Shortly after President-elect Donald Trump finished his victory speech last week in West Palm Beach, Florida, the room burst into a rendition of the Christian hymn “How Great Thou Art.” The moment, which was captured on video, was a reminder of Trump’s robust support among conservative evangelical Christians, who have consistently backed the former president with upward of 80% voting for him in all three of his elections.
Among the crowd in Florida on election night on Nov. 5 was longtime Trump supporter Robert Jeffress, the pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas, who preached a sermon to the businessman on the morning of Trump’s 2017 inauguration. Jeffress described the atmosphere at Trump’s victory party as “electric” and suggested the vibe was similar when he returned to his church last Sunday.
“Our people were elated, for the most part, over the election results,” Jeffress said.
Conservative Christians have long celebrated what they see as the landmark successes of Trump’s first term, particularly his appointment of three conservative justices to the Supreme Court and their overturning of Roe v. Wade to end nationwide abortion access. This time, however, Jeffress and other evangelical advisers of Trump say they are hoping for more — although exactly what form those policies will take appears to be the subject of debate.
For Jeffress, a key policy concern for Trump’s second term is “protecting the religious freedom of all Americans.”
Your tax-deductible gift helps our journalists report the truth and hold Christian leaders and organizations accountable. Donate $75 or more to The Roys Report this month, and you can elect to receive the “Reimagine Church” 2-Book Bundle including ‘Invisible Jesus’ by Scot McKnight & Tommy Phillips and ‘Need to Know’ edited by Danielle Strickland. To donate, click here.
“The things (Trump) is most interested in is anything that will prohibit not only pastors from preaching what is in their heart, but what would keep laymen from exercising their faith in the workplace, whether it be doctors being forced to perform abortions or high school football coaches not allowed to pray before a football game,” Jeffress said.
Trump, for his part, promised during his campaign to create a federal task force to fight “anti-Christian bias,” saying if he didn’t win, Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris would “come after Christians all over the country.” He also promised to get rid of the so-called Johnson Amendment — a part of the tax code that prohibits churches from endorsing candidates — “permanently the next time,” after signing an executive order that weakened the restriction during his first term as president.
“They didn’t want you to speak to people, and if you did they take away your tax-exempt status,” Trump told a group of mostly pastors in Powder Springs, Georgia. “And I said, ‘But these are the people that me and others want to hear from, and you’re not letting them speak. What’s that all about?’”
The Rev. Franklin Graham, son of famed evangelist Billy Graham and head of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, said he hoped Trump would address a myriad of foreign policy concerns. He said he was especially hopeful Trump would “find a way to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine,” suggesting there should be a special ambassador appointed to go to Russia, which invaded Ukraine in 2022, to speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“Democrats demonized the Russians so much that if you talk to them, it looks like you’re doing wrong,” said Graham, who also praised Trump’s efforts to forge a relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
Graham also said he hoped Trump would work to establish peace amid the ongoing Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip that has spread to southern Lebanon and the surrounding region, noting the president-elect helped bring about a bilateral agreement on Arab-Israeli normalization known as the Abraham Accords during his first term in office. Trump criticized Biden’s handling of the Israel-Hamas war and has urged Israel to “finish the job” and destroy Hamas.
“Now (Trump’s) got somebody who can help restart that and come up with a comprehensive peace deal for that region,” Graham said, referring to Trump’s decision to appoint real estate tycoon Steven Witkoff as his Mideast envoy.
The Rev. Samuel Rodriguez and the Rev. Tony Suarez, the president and vice president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, and both Trump faith advisers, listed a desire for Trump to take action on “children’s and parental rights,” especially in regards to transgender children who seek out gender affirming surgery, something conservative Christians have grown increasingly vocal in opposing.
Trump campaigned on the issue, pledging to challenge protections for transgender students and running an ad that declared “Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.” The president-elect has not detailed his plans to address the topic, although some conservatives have floated excluding transgender students from Title IX protections. Doing so could alter policies in public schools regarding bathrooms, locker rooms and which pronouns students use. Since Trump was elected, transgender youth have flooded crisis hotlines, according to The Associated Press.
“We want policies that prevent government intrusion into children’s medical and personal development, particularly regarding sensitive issues like gender identity,” Rodriguez wrote in an email. Evangelicals and other conservative Christians, he argued, oppose state-level policies that have “enabled government involvement” in “matters that should remain private and family-centered, respecting faith-based values in both education and public spaces.”
