DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
<
form action=&amp
;amp;amp;quot;https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; method=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;p
ost&
quot; target=&am
p;amp;amp;quot;_top&
amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;input type=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hidden&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; name=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;cmd&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; value=&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot
;_s-xclick&a
mp;amp;quot;&amp
;amp;amp;gt; &am
p;amp;amp;lt;input type=&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hidden&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; name=&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hosted_button_id&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; val
ue=&
quot;DKL7ADEKRVUBL&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;input type=&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;image&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; src=&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;https://www.payp
alobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donateCC_LG.gif&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; border=&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;0&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; nam
e=&q
uot;submit&a
mp;amp;quot; alt=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;quot;PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!
&quo
t;&g
t; &
lt;img alt=&
amp;amp;quot;&am
p;amp;amp;quot; border=&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;0&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; src=&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;https://www.paypalobjects.com
/en_US/i/scr/pixel.gif&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; width=&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;1&a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; height=&amp
;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;1&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&am
p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &a
mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/form&
amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;
HTML https://3169.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Politics
*****************************************************
#Post#: 14973--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: guest73 Date: July 9, 2020, 12:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Trump blasts Supreme Court decision: This is 'political
prosecution'
The Supreme Court has deferred issuing a definitive ruling on
whether congressional committees can have access to President
Trump's financial records, throwing the issue back to the lower
courts in a move blocking Congress from getting the records at
this time.
2 minutes
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhY1NGOjcCs
#Post#: 15867--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: patrick jane Date: August 4, 2020, 5:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[img]
HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/118646.png?w=700[/img]
HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2020/july/have-your-political-views-become-idol.html
Have Your Political Views Become An Idol?
As followers of Christ who are engaging in this process, are we
starting to cross a line that shouldn’t be crossed?
Are your political views and convictions growing in intensity?
Are you finding yourself feeling angrier than you used to be
about a variety of political issues? Are people in your extended
family, community, or church becoming angrier?
In addition to being in the midst of a global pandemic,
widespread demonstrations about racial injustices, and an
election year, we live in a media saturated environment where
hate and division trigger wider viewership, larger ratings, and
significantly higher advertising revenue.
In such an environment, how can we as individual Christians, or
as pastors or ministry leaders tasked with leading others, know
when we are getting sidetracked, especially when “believing
you’re right and that others are wrong” triggers intense and
addictive feelings?
Media outlets on both the left and right are using language and
tactics to inflame anger, alienate, and disparage whomever ‘the
other’ might be and, as a result, there are growing levels of
disrespect and hatred towards people who hold different
political views.
As followers of Christ who are engaging in this process, are we
starting to cross a line that shouldn’t be crossed? And, if we
are, how can we know when this is happening, and what are the
costs?
Signs of political idolatry
Idolatry comes in all shapes and sizes. It is not limited to
people who put a metal or wooden statue on an altar and light
incense to it. Although this happens in many parts of the world,
idolatry is a deeper issue. Here are a few questions to discern
if it is at work in our hearts.
Who or what am I trusting to provide for my future?
People enter into idolatry because they feel the need for safety
and security. Life can be hard and even if we are experiencing
good times, there is a sense that we do not want them to end.
It doesn’t take much to realize how truly fragile, vulnerable,
and powerless we are in this world. The pandemic alone, with all
its recent economic ripple effects, has made this painfully
clear even for many who thought they could control their
destinies.
Political idolatry happens when we begin fixating on what a
human leader or political party can do for us more than we focus
our eyes on our Heavenly Father, our true provider who calls us
to trust him and not worry (Matt. 6:25-34).
How am I treating people who disagree with me?
We can also tell if we have moved into political idolatry by how
we treat people with different opinions, be they on the left or
right of the political spectrum. All human beings, despite their
political views or political affiliations, are made in God’s
image (Gen. 1:26-28).
As such, humans are held to a very high standard regarding how
we treat people. Jesus said in Matthew 25:31-46 that whatsoever
we do to “the least of these” we have done to him. In the
current political environment “the least of these” are often
whoever is on the other end of the political spectrum.
When we interact with “those people” who see political and
social issues so differently, do we treat them with dignity and
honor the way we would treat Jesus? Are we treating them with
kindness so we bear the image of our Heavenly Father (Matt.
5:43-48)?
Where is my loyalty being placed?
The next logical step in discerning if we are letting our
political views become idols is by looking at the loyalty and
allegiance question. When faced with a choice between what
political pundits and political leaders are asking us to do, and
what Scripture asks of us as followers of Christ, which actions
do we take?
For example, God is going to judge us for how we speak about
people, and for the names we call them (Matt. 5:21-24). Do we
take our cues from political leaders and fear them, or do we
fear God, the one who deserves our ultimate allegiance (Luke
12:2-5)?
Costs of political idolatry
Sometimes, we might make light of these things and rationalize
why it is OK to choose political rhetoric and divisive behavior
over behaviors and attitudes God calls us to in Scripture.
Perhaps it is spiritual warfare that is causing us to not step
back and assess the broader impact of political idolatry, for it
comes at a great cost (1 John 2:1-11).
Distorted discipleship
Essential in the discipleship process is the formation of a new
core identity. When we accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior, we
become children of God (Rom. 8:14-17), and the chief aim of our
life is to grow in Christ-likeness (2 Cor. 3:18; 2 Cor.
5:14-21).
Political idolatry forms in us a different core identity, and
from that a very different ‘likeness’ emerges. Discipleship
becomes distorted as we say that we are Christians but
attitudes, words and behaviors begin resembling the messaging of
politicians and pundits on the right or the left more than our
risen Lord.
Marred witness
The distorted discipleship then leads to a marred witness.
Rather than seeing Christians who have hope in a God with
ultimate power and authority, who is ushering in an eternal
kingdom, they see people rallying around political figures and
behaving in ways that seem at times to be wholly contradictory
to how their Bible, that they say informs and guides their
lives, is telling them to live and treat people in the world.
Jesus taught his followers that people would know we are
Christians by our love (John 13:34-35), but political idolatry
frequently holds opposing values. People begin thinking it is
fine to hate, malign, publicly embarrass, ridicule and even
bully those with different political views.
So, at a time when a broken world needs the witness of Christ
more than ever, political idolatry clouds and disfigures this
witness, and the end result is far fewer people believe that the
gospel is true or good news at all.
