What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

David French: "Evangelicals Are Supporting Trump Out of Fear, Not Faith" (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Thoughts?

https://time.com/5615617/why-evangelicals-support-trump/?fbclid=IwAR3yn5nMDpB3bXvl3Kt52UJgj03yEqCWiR4tH7aQEAguUdvRLSj46jGxJWo

On June 21, the writer E. Jean Carroll came forward with a vivid and disturbing claim that Donald Trump raped her in a department store in the 1990s. She is the 22nd woman to allege that Trump committed acts of sexual misconduct. These claims are more extensive and more corroborated than the accusations against Bill Clinton.

It’s worth contrasting Trump, who denied Carroll’s claim (as well as his other accusers’), with Clinton because his scandals helped spur the Southern Baptist Convention in 1998 to issue its seminal “Resolution on Moral Character of Public Officials.” That document’s key statement was ominous and unequivocal: “Tolerance of serious wrong by leaders sears the conscience of the culture, spawns unrestrained immorality and lawlessness in the society, and surely results in God’s judgment.”

The relentless drumbeat of claims against Trump–combined with the clear moral declarations of the past–have caused millions of Americans to look at their evangelical fellow citizens and ask, simply: Why? Why have you abandoned your previous commitment to political character to embrace Donald Trump?

Part of the explanation is undeniably basic partisanship and ambition. White evangelicals are largely Republican, and they’re generally going to vote for Republicans. And proximity to power has always had its attractions for religious charlatans of all stripes. But I’d suggest the real reason for the breadth and depth of evangelical support is deeper and–perversely–even more destructive to its religious witness.

That reason is fear.

Talk to engaged evangelicals, and fear is all too often a dominant theme of their political life. The church is under siege from a hostile culture. Religious institutions are under legal attack from progressives. The left wants nuns to facilitate access to abortifacients and contraceptives, it wants Christian adoption agencies to compromise their conscience or close, and it even casts into doubt the tax exemptions of religious education institutions if they adhere to traditional Christian sexual ethics.

These issues are legally important, and there are reasons for evangelicals to be concerned. But there is no reason for evangelicals to abandon long-held principles to behave like any other political-interest group.

Instead, the evangelical church is called to be a source of light in a darkening world. It is not given the luxury of fear-based decisionmaking. Indeed, of all the groups in American life who believe they have the least to fear from American politics, Christians should top the list. The faithful should reject fear.

This is made plain to young Christians from the early days of Sunday school. There, many millions of young believers are taught the biblical verse: “For God gave us not a spirit of fear but of power and love and self-control.”

But in 2016, something snapped. I saw Christian men and women whom I’ve known and respected for years respond with raw fear at the very idea of aHillary Clinton presidency. They believed she was going to place the church in mortal danger. The Christian writer Eric Metaxas wrote that if Hillary won, America’s chance to have a “Supreme Court that values the Constitution” will be “gone.” “Not for four years, not for eight,” he said, “but forever.”

That wasn’t faith speaking. They were the words of fearful men grasping at fading influence by clinging to a man whose daily life mocks the very values that Christians seek to advance.

But why? The American evangelical church isn’t so weak that it needs Trump’s version of secular salvation. The early persecuted church would be stunned at the modern American church’s immense political strength. It has become so strong that it exercises veto power over the political prospects of any Republican nominee.

Yet the church is acting as if it needs Trump to protect it. That’s not courageous. It’s repulsive. And so long as this fear continues, expect the church’s witness to degrade further. In seeking protection from its perceived enemies, the church has lost its way.

It’s time for evangelicals to exercise their political veto power. America’s conservative people of faith should seek a primary challenger to Trump and send a message to the GOP that it will not compromise any longer. And it should do so from a position of confidence–and faith.

*******

David French is a TIME columnist. A lawyer and senior fellow at the National Review Institute, he is a best-selling author whose next book will be The Great American Divorce.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can only speak to this on an anecdotal level. But the evangelical Christians I know (quite a few) who support President Trump are very happy with him. They approve of his statements and actions, and especially his court appointments. I certainly don’t sense fear. They like him. 

 
I can only speak to this on an anecdotal level. But the evangelical Christians I know (quite a few) who support President Trump are very happy with him. They approve of his statements and actions, and especially his court appointments. I certainly don’t sense fear. They like him. 
I think the point of is the 'like' comes from a place of fear. They have been afraid they are losing and now they have someone with a huge stick that is willing to literally do whatever he wants to make them happy

 
The relentless drumbeat of claims against Trump–combined with the clear moral declarations of the past–have caused millions of Americans to look at their evangelical fellow citizens and ask, simply: Why? Why have you abandoned your previous commitment to political character to embrace Donald Trump?
Because those that are doing so never held the belief in the first place. Turns out it was political, that’s proved now, and it’s sad but true.