Rodriguez also wrote that he hoped Trump would protect religious liberty in the U.S. and globally — including “policies that protect people of faith from government overreach and hostility.”
“Additionally, on the international stage, we hope to see the administration champion religious liberties, building a robust defense against all forms of totalitarianism, whether religious or secular,” according to Rodriguez.
Virtually every conservative Christian leader who spoke to the press mentioned abortion as a key issue of concern, although there were differences in terms of policy focus. The discrepancy may be a byproduct of the Republican Party’s struggles since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022. Since then, multiple red states have either rejected attempts to curtail abortion rights or backed ballot initiatives that enshrine abortion rights in the state’s constitution. This election, advocates for abortion rights achieved victories in seven of the 10 states where abortion was on the ballot.
Even so, many conservative Christians are unwavering in their opposition to abortion. Suarez conveyed that he hoped Republicans would be firmer in their anti-abortion stance despite recent political setbacks. Doug Wilson, a pastor in Moscow, Idaho, who has advocated for Christian nationalism and become a rising star among conservative figures in Trump’s orbit such as Tucker Carlson, said he hoped the next president would focus on appointing conservative judges and justices, adding that he hopes “the pro-life issue” would “become an explicit litmus test” for any Supreme Court nominees.
Evangelical leaders were less uniform when discussing a potential national abortion ban, a policy liberals have warned could happen now that Republicans are projected to regain control of the U.S. House along with the Senate and the presidency. Trump distanced himself from the idea during his campaign, although he responded vaguely when asked during a debate whether he would veto a ban were he to occupy the Oval Office.
Ralph Reed, the head of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, dismissed the plausibility of a national abortion ban in a conversation with reporters last week, saying the policy is unlikely to get approved by Congress in the first place. But Jeffress was more precise: The pastor focused on the need for exceptions in abortion legislation.
“I think the majority of Americans … do not support banning abortion with no exceptions,” Jeffress said. “They may disagree on what those exceptions should be, but most people I know, including evangelicals, don’t believe that a mother ought to be forced by government to give up her life to possibly save the baby.”
He added: “I think what the president will do is what the president has said, and that is no national abortion ban — certainly (not) one that would outlaw abortion with no exceptions. He believes in the exceptions.”
The faith leaders also noted support for other policies that are not tied explicitly to faith, such as a desire to reduce immigration, which Trump has paired with a plan to enact mass deportations. Rodriguez and Suarez also said they hoped Trump would help pass a form of immigration reform.
But no matter what, for Jeffress and other evangelicals, there is trust Trump will pursue policies that reflect the support they’ve given him throughout his political career.
“I think what appeals to many evangelicals about Trump is they believe that President Trump will do effectively what (God) has commanded government to do,” Jeffress said. “God never commanded government to lead a spiritual revival in America. That is not the responsibility of government. It’s the responsibility of the church and the responsibility of government, according to Romans 13 and 1 Timothy 2, to keep citizens safe from evildoers and leave Christians alone to practice their faith, that’s it.”
Jack Jenkins is an award-winning journalist and national reporter for the Religion News Service.
English 
Spanish
40 Responses
For Jeffress, a key policy concern for Trump’s second term is “protecting the religious freedom of all Americans.” There lies an example of the Church’s problem, looking to a man to protect Christian religious freedoms instead of praying to our God. Do these people even read their Bible? Jesus told us the unsaved world will hate us and that will never change.
…freedoms like not forcing non-Christian childen to read the Bible in public schools as in Oklahoma? Or the religious freedom to think there isn’t a divine mandate on gender or gender roles? No – Jeffress (and to be clear – I used to attend that church under him years ago, so this is not an opinion from afar) – Jeffress is only interested in true freedom for his belief system.
“All faiths are equal, some faiths are more equal than others”
Ain’t his beliefs that matter buddy. It’s Gods word and his commands thatatter
I’m pretty sure Christians can pray fervently to our God, and also serve in the public and business and academic spheres to protect our religious freedoms.
It’s not either/or.
The next stop on the crazy train features a nominee for Attorney General with a rather colorful history, to put it mildly. Sex trafficking and ethics violations? No problem! Jump aboard and enjoy the ride!!
Getz has never been convicted of anything.