Broken societies
And out of distorted discipleship and marred witness, horrific
things can happen in society. Walk the path of Auschwitz and you
will never be the same, wondering how the place that was the hub
of Western theology in its day could spawn such unfathomable
horror.
How in the world could Christians commit intense violence
against innocent people, merely because they were different? It
happens when people substitute teachings of Jesus for political
ideologies.
Some might say that is just an extreme case. Yet we saw it in
Rwanda as well, and at that time their nation was dubbed the
“most Christian” of all countries. It happened in Sarajevo and
refugees said, “We never thought it could happen here. We were
so educated.”
However, extreme violence did happen, because professing
Christians chose political idolatry over loyalty to the
teachings of Christ. And brokenness in our own society continues
as the remnants of slavery and segregation, political positions
once vehemently supported by many Christians, result in people
of color still regularly having to navigate discrimination in a
variety of forms.
God deserves better from us
In the midst of a global pandemic, protests, and economic
turmoil, Christianity proclaims that it has “good news” to share
with the world. The Lamb of God, through his sacrificial work on
the cross, took away divisions among people where hatred and
prejudice had separated them for generations.
Through his blood, he reconciled Jews and Gentiles (Eph.
2:11-22), he destroyed economic and racial barriers (1 Cor.
12:13), gender barriers (Gal. 3:28), and other seemingly
irreconcilable cultural differences (Col. 3:10-12). The first
chapter of Colossians proclaims that Jesus reconciled to himself
all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by
making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
It is because of all that God has done for us through the blood
of Christ that he deserves to have no other idols before him.
These are not harmless political games that are being played.
This is deadly serious.
The world needs the church, and every person within it, to set
aside political idolatry so people can see our Risen Lord. It
doesn’t mean that we don’t engage in political processes and
seek to influence our societies. It does mean we keep Christ and
his teachings first and foremost as we do this.
Mary Lederleitner is author of the book Women in God’s Mission
and Managing Director of the Church Evangelism Institute at the
Wheaton College Billy Graham Center.
#Post#: 15896--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: patrick jane Date: August 7, 2020, 5:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://i.pinimg.com/564x/48/63/6f/48636f2839ae65a33e10d9a6f3e0f21a.jpg
8/7/20
Donald J. Trump Retweeted
The White House
@WhiteHouse
·
Aug 5
US government account
LIVE: President
@realDonaldTrump
holds a news conference
The White House
·
879.8K viewers
0:01 / 33:01
The White House
@WhiteHouse
LIVE: President @realDonaldTrump holds a news conference
pscp.tv
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
BIG NEWS! The Political Crime of the Century is unfolding.
ObamaBiden illegally spied on the Trump Campaign, both before
and after the election. Treason!
Quote Tweet
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
· Aug 5
Sally Yates just testified that she would not have signed off on
the surveillance of Carter Page if she knew what she knows now.
That follows Rod Rosenstein saying the same thing.
HTML https://jonathanturley.org/2020/06/04/rosenstein-slams-mccabe-obstruction-theories-and-1000-prosecutors/
Show this thread
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
Every time you see a negative Big Pharma commercial against me
remember, it means your drug prices are coming way down!
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
HTML https://twitter.com/TeamTrump/status/1290980559519395840/video/1
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
716.7K views
0:00 / 0:58
From
Team Trump (Text TRUMP to 88022)
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
765.2K views
0:00 / 2:10
From
Team Trump (Text TRUMP to 88022)
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
Sally Yates has zero credibility. She was a part of the greatest
political crime of the Century, and ObamaBiden knew EVERYTHING!
Sally Yates leaked the General Flynn conversation? Ask her under
oath. Republicans should start playing the Democrats game!
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
.
@CNN
has no sources on the Task Force. Their “sources” are made up,
pure fiction! Jim Acosta is a Fake reporter!
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
Nevada has ZERO infrastructure for Mail-In Voting. It will be a
corrupt disaster if not ended by the Courts. It will take
months, or years, to figure out. Florida has built a great
infrastructure, over years, with two great Republican Governors.
Florida, send in your Ballots!
Donald J. Trump Retweeted
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
I will be interviewed on
@foxandfriends
at 7:30 A.M. Enjoy!
Donald J. Trump Retweeted
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 4
0:23
63.5M views
From
Donald J. Trump
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
Aug 5
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGA
#Post#: 16058--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: patrick jane Date: August 11, 2020, 11:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Black Lives Matter is a Domestic Terrorist Organization | Change
My Mind
Steven Crowder takes to the streets of Austin to have real
conversations with real people. In this installment, Steven
posits that Black Lives Matter is a domestic terrorist
organization.
1 hour 7 minutes
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yITK_Bm78mI
#Post#: 16965--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: patrick jane Date: September 1, 2020, 11:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tm1ZD9hFPO4&list=WL&index=4&t=0s
#Post#: 17440--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: patrick jane Date: September 9, 2020, 9:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[img]
HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/119195.jpg?w=940[/img]
HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2020/september-web-only/cut-stone-confederate-monuments-ryan-newson.html
Monuments Can Be Destroyed, but Not Forgotten
Our most controversial stone statues carry layers of communal
history that aren’t easily cast aside.
In the Hebrew Scriptures, stone monuments are earthen witnesses
to a sacred covenant. When Jacob contractually maneuvered
himself out from under his father-in-law Laban, he set up a
pillar in the highlands of Gilead. It was supposed to be a
reminder of a legal separation, but the fragility of the peace
was underscored by the dueling names given to the monument:
Jacob’s in the Hebrew tongue, Laban’s in Aramaic. The monument
was barely dedicated before it became an object of linguistic
civil war.
What’s old is new again. Disputes over historical markers and
their meanings are simply the continuance of culture war by
other means. Theologian Ryan Andrew Newson wrote his new book
Cut in Stone: Confederate Monuments and Theological Disruption
in the wake of the 2017 protests and counter-protests in
Charlottesville, Virginia. Thousands of organized white
nationalists infamously marched through the University of
Virginia campus chanting language—“White Lives Matter!” “Blood
and Soil!”—charged with centuries of racial supremacy. The
material cause for the march was the threatened removal of a
statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. Erected in 1924,
the statue presented a genteel, handsome Lee—hat in hand,
martial but not militaristic. The stone general is resigned but
undefeated, like the Lost Cause he represents.
