Saturday, September 24, 2016

Seven Reasons Why Christians Should Vote For Trump

In this election, there is no one running whom Christians can wholeheartedly support.  Both Trump and Clinton have their issues.  I sincerely wish that Ted Cruz was on the general election ballot – but he isn’t there.  On the Democratic side, we cannot choose a Jimmy Carter, a John Kennedy, or even an honest Socialist like Bernie Sanders.  Although I am a conservative, I would give serious consideration to any of the preceding Democrats – because of their character - but they are not running.

We all must face this reality: Just because we must choose between two poor candidates this does not mean that our choice is not important.  There are many reasons why, in this election, Donald Trump is the better choice.  Here are seven of them.

1) Christians will have significant influence in a Trump administration; they will have zero influence in a Clinton administration.

Outside of extremely theologically liberal churches, Hillary Clinton certainly doesn’t want or need to listen to Christians.  On the other hand, Trump absolutely needs the support of evangelicals, theologically conservative Catholics and other theologically conservative Christians (as well as theologically conservative Jews).  He will not be elected without our votes and he will not be able to advance his legislative agenda without us either.  Trump’s choice of Mike Pence – a solid evangelical - as his running mate certainly reflects his recognition that he needs us.

Trump's choice of Mike Pence, a solid evangelical,
as his running mate is huge.
So, be it immigration reform, or the matter of Christians being persecuted overseas, or any other issue that concerns us – we will have influence in a Trump administration.  Hillary Clinton has never cared what we think and never will.

2) Trump will be held accountable by both parties – Democrats will continue to give Hillary Clinton a pass on any and everything she may want to do.

We have seen the Democratic party pull out all the stops to nominate someone with massive ethical and even criminal issues.  Short of homicide, it appears that she can do nothing that will cause the Democratic leadership to stop covering for her.  On the other hand, Trump is not only despised by Democrats, he is a complete outsider in relation to Republicans – having won the nomination by attracting both new voters and crossover votes from Democrats.  Should Trump do any of the things that opponents fear, the Republican leadership would not hesitate to impeach him.  After all, his replacement – Mike Pence – is a rock solid conventional conservative, someone the Republican establishment would consider a vast improvement over Trump. 

3) Clinton presents a significant threat to religious freedom – Trump does not.

Our religious freedom is hanging by a thread – and has been for many years.  In the late 1980s and early 1990s SCOTUS issued several rulings that gutted the free exercise clause of the 1st Amendment.  Taken together, they require religious individuals to obey “all generally applicable laws”.  In other words, unless the law is specifically designed to apply only to religious people, religious individuals must obey it even if it conflicts with, and substantially burdens, the free exercise of their religion.

These rulings alarmed both left and right – so much that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) was passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.  Sen. Ted Kennedy was a co-sponsor and it passed the Senate 99-0.  It could never pass today.  It was RFRA – not the 1st Amendment free exercise clause - that was the basis of the Hobby Lobby decision.  

Without RFRA, here are just a few of the things that the federal government could do:

  • Require all doctors, as a condition of licensing, to participate in at least one abortion.  (This has actually been proposed in the past.)
  • Draft Quakers, Amish and others whose religion forbids their participation in war and require them to serve in combat units.
  • Require religious hospitals to conduct abortions, regardless of their views.
  • Churches that allow non-members to rent their facilities for non-member weddings could be compelled to allow same sex couples to rent their facilities, regardless of their views on such unions.
  • Require religious organizations, perhaps even churches, to hire people whose conduct and/or beliefs conflict with the official positions of the organization.
  • Religious schools could be required to use government-mandated curriculum on any and every subject.
  • Everyone who solemnizes marriages – including priests, ministers and rabbis – could be required to do so for all persons issued a license.

In short, as long as religious individuals and institutions are not singled out – almost anything goes.

