Porn Stars, Playmates, and Christian Politics

[Catholic_Lady]

Right, because there are absolutely, positively, no independent voters.

Chad is right. Evangelicals aren't the only ones who vote for a particular candidate just because of party loyalty, regardless of how crappy that candidate is as a politician and as a human. Many groups do that.

[Crossless2.0]

Right, because there are absolutely, positively, no independent voters.

Chad is right. Evangelicals aren't the only ones who vote for a particular candidate just because of party loyalty, regardless of how crappy that candidate is as a politician and as a human. Many groups do that.

Yes, that's correct.

I wonder, though, how many of these other groups have spent the past four decades insisting that they have a corner on morality and public decency. Chad's point is true and somewhat irrelevant, since the post he responded to concerned the Christian Right's hypocrisy and willingness to cast aside their alleged principles for the sake of power.

[Jackalope]

Right, because there are absolutely, positively, no independent voters.

Chad is right. Evangelicals aren't the only ones who vote for a particular candidate just because of party loyalty, regardless of how crappy that candidate is as a politician and as a human. Many groups do that.

Well, no kidding there are plenty of groups that vote along party lines. I never claimed otherwise.

Chad's implication seemed to be that everyone does that. Probably about a third of voters are independent, and don't. That was my point.

[Catholic_Lady]

Chad is right. Evangelicals aren't the only ones who vote for a particular candidate just because of party loyalty, regardless of how crappy that candidate is as a politician and as a human. Many groups do that.

Yes, that's correct.

I wonder, though, how many of these other groups have spent the past four decades insisting that they have a corner on morality and public decency. Chad's point is true and somewhat irrelevant, since the post he responded to concerned the Christian Right's hypocrisy and willingness to cast aside their alleged principles for the sake of power.

A lot of social justice type groups are like that. They go out and protest, and write books, and tell those who disagree with them that they're wrong and bad, etc. I used to be Facebook friends with a liberal atheist woman who was always posting preachy shit on her Facebook and condemning those who she didn't feel were doing things right or whatever. It doesn't have to be a religious group.

Personally I hold Christian groups to a higher standard because I'm Christian, but they are by no means the only ones who have a set of principles they strongly stand for and speak out about. They can be hypocrites as well. Only difference is I dont care about their hypocrisy hecause they are not supposedly standing for Christ.

---

Chad is right. Evangelicals aren't the only ones who vote for a particular candidate just because of party loyalty, regardless of how crappy that candidate is as a politician and as a human. Many groups do that.

Well, no kidding there are plenty of groups that vote along party lines. I never claimed otherwise.

Chad's implication seemed to be that everyone does that. Probably about a third of voters are independent, and don't. That was my point.

Gotcha. Yeah, not everyone does that. My husband and I, and many people we know, all voted Indy this time around.

[Anomalocaris]

The difference is evangelicals are not an ordinary special interest group whose interest and agenda exists largely independent of public perception. Evangelical movement is a cult that gains through the number of followers. It shoots itself in the foot when it tied itself to a party with moribund demographics while comporting itself in such manner as to make itself disgusting and contemptible to any others.

[Divinity]

It's hard to take people seriously when in one breath they defend 'traditional marriage' and in the next defend a guy who has had 3 wives. (Am I talking about Newt or Trump? Hint: It's both!)

[Crossless2.0]

The difference is evangelicals are not an ordinary special interest group whose interest and agenda exists largely independent of public perception.  Evangelical movement is a cult that gains through the number of followers.   It shoots itself in the foot when it tied itself to a party with moribund demographics while comporting itself in such manner as to make itself disgusting and contemptible to any others.

In other words, keep up the good work, folks.

---

Yes, that's correct.

I wonder, though, how many of these other groups have spent the past four decades insisting that they have a corner on morality and public decency. Chad's point is true and somewhat irrelevant, since the post he responded to concerned the Christian Right's hypocrisy and willingness to cast aside their alleged principles for the sake of power.

A lot of social justice type groups are like that. They go out and protest, and write books, and tell those who disagree with them that they're wrong and bad, etc. I used to be Facebook friends with a liberal atheist woman who was always posting preachy shit on her Facebook and condemning those who she didn't feel were doing things right or whatever. It doesn't have to be a religious group. 

Fair enough.

[vorlon13]

The difference is evangelicals are not an ordinary special interest group whose interest and agenda exists largely independent of public perception.  Evangelical movement is a cult that gains through the number of followers.   It shoots itself in the foot when it tied itself to a party with moribund demographics while comporting itself in such manner as to make itself disgusting and contemptible to any others.

Knowing better than Jesus does drives me right up the wall when it comes to dealing with political leaders. Evangelicals with access to high ranking pols who then fail EVERY FUCKING TIME to witness the Word to those pols makes me crazy too. Jesus, they are right there, sins PUBLISHED in the papers and BROADCAST on all media, they are crying for help, people !!!

Give them a dose of Jesus !!!!

[The Grand Nudger]

@Anom.

IKR?

Had it attached itself to the dems, it would have at least attached itself to a group that is more closely aligned with it's purported values and was in demographic ascent.  IDK why they decided to attach their religion to politics so overtly in the first place..but even more confusing is the fact that they chose the wrong horse.

[vorlon13]

I'm old enough to remember the early Christian political movement HATED President Carter despite his being one of them. (actually, he was better at it than they were and I think that hurt him too). Reagan comes along, tells them what they want to hear (actually brazenly pandering to them) and they loved it despite Reagan evincing no sign of any Christian depth, piety or fealty in his personal life. And damn little in his actions as prez . . . . .