The statue lasted decades in the city center without scrutiny,
but in the 21st century, it struck some as strange to venerate
the leader of a rebellion devoted to the preservation of chattel
slavery. Newson’s book delves into the history of Confederate
monuments like this one, asking what sort of political
ideology—or theology—underwrites them. What did these
monuments—often constructed many decades after Lee resigned at
Appomattox—mean for the communities that created them? What gave
them their near-sacred value? And what is the appropriate
political and theological response to markers of a contested
American legacy? Can you—should you—erase a moral tragedy?
Remembering a Tragic History
When they were originally constructed, monuments to Confederate
leaders and soldiers were remarkably free of cultural guilt.
Hundreds of statues appeared in over 30 states in the aftermath
of Reconstruction, as the South began to rehabilitate its
image—and historical memory. As Newson points out in fascinating
detail, the Confederacy was re-memorialized decades after its
military defeat. Monument construction was most intense from
1890 to 1950, a span of time that unsurprisingly coincides with
Jim Crow.
Other defeated nations and causes have wrestled with how to
remember a tragic history. Germany after the Second World War
underwent a therapy of historical penance that continues even
today. The Confederacy, however, did not. Its monuments served a
“palliative” purpose, Newson argues, aiming to “alleviate
collective suffering without addressing the root cause of the
pain.” So the stone figures stood as reminders of the genteel
honor and heroic manhood of figures such as Lee, Stonewall
Jackson, and Jefferson Davis—eliding their militant defense of
chattel slavery. With these symbolic moves, the memory of
slavery was quickly shunted into the distant past, even as its
system of involuntary unpaid labor shifted from the plantation
to the chain gang in the late-19th century and the systemic
incarceration of African Americans in the 20th.
As a historical project, Cut in Stone focuses on the
Reconstruction-era South, but Newson’s theological analysis
touches more broadly on the nature of historical memory and the
moral obligations of a political community that is still haunted
by the sins of its fathers. Newson’s book was published in the
middle of the summer of 2020—a wry moment of providence if ever
there was one. While Charlottesville in 2017 provides the
backdrop to the book, more recent events have made its subject
matter even timelier.
I was invited to review Newson’s book the day that statues of
Christopher Columbus were removed from Grant Park and Arrigo
Park in my hometown of Chicago. A week prior, a confrontation
between protesters and police had centered on the statue in
Grant Park. As protestors attempted to topple Columbus by force,
multiple people on both sides of the conflict were injured.
In the early-20th century, the monuments had been commissioned
by Italian-American communities in Chicago to memorialize the
Genoese explorer, who at that time evoked a spirit of
exploration and American destiny. Forgotten for centuries was
Columbus’s brutal subjugation of indigenous peoples—not to
mention the mercenary motivations of his transatlantic voyages.
There’s a reason political communities—and movements—make myths
about themselves. And not all of them are formed in malice or
bad faith. We typically retell the story of the civil rights
movement in heightened rhetoric that foregrounds its best ideals
while leaving other details—including the moral peccadillos of
its leaders—in the shadows. Only recently have we begun to tell
the stories of grassroots figures like Ida B. Wells and Fannie
Lou Hamer in addition to chronicling the (sometimes problematic)
charismatic male leadership of Martin Luther King Jr. and
Malcolm X. When a narrative has been told for decades, or
centuries, it takes of lot of intention to reorder historical
memory.
In Charlottesville and Chicago, historical myths finally
cracked. The stone figures of Lee and Columbus, for different
reasons, were not mere historical memories, but witnesses to
some deeper sense of national or ethnic identity.
One of the blind spots of modern liberalism—the political
philosophy, not the ideology—is its studied obliviousness to the
sacral elements of social life and national identity. There’s a
reason that the debate over stone structures reaches the fevered
pitch that it does. You find out what a community reveres when
the removal of its earthen symbols triggers charges of
disrespect, violation, and even blasphemy. You find out what a
revolution really seeks when you notice what the iconoclasts
want to destroy.
Newson is appropriately circumspect when asking what the proper
social or theological response ought to be toward Confederate
monuments. There is no way to continue honoring the noblesse
oblige of figures like Lee and Jackson without resorting to a
moral naivete that is willfully ignorant of American history.
The instinct to topple national idols is understandable. But
does destruction lead to erasure? Is there a reason to remember
the tragedies of American history in a way that acknowledges the
complications of the past without giving honor where shame is
due?
Handle with Care
This is where the virtue of prudence comes in handy, as virtues
do. How do we distinguish among the different symbols—what they
portray and what they represent for a variety of communities? If
we decide collectively that honorific statues of Confederate
military leaders should be removed, or perhaps limited to museum
exhibits, should we do the same for Christopher Columbus, Thomas
Jefferson, George Washington, or even Abraham Lincoln? All of
these figures have come under scrutiny, often for good reasons.
On July 24th, the day Columbus came down in Chicago, one of the
protestors made the statement that the statue symbolized
negative values that the city needed to “acknowledge,” but also
“divorce ourselves from.” The monument, she said, had “nothing
to do with where Chicago is going and our future.” But that’s
the tricky, sometimes awful thing about sacred symbols: Even
though they are only made of stone, they carry layers of
communal history that aren’t easily cast aside. Is it important
to remember what Columbus represented to Italian-Americans at a
time when they were also the victims of white supremacy? How
does that piece of history need to be preserved once the idol
has been toppled?
Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot explained that the removal was “an
effort to protect public safety and to preserve a safe space for
an inclusive and democratic public dialogue about our city's
symbols.” Which seems quite responsible in such tenuous and
terrifying times. Putting a hold on things—providing space for
deliberative liberalism to do what it does best—seems prudent.
And yet few, on the left or the right, seemed disposed to mimic
the mayor’s temperament. Charges of lawlessness were thrown from
one side, and charges of brutality and moral complicity from the
other. Few seemed satisfied with the mayor’s actions—or if they
were, they were reluctant to say it publicly.
Newson’s historical and theological analysis reminds us that a
statue is rarely just a statue; stone pillars are usually
consecrated to a cause—for better or worse. And while the past
few summers of culture-warring haven’t come close to resolving
every question of whether our most controversial monuments
should stay up, come down, or go elsewhere, Cut in Stone
provides a helpful framework for understanding the political and
theological principles at stake.
Clearly, sacred objects ought to be handled carefully. And yet,
sometimes their destruction—as with golden calves or stone
tablets—is the more meaningful response. If Moses smashed stones
etched by the divine hand in response to national idolatry, then
what kind of iconoclasm calls to us today?