Just in case you still think that Democrats are in favor of freedom of religion, consider this statement from the Obama administration’s Commission on Civil Rights:

“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ … remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance,”  This terrifying statement does not reflect an off hand comment by a single official – it appears in an official report and reflects official policy

Indeed many of our civil rights are now at risk and may be lost if Clinton is elected.  She and most other Democrats would love to repeal RFRA, but this is unlikely.  However, do not forget that if elected she will appoint several justices to SCOTUS.  Chance are that in addition to reversing recent 2nd Amendment rulings, a willingness to overturn RFRA as unconstitutional will be a litmus test.  Either way, Hillary Clinton will try to end religious freedom as we know it. 

4) Clinton can be counted upon to do everything possible to silence Christians.

Democrats of today have no respect for the First Amendment’s Freedom of Speech clause either.  Under the guise of “election reform” they want to limit the ability of persons to join together and speak their mind for months before elections.  Of course, organizations favorable to Democrats, such as unions, would be exempted.  Without question, this is yet another effort to fix elections.

Given that the single most reliable predictor of a Republican vote is church attendance, a Clinton administration will definitely do everything possible to silence Christians.  Given that the Obama administration has already used the IRS against conservative groups, it is highly likely that the IRS will be weaponized against Churches and Christians.  It is likely that any clergy endorsing Republican candidates can expect their churches to be audited.  Look for the IRS to say that by virtue of their association with the church, personal endorsements constitute an endorsement by the church.  Any clergy member speaking out will risk their church’s non-profit status.  Ditto for churches where a significant number of parishioners are politically active.  The IRS will allege that with so many members involved in conservative causes, the church is simply a cover for political activity.  The IRS does not have to win these cases to accomplish their goal – they can and will make life so difficult for politically active Christians that they learn to keep their mouths shut.  

5) If elected, Clinton will be the first person elected after committing an impeachable offense.  (Perjury, without question she lied under oath to Congress – the FBI findings directly contradict her testimony.)

Hillary Clinton testified under oath, before Congress, that she had never sent or received any classified material via her private email – the FBI found over 100 such communications.  She testified that she had turned over all of her work related emails, the FBI found thousands more she had not turned over.  I could go on, but what is totally clear is that Hillary Clinton committed perjury before Congress.  There is no question that this constitutes an impeachable offense.

Donald Trump has no such problems.

6) Hillary Clinton is not only corrupt – she does not even attempt to hide her corruption.

Weapons Deals Are But A Tiny
Fraction Of Cases Where A
Favorable Act By The State
Department Was Followed By
A Huge "Gift"
As Secretary of State, Clinton turned the State Department into her own cash machine.  President Obama was so concerned about this, that he had Hillary Clinton sign a document agreeing that her foundation would not take contributions from persons or nations having business before the State Department.  She began violating this agreement almost immediately.  During her four years as Secretary of State, her foundation took tens of millions of dollars from persons and nations having business before the Department of State.  In addition, time after time, after getting a favorable ruling from the Clinton State Department, Bill Clinton would be hired by those who sought the ruling to give a speech.  He was paid between $250,000.00 and $1,500,000.00 for these “speeches”.  All of this was done right out in the open.  If this had been done by anyone else, the press would be all over this – but when it comes to Hillary, this obvious corruption is ignored.  Imagine what she would do as president…

All of this is well documented in this documentary.

Donald Trump has no issues that rise to this level.

7) According to the FBI director, it would be highly unlikely, after mishandling classified documents, that she could obtain a security clearance – this alone should completely disqualify her.

General David Petraeus Mishandled One
Classified Document - Sec. Clinton
Mishandled Hundreds
Should we elect someone as president who has already demonstrated that she cannot be trusted with classified information?  Should we elect someone as president who could not qualify to be a presidential aide?  Should we elect someone as president who barely escaped prosecution for an offense that, in addition to other punishment, would have barred her from ever holding public office?  I think the answer is obvious.

For all of the above reasons, given the actual choice between these two candidates, the only choice for serious Christians is Donald Trump.  Should he be elected, this Christian will be watching him closely in order to hold him accountable.


No comments:

Post a Comment