I’m confused. When Obama attempted to talk with Kim Jong Un, he was accused of pandering to dictators. Now we WANT a POTUS who associates with Kim Jong Un and negotiates with Vladimir Putin? Why? And it wasn’t just the Democrats who demonized Russia…I guess no one remembers the Cold War. I thought we ALL agreed the communism and authoritative regime being run in Russia for GENERATIONS was fundamentally against the democratic principles upon which America was established. When did this change?
And where/when was this “threat to religious liberty”? When were any pastors banned from “preaching what is in their heart”? If anything, I think the problem is pastors preaching what is in their heart versus what is in the Bible….
Can someone explain what a real estate tycoon knows about the Middle East conflict?
And let me get this straight: in addition to watching more “red” states back away from limiting abortion rights, we have Trump/Vance both being in favor of access to the abortion pill, and in the VP debate we heard Vance support spending MORE government money to enable more parents to be stay-at-home, subsidize day care, incentivize more childcare workers, and increase paid leave for working parents. I had to rewatch to see if I was accurate in hearing such Democratic, progressive policies come out of the mouths of the SAME Republican conservatives who used to fight for removing all abortion rights, rally against such expansive government spending and fight against access to the abortion pill.
Well, at least this confusion has kept me prayerful.
The threat to religious liberty does not manifest itself in churches.
It manifests itself in adoption agencies, schools, universities, and businesses, under the influence of state and federal governments.
Can you provide specific examples? Because I look at every organization you list and see Christians doing just fine in continuing to practice their faith openly and freely without punishment, imprisonment, or persecution.
Marin Heiskell, don’t ask difficult questions [/sarcasm].
Years ago, after watching the film Napoleon Dynamite, I asked my then-young nephew to explain the plot. His reply: “you’re thinking too hard.” The same approach applies to this train wreck. I, too, am confused. Concur with your conclusion — pray without ceasing.
Yes, without cynicism, I’m confused and seem to be in the the dark with this situation too.
When did it become difficult, if not enforced, that Christians are not to meet for worship, mutual support and prayer?
When did it come about that exercising one’s faith through forgiveness, being gracious and loving other people – no matter who they are – and virtues like respecting Gods creation and creatures, and living in a spirit of contentment and living out other fruits of the spirit such as joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control, become deeply frowned upon, or worse still, illegal?
Aware that things aren’t ideal in our so called post modern world, (was it ever ideal?)
How has it come about that people who claim to have faith in the resurrected Christ, believe, or now feel, that they desperately need an additional or other gospel?
Marin Heiskell:
“On December 25, 1991, the Soviet hammer and sickle flag lowered for the last time over the Kremlin, thereafter replaced by the Russian tricolor. Earlier in the day, Mikhail Gorbachev resigned his post as president of the Soviet Union, leaving Boris Yeltsin as president of the newly independent Russian state.” (Google search information)
Perhaps it’s time to make an attempt to re-connect with Russia. There is no excuse for what is happening in the Ukraine/Russia war right now, but it will not end until someone negotiates peace. If we don’t try, we will inevitably fail. If we try, there’s a chance for a break-through.
“Associating with Kim Jong Un” is not the same thing as attempting to help create change in his sad country.
Perhaps Obama’s goals were different from those of the upcoming administration’s? Not sure.
Right or left, Republican or Democrat, I think it’s beyond foolish to trust Putin or Kim Jong Un.
Don’t take the bait of Satan. Please do not let evil people live rent free in your brain. Focus of your mission as the LORD’S ambassador on earth. Love never fails. Be strong in your faith. Believe it, because GOD’s got.
Drug dealing is not a “nonviolent” crime. Selling a substance known to destroy the body and mind and cause painful physical and mental addiction rendering a citizen useless to their country is very much a violent crime. It in essence “kills” the normal, productive, healthy person who buys and uses the drugs and leaves the shell of that person in its place. This woman (and that man) should have never been released or pardoned. Their sentences were not long or hard enough to pay for all the destruction they caused in countless lives. In the name of Jesus may God deal justly with this woman and that man in a way that vindicates their victims.
Theologians agree America will not factor in end times. Why?
Maybe our population will be drastically diminished, or sickly. Yeah, put someone with a history of drug use, all conspiracy theories and zero expertise, over our health system.
Some say we will no longer be a superpower. Replace the current military leader who has overwhelming qualifications, with a weekend anchor, wholly lacking the experience and expertise for the position, simply because he is “anti-woke.”