David Henreckson is the director of the Institute for Leadership
and Service at Valparaiso University. He is the author of The
Immortal Commonwealth: Covenant, Community, and Political
Resistance in Early Reformed Thought.
#Post#: 17511--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: patrick jane Date: September 12, 2020, 10:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[img]
HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/119253.jpg?w=700[/img]
HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2020/september/bahrain-israel-peace-treaty-trump-united-arab-emirates-uae.html
Bahrain Makes Peace with Israel, Following United Arab Emirates
Today’s deal will normalize diplomatic, commercial, and security
ties. Trump administration hopes more Arab nations soon follow.
Bahrain has become the latest Arab nation to agree to normalize
ties with Israel as part of a broader diplomatic push by
President Donald Trump and his administration to fully integrate
the Jewish state into the Middle East.
Trump announced the agreement on Friday, following a three-way
phone call he had with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
and Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa. The three leaders
also issued a brief six-paragraph joint statement, attesting to
the deal.
“Another HISTORIC breakthrough today!” Trump tweeted.
The announcement on the 19th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001
terrorist attacks came less than a week before Trump hosts a
White House ceremony to mark the establishment of full relations
between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Bahrain’s
foreign minister will attend the event.
“There’s no more powerful response to the hatred that spawned
9/11 than this agreement,” Trump told reporters at the White
House.
It represents another diplomatic win for Trump less than two
months before the presidential election and an opportunity to
shore up support among pro-Israel evangelicals. Just last week,
Trump announced agreements in principle for Kosovo to recognize
Israel and for Serbia to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to
Jerusalem.
“This is a historic breakthrough to further peace in the Middle
East,” Trump, Netanyahu, and King Hamad said in the statement.
“Opening direct dialogue and ties between these two dynamic
societies and advanced economies will continue the positive
transformation of the Middle East and increase stability,
security, and prosperity in the region.”
Most people vividly remember where they were on the dreadful
day, 19 years ago, when terrorists hijacked planes, weaponizing
them as bombs to be flown into buildings. As a sophomore
studying at Union University (Jackson, TN), I remember the
images flashing across the TV screen as we paused our “Becoming
a Global Christian” class. The professor, the students, we were
all speechless as we witnessed live coverage of the second plane
hitting the second tower.
Like the UAE agreement, Friday’s Bahrain-Israel deal will
normalize diplomatic, commercial, security, and other relations
between the two countries. Bahrain, along with Saudi Arabia, had
already dropped a prohibition on Israeli flights using its
airspace. Saudi acquiescence to the agreements has been
considered key to the deals.
Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner noted that
the agreement is the second Israel has reached with an Arab
country in 30 days after having made peace with only two Arab
nations—Egypt and Jordan—in 72 years of its independence.
“This is very fast,” Kushner told The Associated Press. “The
region is responding very favorably to the UAE deal and
hopefully it’s a sign that even more will come.”
Netanyahu welcomed the agreement and thanked Trump. “It took us
26 years between the second peace agreement with an Arab country
and the third, but only 29 days between the third and the
fourth, and there will be more,” he said, referring to the 1994
peace treaty with Jordan and the more recent agreements.
The agreement will likely be seen as a further setback to the
Palestinians who tried unsuccessfully to have the Arab League
condemn normalization with Israel until they have secured an
independent state. That was one of the few cards still held by
Palestinians in negotiations as peace talks remain stalled.
The joint statement made passing mention of the Palestinians,
saying the parties will continue efforts “to achieve a just,
comprehensive, and enduring resolution to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict to enable the Palestinian people to
realize their full potential.”
The agreement makes Bahrain the fourth Arab country, after
Egypt, Jordan, and the UAE, to have full diplomatic ties with
Israel. Other Arab nations believed to be on the cusp of fully
recognizing Israel include Oman and Sudan. While tacitly
blessing the deals, Saudi Arabia—the regional power player—is
not expected to move as quickly.
Like the UAE, Bahrain has never fought a war against Israel and
doesn’t share a border with it. But Bahrain, like most of the
Arab world, long rejected diplomatic ties with Israel in the
absence of a peace deal establishing a Palestinian state on
lands captured by Israel in 1967.
The agreement could give a boost to Netanyahu, who was indicted
on corruption charges last year. Deals with Gulf Arab states
“are the direct result of the policy that I have led for two
decades,” namely “peace for peace, peace through strength,”
Netanyahu has said.
The Israeli-UAE deal required Israel to halt its contentious
plan to annex occupied West Bank land sought by the
Palestinians. Telephone calls soon began working between the
nations as they continue to discuss other deals, including
direct flights.
While the UAE’s population remains small and the federation has
no tradition of standing up to the country’s autocracy, Bahrain
represents a far-different country.
Just off the coast of Saudi Arabia, the island of Bahrain is
among the world’s smallest countries, only about 760 square
kilometers (290 square miles). Bahrain’s location in the Persian
Gulf long has made it a trading stop and a naval defensive
position. The island is home to the US Navy’s 5th Fleet and a
recently built British naval base.
Bahrain is acutely aware of threats posed by Iran, an anxiety
that comes from Bahrain’s majority Shiite population, despite
being ruled since 1783 by the Sunni Al Khalifa family. Iran
under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi had pushed to take over the
island after the British left, though Bahrainis in 1970
overwhelmingly supported becoming an independent nation and the
UN Security Council unanimously backed that.
Since Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution, Bahrain’s rulers have
blamed Iran for arming militants on the island. Iran denies the
accusations, though weapons experts suggest explosives found
there bear similarities to others linked to Iran. Israel and
Iran view each other as top regional enemies.
Outside of those tensions, Bahrain’s Shiite majority has accused
the government of treating them like second-class citizens. The
Shiites joined pro-democracy activists in demanding more
political freedoms in 2011, as Arab Spring protests swept across
the wider Middle East. Saudi and Emirati troops ultimately
helped violently put down the demonstrations.
In recent years, Bahrain has cracked down on all dissent,
imprisoned activists, and hampered independent reporting on the
island. While the Obama administration halted the sale of F-16
fighter jets to Bahrain over human rights concerns, the Trump
administration dropped that after coming into office.
Bahrain’s royal family and officials have come out in support of
the Israel-UAE agreement. However, civil society groups and
others have condemned the move and warned the monarchy not to
follow in the UAE’s footsteps—despite Bahrain’s yearslong
flirtation with Israel and Jewish leaders. Unlike the Emirates,
Jews had a historical presence on the island and some still live
there.
