I’ll get to Trump soon.
First, Roy Moore.
What a guy, huh?
In his 30’s he cruised around Alabama picking up chicks who were 15 years younger than himself!
Creepy and weird, right?
Only guys like Hugh Hefner can get away with perversion like that!
You need to be a recognizable celebrity before you can use people for personal pleasure.
District Attorney of Podunk Alabama won’t cut it.
The minimum requirement for that level of salaciousness is Governor of Arkansas.
Or — You need to be a television star.
(Told you I’d get around to Trump.)
It’s likely that Donald Trump has abused people.
He’s a rich celebrity.
He can use people however he wants.
He said so himself!
That’s a perk of fame.
When he grabs people by the parts they’re happy he noticed them!
Until it is politically useful to be otherwise.
This is why America is insane.
Right and wrong depend on politics.
Good and evil are determined by personal opinion.
Our morals are made-up in the voting booth.
Alabama rejected Roy Moore who is a creepy, child abuser.
Alabama elected Doug Jones who proudly advocates killing unborn children.
There aren’t enough straight-jackets to go around.
Here’s a fact, America.
EVERY politician is deeply flawed.
Because EVERY politician is deeply human.
Turning every election into a game of “Which-Candidate-Is-More-Virtuous” is ludicrous.
We pick Christmas trees because we like the shape.
It’s a completely personal and arbitrary standard.
We pick political leaders the same way.
Remember: Political candidates are celebrities.
They don’t have the same rules as we who are voting for them.
You can select whichever tree suits your fancy.
Just don’t yammer about how your tree “is nicer” than mine.
Pretty soon, we’re going to throw them both out.
14 Responses
The main thing is that all three men (Trump, Jones, Moore) profess the Christian faith. One can only imagine what sort of debauchery they’d commit if they weren’t firmly anchored to God’s enduring moral standards.
Moral standards are how men ought to behave not how men do behave.
And these standards transcend any self-identified religious worldview.
Didn’t Paul write that those who were baptized in Christ were freed from sin and made slaves who do what God approves of? (Romans 6)
If so, why do those who profess Christ as their Savior fail so miserably in discharging their moral obligations? And why do believers encounter so much difficulty in controlling their sexual urges to molest others, while I, as a non-believer, lack such impulses altogether?
Wait… Aren’t you the guy who doesn’t believe in objective morality?
Seems like a dumb question coming from a relativistic worldview.
… You just need some attention?
How do my views on objective morality enter into a discussion examining the logical implications attendant to your theological perspective?
Answer: they don’t; it’s a weak attempt to avoid addressing the inherent weaknesses of your own position; namely, that professing Christians fare no better at upholding their moral values than non-beleivers — regardless of the competing opinions concerning the source of those values.
Moreover, Christians have no empirical means of distinguishing True Christians™ from Christian poseurs until the charlatans are ‘exposed’ to public scrutiny. (pun intended)
“How do my views on objective morality enter into a discussion examining the logical implications attendant to your theological perspective?”
Answer: My theological perspective says objective morality is rooted in the goodness of God’s nature. Your morality is subject to change over time and circumstances so your accusation that “Christians fare no better at upholding their moral values than non-believers” is incoherent.
Of course, if you’re willing to finally admit that molestation is always morally incorrect, then we can move forward.
So, what say you? Is it objectively good to not commit rape?
He seems awfully proud of his claim that he’s never raped anyone, for it to be just a widely-held opinion that he shouldn’t… It would be weird to pat oneself on the back for something that isn’t objectively good.
“The goodness of God’s narure.”
By what metric did you assess the goodness of God’s narure? This is the point that objective moralists seem to miss: you need an external standard in order to make pronouncements about God’s nature. If Christians say God is good and non-Christians say God is a monster, who or what will you appeal to in pleading your case?
My claim that “Christians fare no better at upholding their moral values than non-believers” is completely coherent because it doesn’t matter how you derived your moral code — it matters whether you adhere to it in practice. If you value human life, then inflicting harm on others without just cause would violate your principles.
@mrsmcmommy
Indeed, I am quite proud that my non-religious moral values are more stringent than those who claim to follow the Abrahamic code. For instance, I deem forced marriages and slavery as bad. I may not be able to point to an “objective” moral lawgiver to defend my stance, but neither can Jews, Christians or Muslims — for they cannot produce evidence establishing said lawgiver’s existence or explain why the codes attributed to this entity within their sacred texts contain no sanctions against such things.
“This is the point that objective moralists seem to miss: you need an external standard in order to make pronouncements about God’s nature.”
Wrong.
Morality is ‘written on your heart’. You know right and wrong instinctively. Everybody does.
Apart from any particular religious claims, this absolute morality exists.
Take another couple of days and then come back and deny this.
“Morality is ‘written on your heart’.”
lol . . .
“The human heart is the most deceitful of all things, and desperately wicked. Who really knows how bad it is?” Jeremiah 17:9
Lol.
Stay cynical. Facing the truth is scary!
I know teh truth can be scary. But I’m willing to help you overcome your fears.
Well said, John.
nice post