Maybe, we’ll be in financial ruin. Deport millions of people who do the hard labor, with tiny pay, which keeps our prices down, because you’re mean enough to separate families. It will cost in the billions.
Allow the wealthiest man, who once “overstayed his visa,” with a history of Ketamine use, zero emotional intelligence, who moved to a state to simply limit how much he pays to his baby mamas, and many children, decide what is “waste” in our budget.
Maybe we’ll just be tired, and discouraged, fractured beyond repair, and disengaged. There are people nominated for positions with all kinds of criminal and/or ethical conflicts. Let the immoral, unqualified, those lacking integrity, run everything.
Scripture warns He will say to many, “I never knew you”. These are the “teachers” who are insinuating God, His Word, our mission, and prayer, aren’t “sufficient.”
Christ selected Judas knowing he would betray Him. Maybe some unknowingly played a part in prophecy. “God only knows the real you.”
So what are Christians who supported Trump going to do and say if he follows through on his plan of mass deportation? Will they overlook and ignore and violate their solemn duties and obligations to the foreigner, the stranger, the widow, the orphan by his mass deportation plan? Who will they obey if he follows through on his hateful plan? It appears that, again, they will choose Trump over Jesus. I pray all earnest and the honest believers will read and give heed to:
Exodus 23:9
Leviticus 19:33-36
Leviticus 25
Deuteronomy 15:7-8, 13-15; 10:17-19
And many other like injunctions. Speak truth to power, Christians!
Are you suggesting the US not enforce its immigration laws?
Mexico enforces its immigration laws. I’m not allowed to stay in Mexico as long as I’d like without approval. I have to tell them where I am going, for how long, and when I am coming back. If I overstay my approved time, they wouldn’t say, “So nice to have you. Stay as long as you’d like!” No, they would send me back to the USA.
Once someone sneaks into our country illegally, no matter how they do it, it is unbiblical to send them back to their home country and require them to apply for legal immigration?
Is it compassionate to encourage people to risk their lives and freedom, and pay thousands of dollars to coyotes to get to USA through the back door?
Is it OK for illegal immigrants to steal and use the Social Security numbers of other Americans?
2.6 million people legally immigrated to the US in 2022. The USA is not anti-immigrant, but many of us are anti-illegal immigration. We want it to be orderly. We want it to be safe. We want a say of who comes in and how they are approved. We want our borders to be respected like most nations on the planet.
I don’t think ANYONE is arguing that immigration laws are to be ignored or go unenforced. Those were exacerbated strawman arguments used during election season, so let’s get beyond that:
The true argument lies in HOW to both update AND enforce our immigration laws that in a way that we can take pride in as both Americans (because we are quick to tout our “American virtues” and how “we were founded on Christian principles” and even quicker to point fingers when other countries treat people poorly) and as Christians (knowing how scripture calls to treat even those “foreign among us”).
That includes trying to figure out how to humanely treat those who are already here. Finger pointing and name calling (of immigrants or “political opponents”) isn’t productive action. Shipping immigrants around the country isn’t solving anything either, especially when one claims their goal is to remove all who are here illegally.
I don’t think the answer is simple, or that there is one answer everyone will agree on. (nor am I claiming to have the answer).
I do think everyone agrees that something needs to be done QUICKLY.
.
Duane D. Young:
Following the law figures prominently in Christ’s teachings. Illegally entering the USA is a crime. Implementing a plan that follows American law is NOT a “hateful plan.”
It is possible to love people without supporting illegal activity at the same time.
The USA is a sovereign nation and must enforce its own borders in order to retain its sovereignty.
The prominent law in Christ’s teaching is to love your neighbor as yourself, which is fulfilled by showing mercy (Luke 10:25-37). How the spirit of that law translates into Christians promoting mass deportation is beyond my ability to comprehend. Perhaps there’s a red, white and blue hermeneutic I haven’t grasped.
Loren J Martin:
Showing mercy should not entail opening our border to one and all. How does that exhibit mercy to those who are already living here and trying to make ends meet? How does that exhibit mercy to the children sent across our border with notes pinned to their shirts designating where they are to go? How is it showing mercy when we have no idea where many unaccompanied minors actually live and what they are doing?
Grow some wisdom, please. It is far more merciful to enforce our laws at the border than it is to ignore them. And, believe me, deporting illegal criminals is a merciful act when you consider the consequences of NOT doing so. Perhaps a lesson from Laken Riley’s parents would help you better understand why MERCY starts at home.