In 2017, two prominent US rabbis said Bahrain’s king told them
he hoped the Arab boycott of Israel would end. An interfaith
group from Bahrain that year also visited Israel, though the
state-run Bahrain News Agency later said that it didn’t
“represent any official entity” after an uproar erupted on
social media.
Bahrain has increasingly relied on support from other nations as
it struggles with its debts, particularly neighboring Saudi
Arabia. In that way, Bahrain has followed in lockstep with
Riyadh, meaning any normalization with Israel likely got the
kingdom’s approval though Saudi Arabia has for its part remained
silent since the Emirati announcement.
Associated Press writers Aya Batrawy in Dubai, United Arab
Emirates, and Ilan Ben Zion and Joseph Krauss in Jerusalem
contributed to this report.
#Post#: 17740--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: patrick jane Date: September 19, 2020, 12:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[img]
HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/119422.jpg?w=700[/img]
HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2020/september/evangelicals-for-trump-faith-voters-campaign-rally-georgia.html
This Election, Evangelical Supporters Have More Faith in Trump
The campaign emphasizes another side of the president at
“prayer, praise, and patriotism” rallies.
Joann Roberts had never been to a political rally before.
She prays for President Donald Trump every day and watches
messages from his faith advisers online, including
televangelists Paula White-Cain and Jentezen Franklin. When
Roberts heard they would be speaking at a campaign event in
Georgia, the Southern Baptist mom of three took off from her job
as a hospital administrator and made the hour-long drive to a
field in the far-flung Atlanta suburbs.
Wearing a neon pink shirt printed with the slogan “God, Family,
Guns, and Trump,” she fit right in.
The 500-plus crowd at this week’s Evangelicals for Trump rally
included local politicians, GOP organizers, and even an
unannounced visit by Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, but most were
people like Roberts. They were veterans, retired couples,
bikers, college students, and homeschool moms, all Christians
who felt like this year they needed to do something more to show
their support.
Several volunteers distributing hand sanitizer and masks (not
required, but around a quarter wore them) said this was their
first time working with a political campaign. They traded
stories about going door to door for Trump and turning their
guest rooms into makeshift call centers. They compared churches
and voting districts. They offered compliments over their MAGA
gear. “I got it at Ace Hardware,” one woman beamed when asked
about her Trump 2020 mask. “They can’t keep them in stock!”
More than anything, these Georgia Christians gushed over what
they had seen during Trump’s presidency: a leader who came
through on his pledge to appoint conservative justices, defend
religious freedom, and oppose abortion. “He really just kept his
promises,” said Fred Engel, wearing a red plaid shirt and a
volunteer lanyard around his neck. “I don’t remember a single
politician in my 68 years who did that.”
While detractors critique the president as divisive, arrogant,
and cruel, voters like Engel instead view Trump as a family man,
with the devoted support of Ivanka, Don Jr., and Eric, who came
out to stump for his father at the Cumming, Georgia, rally. The
crowd offered up a collective “amen” when Eric suggested that
“in the Bible, it’s always an imperfect person” used by God.
“I believe my father was put here for a reason,” the younger
Trump son said. “It was because of a higher deity and entity,
and that’s why the evangelical community has rallied around
him.”
Despite the white evangelical turnout for Trump before, it
wasn’t quite like this last time.
“I believe most evangelicals—most pastors for certain—four years
ago probably voted against Hillary Clinton. Four years later,
many if not most are voting for Donald Trump,” said Chuck Allen,
a local pastor who prayed to open the event. “That’s a
significant difference.”
Polls back him up on the first part. A majority of white
evangelicals who planned to vote for Trump in 2016 were driven
more by their opposition to Clinton than by the appeal of Trump
as a candidate, Pew Research showed.
But now, while Trump’s evangelical opponents are more vocal
against the president’s polarizing rhetoric and America First
policies, supporters instead say they have reason for more
enthusiasm. They cite Trump’s conservative stances in office and
the spiritual backing of several evangelical leaders who have
had an open door to pray with him at the White House throughout
his first term.
As sociologist Gerardo Martí wrote, Trump has made inroads with
evangelicals “because he engages in actions in support of
religiously defined group interests rather than as a result of
statements of belief or piety of behavior.” Even with some slips
over the first half of the year, more than half of white
evangelicals (59%) still “very strongly” approved of the
president as of this summer, compared to 29 percent of Americans
overall.
The Trump campaign has set out to maximize that support. It
amped up its evangelical outreach, beginning with a kickoff
event in Miami at the start of the year featuring No. 45 himself
and continuing with hundreds of local MAGA meetups and dozens of
“prayer, praise, and patriotism” events ahead of the November
election.
Leading the charge is the president’s pastor and top prayer
partner White-Cain, who recounts how she has served as a
spiritual adviser for the businessman-turned-politician for
nearly 20 years and took on an official White House role in
2019. She brings along husband Jonathan Cain from the band
Journey, leading to requisite references to “Don’t Stop
Believin’” and “Faithfully.” At the event, he performed to an
audio track of a worship song he wrote called “Freedom in Your
Grace.”
The campaign has also enlisted fellow evangelical advisers and
pastors like Franklin, whose son now works for the campaign;
National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference executive vice
president Tony Suarez, who has joined four Evangelicals for
Trump events so far this year; and Allen, who was enlisted to
join an upcoming event in Phoenix after helping with the one in
his area.
Evangelicals for Trump events are set up differently than the
larger rallies for a broader Trump crowd, starting off with an
invocation and familiar praise music. In a divisive and
defensive election year, the gathering in Georgia this week,
held outside a local barn event space, hummed with the calm
relief of shared faith and shared politics. No rowdy factions.
No snarky signs. No hollering or boos.
Attendees, seated in folding chairs spaced a couple feet apart,
slowly swayed as they sang along to “This Is Amazing Grace” and
“Way Maker,” performed by a stripped-down worship band from
Allen’s church, a nearby nondenominational congregation with
4,500 attendees.
While the faith leaders focused mostly on the administration’s
victories, Eric Trump criticized the “radical” protesters taking
the streets in cities across the US and the decision for some
states to allow businesses to reopen before churches.