It’s trading principle for power, just like everyone else in the GOP that has supported Trump. It’s not complicated.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the point of is the 'like' comes from a place of fear. They have been afraid they are losing and now they have someone with a huge stick that is willing to literally do whatever he wants to make them happy
I understand the argument but it strikes me as an intellectual exercise. When I talk to these people in real life they don’t seem fearful. 

And before Trump came along, they certainly didn’t think they were losing. In fact one aspect of American thinking which has always struck me as consistent among people of almost every political persuasion is that they all think they are winning. The evangelicals I know, just like the liberals I know, believe that the public shares their point of view and if they ever lose an election it’s because of a flawed candidate or faulty messaging. 

 
It’s time for evangelicals to exercise their political veto power. America’s conservative people of faith should seek a primary challenger to Trump and send a message to the GOP that it will not compromise any longer. And it should do so from a position of confidence–and faith.
Do you know the reporting on Jerry Falwell Jr and Michael Cohen?

 
Just want to add: @Joe Bryant you have started some very interesting threads recently. Love these topics; they make for great discussion. Thanks and please keep it up! 

 
I understand the argument but it strikes me as an intellectual exercise. When I talk to these people in real life they don’t seem fearful. 

And before Trump came along, they certainly didn’t think they were losing. In fact one aspect of American thinking which has always struck me as consistent among people of almost every political persuasion is that they all think they are winning. The evangelicals I know, just like the liberals I know, believe that the public shares their point of view and if they ever lose an election it’s because of a flawed candidate or faulty messaging. 
I guess you can call it intellectual but most people don't know they are making a decision out of fear...

 
Catholic school

As vicious as Roman rule

I got my knuckles bruised

By a lady in black

And I held my tongue

As she told me, “Son,

Fear is the heart of love.”

So I never went back.

 
I understand the argument but it strikes me as an intellectual exercise. When I talk to these people in real life they don’t seem fearful. 

And before Trump came along, they certainly didn’t think they were losing. In fact one aspect of American thinking which has always struck me as consistent among people of almost every political persuasion is that they all think they are winning. The evangelicals I know, just like the liberals I know, believe that the public shares their point of view and if they ever lose an election it’s because of a flawed candidate or faulty messaging. 
I agree it’s not fear, it’s avarice.

 
Other than his statement that Christianity is "under siege" in the US, the article is fine. Probably captures the thought process of some evangelicals.

 
I guess you can call it intellectual but most people don't know they are making a decision out of fear...
OK but see if they don’t know they’re doing it then how does French know they’re doing it? This is where it becomes a meaningless intellectual exercise. 

Besides let’s be realistic- his conclusion is absurd. Conservatives should realize they’re fearful and find someone to challenge Trump? We all know that will never happen in a million years. They don’t think they’re fearful, and they’re not going to reject Trump because they don’t want to. 

 
I can only speak to this on an anecdotal level. But the evangelical Christians I know (quite a few) who support President Trump are very happy with him. They approve of his statements and actions, and especially his court appointments. I certainly don’t sense fear. They like him. 
They definitely like the job that Trump is doing.  If there is fear involved it is the fear of change -- they fear that liberalism has run amok.  They are also fearful that the demographics of this country are changing.

 
Other than his statement that Christianity is "under siege" in the US, the article is fine. Probably captures the thought process of some evangelicals.
Maybe if they practiced what they preach they wouldn't feel so "under siege" Hard for someone on the outside being fine with people butting into their personal lives, who appear to them to be hypocritical in what they preach.

 
I think this is true of the older segments in the religion.  I think the younger one gets in this demographic of "evangelical Christian" it's a lack of knowledge and perspective coupled with a desire to "win" and competition (brought on by their sin).  Those new to the faith or early on in their study of theology often times don't know (well enough) the core doctrines and allow influences outside of their relationship with God to be their guide.  They aren't afraid of anything persay, but they want to be on the "good side" of the fight.  Problem is, they don't typically look to the Bible and/or example of Jesus to define the "good side"....they look to other, flawed humans.

 
They definitely like the job that Trump is doing.  If there is fear involved it is the fear of change -- they fear that liberalism has run amok.  They are also fearful that the demographics of this country are changing.
I think there's pretty clearly fear that Dems will open the floodgates at the border and advance a socialized health care system that will decrease the quality of care for the hard working average folks. I won't rehash those arguments here. And maybe some cultural fear, too. Hearing a foreign language spoken nearby seems to really bother some social conservatives. What do they think when the people speaking Spanish are fellow evangelicals?