So Dr King was wrong to illegally protest, cross the color barriers, etc? Jesus also broke Jewish law by “working” on the Sabbath. Maybe “the law” isn’t something absolute but something that should be contextualized and examined carefully?
George Hamilton:
There are Biblically-based laws, and then there are laws never sanctioned in the Bible. God created all human beings and endowed them with unalienable rights, regardless of their skin colors. So, when Dr. King was “illegally” protesting, he was standing up for the Bible and what it teaches about the character of God. Translated: NOT illegal from God’s perspective.
In contrast, protecting American borders is a Biblically-based law meant to protect the citizens who live here. Israel protects its borders, as do most other sovereign nations in the world. God is most definitely a proponent of borders and not moving border stones. He is also adamantly opposed to breaking the law. Jesus’s point in the case you mentioned was that He is Lord of the Sabbath. He wanted to show the elders/pharisees/sadducees He was in charge, not them.
Again, the question is HOW. How can we enforce immigration laws in a way that honors God and the people He created?
Is it to deny housing and food and leave them hungry in the streets?
Is it to herd them like cattle, shuttling them around cities to make a political point?
Not saying I have the answer, but these actions have made me uncomfortable as a believer who sees past nationality – I see God’s creation.
I believe more people have an issue with HOW we are enforcing our laws, than that we are enforcing them. That’s what I’d like to discuss, yet
so many change the argument and make it seem like calling for humane treatment of these people somehow equates to wanting open borders (which we’ve never had) or ignoring the law or “inviting criminals in”….none of which I’ve said, implied or want.
They will go along with it, just like the German Christians in the 1930s.
So Franklin Graham said the following…
“Democrats demonized the Russians so much that if you talk to them, it looks like you’re doing wrong,” said Graham, who also praised Trump’s efforts to forge a relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
Hey Graham the Russians are committing war crimes in Ukraine.
What a disgrace.
Something is seriously wrong with the U.S. White Evangelical church.
Hey Gordon Jansma,
Ukraine is one of the most politically corrupt nations on the planet. Should America be funding their corruption?
Yet another “either/or” argument that puts words in another’s mouth. Nothing was said about funding political corruption. This is about pushing back on Putin, who himself is a war criminal who violates human rights of even Russian citizens who dare dissent.
I know you think it’s time to make peace with Russia, yet I question the wisdom in making peace while Putin is in charge.
And have you been to the surrounding countries of Ukraine? Several are small former USSR nations that have very small military units. You think Putin will stop with taking over Ukraine when he can just bulldoze over Latvia and Lithuania?
Why are we now trusting Putin?
TheBlaze.com website has a good article about the issue of character and how to apply character assessment to voting decisions. https://www.theblaze.com/abide/why-calling-trump-voting-christians-hypocrites-is-a-lie-that-will-continue-to-fail
Excerpt: “So does character matter? Absolutely. But in today’s climate, the character that matters most is embedded in the policies our leaders support. That’s not hypocrisy; it’s an adaptation to a political landscape where our values face unprecedented challenges. In this environment, we must weigh the complete character of a candidate — both his personal life and the values his policies will bring to the country.”
Thanks, Robert. Good read. But it misses the mark by avoiding the actual hypocritical language used by Christians. Many Christian Trump supporters say things like “I don’t like Harris because she slept around”, “Bill Clinton lacked the character to be POTUS, he cheated on his wife”, or “But Harris lies”. Ummmmm…
You can try to “clean that up” with spiritual talk all you want, but when you excuse bad behavior in one candidate and call out THE SAME BEHAVIOR in another, THAT is hypocrisy. When you call out ugly behavior in one candidate, but hide behind “we are all sinners, show me someone who hasn’t sinned!” when your candidate exhibits the SAME behavior, that is hypocrisy. Be consistent. Use the same measures. If you say “we are all sinners” when discussing Trump’s adulterous past, say “we are all sinners” when discussing Harris’s.
Now, if you are willing to overlook certain behaviors because of policy, say that. I understand voting for the administration that will put preferred policies in place. (Character complements all of this by adding in trust to do so). The most productive political conversations I’ve had were led with “yeah, I know Trump did that, yet his stance on XXX is why I’m willing to overlook it.” There was no denying he did it. No making excuses for him doing it. No downplaying it. No whataboutism deflections. Just an acknowledgement, and then explanation of why it’s not a dealbreaker (as part of supporting XXX policy). Hypocrisy never came up because it didn’t apply.