There were four standing ovations for law enforcement, who were
present at the event as security. The only reference to violence
faced by black Americans—the inciting incidents leading to the
recent protests—came from Franklin, who expressed frustration at
false divisions: “It’s like if you’re for President Trump … that
means you’re automatically not upset if you see a black man
being beaten or choked to death in the streets. I stand for
both. I stand for justice and righteousness.”
Perhaps the weather helped things feel particularly peaceful
too. It was the coolest day all summer in the area—overcast,
breezy, and 70 degrees. The invocation prayer referenced a
“God-ordained” forecast.
Even when it began to drizzle, attendees stayed seated,
applauding and waving when they noticed Eric Trump sneak out the
side of the barn to jet off to his next campaign appearance and
mm-hmming in agreement during closing prayers for Americans to
vote for “life, faith, and freedom.”
The Evangelicals for Trump events emphasize a softer side of the
notoriously combative president, with stories about the
president’s faith and family alongside lists of political wins.
White-Cain said “it was his idea” to call for prayer against the
“evil” of coronavirus. Eric admitted that the Trumps went into
the 2016 campaign “not knowing a damn thing about politics,” but
they worked together as a family and “God got us here.”
Though he is a vocal Trump supporter, as a pastor, Allen
recognizes the tension between the draw of the president’s
conservative political priorities and the turnoff of his
reputation as a bully.
“President Trump doesn’t make it easy for evangelicals,” said
Allen, who built a rapport with Trump’s team during visits to
the Mexican border two years ago and to the Bahamas after
Hurricane Dorian last summer. “I wish you could see a more
compassionate Trump that I believe sincerely exists, but there’s
just so much bluster around him.”
Allen estimates that his nondenominational, blue-collar
congregation, Sugar Hill Church, is about “60 percent Trump and
40 percent anyone-but-Trump,” but the Trump faction has become
more eager to take a stand.
Sugar Hill, he said, has benefited from a Trump economy, its
members boasting more jobs and more sales, even in recent
months. (The statewide unemployment rate has fallen back down to
5.6 percent, better than the national average.) As a result, the
church has been able to expand its ministry reach, launching new
worship sites and supporting hundreds of families with rent
assistance and meal distribution during the pandemic.
The coronavirus pandemic, of course, has become a top issue for
voters, and it’s also shaping the way campaigns and elections
are being held in 2020. While the Trump campaign has continued
to put on in-person events to rally Republican Party faithful,
the Believers for Biden outreach has focused on virtual events
and discussions.
“I don’t think in-person events will affect mobilization per se,
but these events seem to serve a purpose in reinforcing certain
aspects of political identity,” said Daniel Bennett, chair of
the political science department at John Brown University.
“Specifically, those attending events like the Evangelicals for
Trump event are telling the world they’re not afraid of COVID
and won’t let a pandemic dampen their enthusiasm for the
election. Biden faith events, being virtual, align with the
Democratic narrative that the pandemic should be treated
seriously.”
Evangelicals attending the Georgia event may have had their
minds made up about Trump, but the rally urged them to become
more involved in getting others to vote for him. “I felt like
this was the last ‘charge’ I needed before the election,” said
Roberts.
Kemp, the Republican governor who narrowly beat out Democrat
Stacey Abrams in 2018, emphasized how individuals could make a
big difference for Trump. He suggested attendees think of “10
people you know, from your church, your neighborhood” whom they
might register to vote in Georgia. (“In person!” someone yelled
from the audience.)
Two tables offered voter registration information, and another
had voter guides from the Faith & Freedom Coalition. Like other
voter mobilization efforts targeting Christians, the Faith &
Freedom Coalition has had fewer opportunities to reach voters
in-person now that many churches and community events remain on
hold during the pandemic.
The coalition, which typically urges pastors to host a
“Registration Sunday” with a voter registration booth in their
church lobby, now also offers a video announcement with
instructions for registering from home.
“Based on my research, activities in church like voter
registration and get-out-the-vote drives are akin to small group
activities run by a few for the benefit of many,” said Paul
Djupe, a Denison University political scientist who has
researched political activity by churches. “I suspect that such
activities have collapsed during the pandemic, defaulting to
online worship and little else.”
Djupe found that distributing voter guides—like the ones from
the Faith & Freedom Coalition—was the most common
get-out-the-vote effort by evangelical churches, whereas black
Protestant congregations were more than twice as likely to hold
voter registration events.
With 49 days to go before the election, Trump backers at
Tuesday’s event disagreed over whether the president stands to
win in a landslide or another close race, but many repeated the
refrain that this was the most important election of their
lifetimes. Eric Trump and Allen referenced the potential for
additional Supreme Court appointments in the next term. Others
expressed broader concerns about freedom of speech, freedom of
religion, and the economy being threatened under a Democratic
administration.
“I did not get into this to be a politician. I’m a preacher …
But I knew if I remained on the sideline and silent, and if all
the preachers remained on the sideline and were silent,
something was going to happen in the direction of this nation
that could not ever be changed back again,” said Franklin, who
leads Free Chapel in Gainesville, Georgia.
Speaking to rows dotted with telltale red baseball caps, with
“Great Is Thy Faithfulness” playing in the background like an
altar call, the pastor offered a closing charge.
“In every election, we have a responsibility to vote our faith.
I don’t go in the booth and leave Jesus on the other side,” he
said. “If we vote, we win. If we don’t vote, we lose.”
#Post#: 17950--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: patrick jane Date: September 24, 2020, 2:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[img]
HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/119490.png?w=700[/img]
HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2020/september/kingdom-of-god-and-supreme-court-of-united-states.html
The Kingdom of God and the Supreme Court of the United States
Thoughts on the kingdom of God and the common good.
The phrase, “The Kingdom of God,” has been in the news recently
given that Amy Coney Barrett is on President Trump’s short list
of nominees to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg who died last week.
As one can imagine given our tense and toxic political
environment, many Democrats are up in arms about the prospect of
President Trump nominating a Supreme Court Justice between now
and the election on November 3rd. Many of them, including former
Vice President and Democratic presidential nominee, Joe Biden,
believe that Trump should postpone the nomination until after
the election.
Not only are Democrats upset that President Trump may proceed
with a nomination, they are uncomfortable with Amy Coney
Barrett, the supposed front runner for the nomination.
