Conventional collectivist created authority is a deception in consciousness. You are your own Authority!

Monday, May 30, 2016

Pulpit pandering

Article Six of the United States Constitution provides in pertinent part:

“The Senators and Representatives… and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
This provision is straightforward. It simply means that the President of the United States along with every other official, elected or otherwise, of the federal and all state governments are required to support the Constitution, but none of them shall ever be required to submit to any religious test as a qualification for office.

Why is it then that a large group our nation’s most prominent Evangelical leaders, (including Southern Baptist Convention President Ronnie Floyd, James Dobson, Ralph Reed, Penny Nance, Bob McEwen, Tim Wildmon of the American Family Association, Kelly Shackleford of First Liberty, and mega-church pastors Jack Graham and Ed Young),  have successfully talked Donald Trump into meeting with them privately before the GOP convention?

I’ll tell you why. It’s because they’re going to subject Trump to their own private religious test as a qualification for giving him their political support in the 2016 presidential election. Trump has agreed to meet with them. He’s ready to pander to the Bible thumpers. He’s going to engage them in pulpit pandering – private, by invitation-only, and off the record pulpit pandering.

I think it’s disgusting.

First of all, Donald Trump is not a religious man. At least he doesn’t wear religion on his sleeve. The evangelicals know that but they helped make him the Republican nominee anyway. In the primaries they wisely chose competence over piety. They did the right thing then.

Never-the-less they still remain worried about him. They want to make sure that Trump will do their religious bidding once he gets in office. In short, they want to subvert the United States Constitution. And they want to do it all in private.

“Our goal is to be able to have a conversation that could lead to a better understanding of what Donald Trump has to offer to the country,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. 

What he really means by that is he and the rest of the Bible thumpers want to try to influence Trump into promises to support the political imposition of their ultra-right-wing religious agenda in return for their political support.

“I want to be actively supportive of a candidate who can help turn this nation around,” says Perkins. “With Trump – I’m not there yet. I hope to be there – but I’m not there right now.” 

So, what they want to hear about in order to “be there” are detailed plans on potential Supreme Court nominees, the vetting process, as well as Trump’s intentions regarding “religious liberty,” and “pro-life” issues.

“This is about the possibility of being able to appoint the next four Supreme Court justices. This is about the dignity of human life from the womb to the tomb. This is about religious freedom,” explains Southern Baptist Convention President Ronne Floyd.

You see, they want Trump to promise to appoint Supreme Court Justices who will scrap Roe v Wade, uphold abortion bans, and permit them to employ the government to discriminate against gays.  

Floyd maintains that the conversation with Trump is a way for Christians to share their hearts with him because many people of faith are struggling to come to terms with some of Mr. Trump’s past statements – statements that are contrary to biblical teachings.

Alas! The Bible thumpers don’t want Trump to do anything in office as president that might be contrary to biblical teaching. 

No; they just want him to privately reassure them by pulpit pandering. 


  1. I'm not sure I see the problem in general here.

    EVERY voter, EVERY campaign contributor, EVERY endorser subjects EVERY candidate to numerous "tests."

    That some of these "tests" might be religious in nature is of no import whatsoever vis a vis the Constitution, as the constitutional provision is about legally binding "tests," e.g requiring that an electee certify he's not a Catholic before being sworn in or whatever.

    Obviously candidates who pass one group's "tests" may thereby automatically fail another group's "tests." I find the religious ones as obnoxious as you do ... and vote accordingly based on who caters to them.

    1. Of course you are right as far as the legality of it all is concerned... I said I thought it was disgusting... I didn't say it was illegal and that is true for the reasons you say.

    2. Yes, it is disgusting. It so happens that I do have religious beliefs, but I expect candidates to convince me of the correctness of their political philosophy/policy positions without reference to religion. If they have to appeal to religious beliefs to justify themselves, they've already lost me and my vote.