Skip to main content

When You Vote for Trump, This Is What You're Doing...

   If you want to vote for Donald Trump, feel free.  I am not here to dictate to your conscience what you should do.  I ain't God and I ain't yer momma, but at least be aware of exactly what you're doing. Let me offer you ten stark statements about what you're doing when you place your vote behind such a man.  When you vote for Donald Trump, you are voting for a man who:

1) Insinuated that Ted Cruz's father was connected with JFK's assassin.

2) Mocked the appearance of Ted Cruz's wife.

3) Made fun of a reporter with a physical disability.

4) Made disturbing comments on his daughter's physical appearance.

5) Appeared on the cover of Playboy.

6) Cheated on his wives.

7) Made phallic references during a debate.

8) Went bankrupt.

9) Donated money to Hillary and Co.

10) Has changed his views on almost everything.

    Once again, vote as you think you should.  Many people choose a candidate primarily based on the opposition.  That's one strategy for voting, and it makes sense some of the time.  However, if you vote for a man whose only redeeming quality is that he isn't the other candidate, you may want to rethink your strategy.  When that strategy will let you vote for a man despite these abhorrent actions and obvious character flaws (and numerous others--the list could go on and on), it might be time to stay home or vote for a third-party candidate.  
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, l...
Post a Comment
Read more

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repe...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...
Post a Comment
Read more