Why would many Democrats be uncomfortable with Barrett? Aside
from being mentored by Antonin Scalia and a proponent of
originalism, statutory interpretation, and stare decisis, she is
a devout Roman Catholic. For Barrett', her faith intersects with
her vocation. While speaking to graduates of the Notre Dame Law
School years ago, Professor Barrett addressed what it meant to
be a “different kind of lawyer.” She stated, a “legal career is
but a means to an end. . . and that end is building the kingdom
of God."
In short, the language of building the kingdom of God has people
uncomfortable.
It should not—it is basic language used across different
Christian traditions and denominations.
What is the Kingdom of God?
The “Kingdom of God”—or simply put, the rule and reign of God—is
something that practically every Christian tradition embraces,
albeit with a wide range of understanding and application.
For brevity and simplicity, I want to note four elements to what
constitutes the Kingdom of God.
First, the King.
In the Kingdom of God, God—or YHWH—is King. And in a kingdom,
everything revolves around the king; in Scripture, that means
the glory of YHWH. As the Scriptures unfold, YHWH is revealed in
the person of Jesus Christ. Now, Jesus more specifically, is the
King in the Kingdom of God.
Second, the domain.
There is a territory over which the king reigns. In the Gospel
of Matthew, the recurring phrase, “Kingdom of Heaven,” is used
to describe what Jesus inaugurated in his coming. Elsewhere, it
is referred to the “Kingdom of God.” In addition, Jesus, in his
teaching on prayer, instructs his disciples at one point to
pray, “Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in
heaven.”
Jesus gives more detail to, and is the personification of, the
Old Testament teaching that God is bringing his rule to earth.
In creation, God established earth as his domain over which he
rules. Isaiah 66:1 states, “This is what the Lord says: ‘Heaven
is my throne, and the earth is my footstool.” God created earth
as a domain to extend his reign.
Third, the citizens of the kingdom.
A note that combines this element with the second element is
that in creating Adam and Eve as his image bearers, God
establishes the fact that earth is his. It was common in
antiquity for earthly kings to erect images of themselves and
place them in far flung corners of their kingdom signifying that
domain is under their reign.
Throughout Scripture God seeks to be in personal communion and
covenant with his people. Israel was to be God’s people, living
in the Promised Land, to serve as a “kingdom of priests.”
In the New Testament, Jesus (both the better Adam and Israel)
through his death, resurrection, ascension, and sending of the
Spirit, gives birth to the church. The church isn’t the Kingdom,
it is a representation (or reflection) of the fully coming
Kingdom. Nevertheless, they are citizens of the already but not
yet Kingdom. In Revelation we read, “Look, God’s dwelling is
with humanity, and he will live with them. They will be his
peoples, and God himself will be with them and will be their
God” (Rev 21:3).
Fourth, the rule of life.
The king reigns through a set of laws and statues that govern
the people of his land—for his glory. Also, these laws are meant
to reflect the nature, character, and attributes of the king and
his kingdom.
A Theological Understanding and Application of God’s Kingdom
Theological interpretations and applications of the Kingdom of
God are vast, and this one brief article will hardly touch on
them. In my book, Subversive Kingdom, I say much more.
One of the more common understandings of the Kingdom of God is
the Two Kingdom view (which still has its nuances) originally
articulated by Augustine in The City of God and later developed
by reformers like Martin Luther.
Two Kingdoms adherents generally claim the Bible teaches that
God rules all of creation in two distinct ways; one through the
“common kingdom” in which all people operate by natural
revelation, and the second through the “redemptive kingdom” in
which Christians are ruled by special revelation. Two Kingdom
adherents believe that Christians should not impose biblical
standards on society but instead appeal to common understandings
of the good, the true, and the beautiful shared by all people.
Within the realm of the “redemptive kingdom,” they hold that
believers are nurtured through the church by means of preaching,
the sacraments, and participating in Christian community. (See
Tim Keller, Center Church, 194–217).
The church as citizens of the “already but not yet” kingdom
participates in the mission of God—to redeem a people for
himself from every tribe, nation, and tongue. The church
participates by sharing and showing the gospel of King Jesus,
the Spirit of God works subversively through believers to expose
the darkness, to convict sinners, to invite people into becoming
a new creation in Christ, and to catch a glimpse of the future
consummated Kingdom of God.
Concern Over Building God’s Kingdom
This understanding of the Kingdom of God doesn’t describe every
tradition’s view—I don’t know if it represents the view of Amy
Coney Barrett. However, I tend not to use the word “build” in
this context, but I do know many who would eagerly support a
Supreme Court nominee who sees their vocation as a platform to
engage as a citizen of the Kingdom of God.
Many would celebrate such an appointment, while others—perhaps
especially less religious and/or more secular people—would be
concerned about a judge or justice using such language. It seems
Washington Post writer Ron Charles is concerned as he tweeted,
“Amy Coney Barrett, the judge at the top of Trump’s list to
replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg, has said we should always remember
that ‘a legal career is but a means to an end… and that end is
building the Kingdom of God.'”
So, yes, there are political differences here for many reasons.
My intent is not to address all of those in this short article.
However, the concern about kingdom language is also worth
exploring, as I’ve tried to do here. Yes, for some, “building
the kingdom of God” would be seen as an obstacle. But as my good
friend Karen Swallow Prior tweeted in response to Charles,
“Better to appoint/elect people who want to make hell on earth,
I guess?”
For me, teaching at a school with the motto, “for Christ and
Kingdom,” this language is normal and widespread in the
Christian church. If you want to oppose this nomination, I hope
it is not because of this basic Christian terminology and
emphasis.
My prayer echoes that of our King, “Your kingdom come. Your will
be done on earth as it is in heaven.” If God chooses to answer
such a prayer during this transition period between inauguration
and consummation of the Kingdom of God, I know that life will be
valued, morality grounded, equality advanced, justice served,
religious freedom upheld, and God will be honored. And these are
the things that at her very root, makes America great.
Ed Stetzer is executive director of the Wheaton College Billy
Graham Center, serves as a dean at Wheaton College, and
publishes church leadership resources through Mission Group. The
Exchange Team contributed to this article and has updated the
article.
Josh Laxton currently serves as the Assistant Director of the
Wheaton College Billy Graham Center, Lausanne North American
Coordinator at Wheaton College. He has a Ph.D. in North American
Missiology from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.
#Post#: 17952--------------------------------------------------
Re: Election 2020 | Can Democrats Take Back The White House?
