I thought had a chance of beating Trump.

If yes, then whatever standards you are using are not Christian or biblical.

You mean like "Love thy neighbor"?

-CryptoLutheran