Don’t want to be a hypocrite? Don’t throw stones about bad behavior while standing in the glass house of Trump. Focus on policy.
Marin Heiskell:
Your words: “When you call out ugly behavior in one candidate, but hide behind “we are all sinners, show me someone who hasn’t sinned!” when your candidate exhibits the SAME behavior, that is hypocrisy.”
No, actually, it’s not hypocrisy to state clearly that ALL have sinned, regardless of what political party they claim. You seem confused again.
My confusion comes from why the same “we are all sinners” argument isn’t raised when it comes to criticizing the opposing candidate. Why is it “ugly behavior” when committed by a Democrat but “we are all sinners” when committed by a Republican? Why does only one side deserve such grace?
Perhaps you can clarify for me. I’m open to hearing.
And it’s not the statement that is hypocritical; it is true. It’s the inconsistent application of it that is problematic, and yes, hypocritical.
You seemed confused so wanted to clear that up.
So again, why is it applied inconsistently? Is not “inconsistent application” pretty much the definition of hypocrisy?
Hi Marin,
I just saw your post. Hypocrisy is defined in a variety of ways, but the gist of it is the inconsistency between what one says and what one actually does. For example, I can claim to be an animal lover, but if someone witnesses me running a cat over on purpose, that would be an example of hypocrisy.
So I am not sure your example is a clear one of hypocrisy. I think you believe I am applying different standards to how I view Republicans and Democrats, right? The reality is, God’s laws apply equally to everyone. So, when I say ALL have sinned, I mean everyone. Including President Trump. I do not believe there is a difference between our sinful actions simply because some of us are Democrats and some are Republicans. God views all of us through the same eyes, Red and Blue.
Does that answer your question?
It does, but not in the way you probably hoped:
It explains why you SAY all have sinned; it is rooted in your belief there is no difference between our sinful actions merely due to political affiliation. (I agree with this).
Yet it does not explain your ACTIONS, which includes responding to Harris (or a Democrat)’s sins with rebuke and scorn, yet responding to Trump’s sins with a gracious “all have sinned”.
Inconsistent speech and actions, thus – by your own admission – hypocrisy.
Marin Heiskell:
Your response indicates you believe I have responded differently to Harris’s sins. Could you provide some examples? I believe I have consistently stated that President Trump’s sins are no better or worse than Harris’s sins in God’s eyes. What I have also consistently stated is that I agree with President Trump’s policy stances while I totally disagree with Harris’s policy stances. I believe hers represent a sinful attitude centered on hurting our nation, while President Trump’s policy stances represent a desire to help our nation succeed.
Again, there seems to be a disconnect between what I say/mean and how you interpret what I say/mean. I am not sure why – Confirmation Bias perhaps?
Marin Heiskell:
“Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one’s prior beliefs or values.” (Online dictionary)
This is what I have noticed in many, if not all, of your posts. It is sometimes difficult to comprehend what others are stating when confirmation bias gets in the way.
Not sure how confirmation bias is at play in this matter, when my prior beliefs and values align with ALL have sinned.
You asked for proof: I encourage you to read through several of the political threads you participated in on this site.
Many times you post things inquiring how anyone can call themselves a Christian and support Harris – then name her sins.
LThen others (Jen and myself included) respond with how Trump has also sinned, and your response is “well, all have sinned.” It is dismissing his sins while zeroing in on hers. Why didn’t you think “well all have sinned” when it came to Harris?
I believe the answer is in YOUR bias; your bias in favor of Trump and conservatives.
And while this chat is between me and you, this is not to imply you are the only person who does this. I am calling out a behavior that has been very prominent among evangelicals when it comes to Trump – the same evangelicals who were claiming “character matters” as a reason for impeaching Clinton over his adulterous affair, yet now say “I’m not electing a pastor” when Trump
has been notoriously adulterous dating back to the 90s. I am not sure that evangelicals realize how much the very non-believers we are to win over for Christ are watching us do this – and are completely turned off by our double standards. We need to address this as the body of Christ.
On July 8, 2024 the RNC Platform was CHANGED to Trump’s Platform. It seems no one took notice! It did not include abortion at all.