By: patrick jane Date: September 24, 2020, 2:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[img]
HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/119522.jpg?w=940[/img]
HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2020/september-web-only/supreme-court-evangelical-issues-ruth-bader-ginsburg-trump.html
Why the Supreme Court Makeup Matters Beyond Abortion
Legal experts cite religious freedom and free speech among the
major issues for evangelicals in a post–Ruth Bader Ginsburg
court.
Last week’s death of Ruth Bader Ginsberg represents the third
opportunity for President Donald Trump to nominate a Supreme
Court justice.
A third of evangelicals by belief cited Supreme Court nominees
and abortion stance as reasons for voting for Trump in 2016.
Many evangelicals and pro-life Americans have celebrated the
possibility that another conservative justice could shift the
Court toward overturning Roe v. Wade and reshaping abortion law
in the country. Yet the new makeup of the Court will address
crucial issues for the church that extend far beyond abortion.
CT asked legal experts how a new Supreme Court appointment
replacing Ginsburg stands to affect evangelicals outside of Roe
v. Wade. Here are their responses, calling out issues such as
religious freedom, racial equality, child protection, and free
speech.
Barry P. McDonald, law professor at Pepperdine University:
As it stands, the Supreme Court is controlled by a majority of
five solid conservative justices who either have a strong record
of supporting religious freedom rights or give every indication
that they will develop such a record. If President Trump
succeeds in appointing Justice Ginsburg’s successor, that will
likely add one more justice to this coalition. While an
additional vote is not necessary to maintain this trend, it
could prove important to religious freedom proponents in cases
where Chief Justice John Roberts might moderate his vote in an
attempt to shield the Court as an institution from charges that
it has become too political and divisive (or where any
conservative justice moderates his or her vote for whatever
reason). This is most likely to occur in cases where religious
beliefs might conflict with laws prohibiting discrimination on
the basis of sexual and gender orientation. Indeed, both Roberts
and Justice Neil Gorsuch recently alluded to such future
contests in voting to interpret federal workplace laws as
barring such discrimination.
Kim Colby, director of the Christian Legal Society’s Center of
Law and Religious Freedom:
Justice Ginsburg’s replacement potentially could provide a more
secure footing for our basic human right of religious freedom.
In 27 years on the Supreme Court, Justice Ginsburg heard over 30
religious freedom cases. Unfortunately, her support for
religious freedom was lackluster.
Justice Ginsburg previously voted in favor of religious schools’
freedom to choose their teachers but then voted against that
right in a recent case. She voted once for—and three times
against—robust application of the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act. Her two votes in favor of prisoners’ religious freedom, as
well as a Muslim employee’s right to wear a hijab, were
commendable. But four times, she voted to uphold the
government’s exclusion of religious speech from the public
square.
Justice Ginsburg advanced a theory of the Establishment Clause
that excluded religious students from government programs
funding education. Several times she voted to remove religious
symbols from public property. When comparing her votes in recent
cases to votes by Justice Neil Gorsuch and Justice Brett
Kavanaugh, the comparison suggests that someone nominated by
President Trump likely will be a good steward of religious
freedom.
Lynne Marie Kohm, law professor at Regent University:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement can make a dynamic
difference for America’s children in three key cases—one past,
one present, and one (hopefully) future.
Past: Transgender rights—Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia. The
Court held that firing an individual for being transgender
violates Title VII. Ginsburg’s replacement could alter future
transgender rulings, particularly as biological female athletes
seek to protect their rights in girls’ sports.
Present: Foster care—Fulton v. Philadelphia. First Amendment
rights of Christians who provide foster care are at stake as the
Court soon determines whether the government can condition a
religious agency’s ability to participate in the foster care
system on practices that contradict its religious beliefs.
Future (hopefully): Child pornography. In 2002, Ashcroft v. Free
Speech Coalition struck down two provisions of the Child
Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 as overbroad, giving a
tremendous win to the adult-entertainment industry. Child
pornography has since proliferated. Children need protections
that a Ginsburg replacement could help deliver.
Beyond Roe, American evangelicals want to see all children
protected, born and unborn.
Thomas Berg, law professor at the University of St. Thomas:
One obvious evangelical priority for the Court’s new justice
(beyond abortion) is religious freedom, which the Court already
strongly supports. Majorities of 5–7 justices have protected
religious schools’ right to hire the religion teachers they
choose, employers’ right to object to covering employees’
contraception, and families’ right to choose religious schools
for their children and still receive government educational
assistance. Justice Ginsburg dissented from all those rights;
the new nominee will strengthen them.
But the nominee should also be questioned about another
priority: racial equality. Christians must care about this
because racism denies that some fellow humans have their full
God-given dignity. And justices should care because the
Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment was meant to eliminate
practices that had kept black people constricted even after
their formal enslavement ended. Republican appointees typically
commit to enforcing a provision’s “original meaning.” The next
justice should apply the amendment vigorously to racially unjust
practices of our day.
Carl H. Esbeck, law professor emeritus at the University of
Missouri:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was an effective legal activist,
first for the ACLU and later as a high court justice. To admire
her work depends on whether one believes the role of a judge is
to align the law with one’s sense of justice or is it to
subordinate the self to the nation’s organic documents and the
rule of law. Unlike Justice Ginsburg, we can aspire to a
successor who will interpret the US. Constitution in accord with
the original meaning of the adopted text. I also hope for
reconsideration of the free speech case of Hastings Chapter of
the Christian Legal Society v. Martinez. Authored by Justice
Ginsburg, this was a 5-4 decision denying student religious
organizations access to meeting space at a state university
campus without first agreeing that there be no qualification
that the organization’s student officers and members conform to
a statement of faith.
Rena M. Lindevaldsen, law professor at Liberty University:
Conservative justices view the Constitution as a source of, and
limit on, their power, recognizing that the separation of powers
best protects our God-given liberties and that the Constitution
contains an amendment provision to make changes when necessary.
Liberal justices circumvent that amendment provision and simply
change or create law to suit what they believe the culture
desires. But when those justices promote the “right” of people
to do whatever pleases them amidst a culture that promotes
“godlessness and wickedness” (Rom. 1:18), government punishes
those who proclaim the unchanging truth of Scripture.
That punishment takes many forms, including firing employees who
will not promote a particular agenda, arresting sidewalk
counselors, singling out churches for censorship, labeling the
truth of Scripture as hate speech, or stripping people of the
right to self-defense against a despotic government. Appointing
the right justice helps us, as Justice Scalia said, guard
“against the black-robed supremacy.”
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page