 
The only thing threatening Christianity right not is the blatant hypocrisy espoused in near everything they do.  From embracing Trump's immorality, to the stance on gay marriage, immigration camps, the response to widespread child rape, gun issues, for-profit megachurches, and on and on.  It would greatly help if Christians acted more Christian in the manner in which they conduct themselves.  Of course, being Christian means being less cruel and more tolerant.  I don't see how they can walk that back within a large majority of their congregations.

 
If David French can’t figure out why evangelicals support Trump I’ll give him a road map depicting the route to the next idiot convention and kick his ### in the direction it’s starting.

My ### they’re scared. They know exactly where the First Amendment interpretation begins and ends and it is at the federal level and is made up of Supreme Court appts.

Anybody who can’t figure this out shouldn’t be in any position to address the political landscape for money.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why would Christians be against this?
:shrug:  I don't get it either but the Venn overlap is unmistakable.

I'm also wondering if there is a growing fear among evangelicals that their numbers and influence are shrinking in a secularizing nation. The Christian influence was something that could be taken for granted for most of the nation's existence; going forward, not so much perhaps. 

 
It’s difficult to imagine how an “evangelical” would be a supporter of Trump.  This seems as good a reason as any, because logically it makes little sense.

 
I guess I’m mainly objecting to the word “fear” being used here. Are they concerned, in some cases very concerned about the stuff people have described here? Of course, that’s obvious. But they don’t seem very fearful to me. They’re not cringing. 

Plus, French makes the argument that this fear has caused them to make an irrational decision in support of Donald Trump. But I could just as easily make the opposite argument: that if you believe in the politics that most conservative Christians do, then supporting Donald Trump is a perfectly rational decision to make. In fact, at the moment at least this opposite argument makes much more sense. 

 
My ### they’re scared. They know exactly where the First Amendment interpretation begins and ends and it is at the federal level and is made up of Supreme Court appts.

Anybody who can’t figure this out shouldn’t be in any position to address the political landscape for money.
So...they're not scared of the Supreme Court taking away their rights ruling against their belief system?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let’s agree for a moment with the premise that conservative religious values are becoming less popular. If you are one of those who share those values what then is your solution? The obvious answer is long term protection under the law, so that politicians in the future won’t be able to change society in the way you don’t like. 

This is exactly what Donald Trump (and Mitch Mcconnell) have provided for social conservatives. Long after these two men are gone, the judges they have appointed will continue to protect social conservatism. It’s already done no matter what happens now. If I were a social conservative this gain would be worth almost any price. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So...they're not scared of the Supreme Court taking away their rights?
No. They know that a manger in the public square, school prayer, local primacy of privacy laws, etc. once flew in their communities before the commies at the ACLU had their way with the establishment clause and other reading of the First Amendment.

 
School prayer

public invocations

abortion laws

contraception laws

God as mentioned in gov’t proceedings

censorship and community standards

etc., ad nauseum

 
Actually there are many dozens of smaller reasons that combined are much more important: the federal judgeships. In terms of long term impact these will have a much greater effect on society. 
No. The big decisions start and end at the S. Ct. All other courts are controlled by their rulings. Any devolution of power starts there and only there.

 
School prayer

public invocations

abortion laws

contraception laws

God as mentioned in gov’t proceedings

censorship and community standards

etc., ad nauseum
Right. And here’s a big one in recent years: “protecting” Christians from gay rights. For some reason or another there is a paranoid fear in certain parts of the country that a gay couple is going to try to force a Baptist church to perform gay marriages. 

 
Though fed courts are big once the devolution happens. 

My God, this article is one big bloviation by somebody who is either too stupid to comment astutely on the issue or too angry to be competent in his role as political commentator.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No. The big decisions start and end at the S. Ct. All other courts are controlled by their rulings. Any devolution of power starts there and only there.
I disagree. The small decisions,  combined have more impact. But let’s ask an attorney to weigh in. 

 
Though fed courts are big once the devolution happens. 

My God, this article is one big Bolivia Timon by somebody who is either too stupid to comment astutely on the issue or too angry to be competent in his role as political commentator.
I think he was one of Buckley’s protégés. I disagree with him here but he’s been insightful in the past. 

 
So let's say the Moral Majority was successful in their political ambitions of ending the civil rights movement, the women's movement, gay rights movement, and teaching of evolution. Looking back nearly 50 later, were these really "moral" positions? There are plenty of truly good, decent, moral religious people, but it seems like when religion and politics mix it is usually for regressive, hateful and bigoted beliefs that have nothing to do with the teachings of the Bible or morality for that matter. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top