Trump & Stormy Daniels: Social Conservative Hypocrisy | National Review:
So the media tells us that Trump had a dalliance with a porn star named "Stormy" at "sometime", for which he paid her off to keep quiet about. You can trust the media, they would never be anything less than truthful about Trump, and we all know they are nothing but honest.
Jonah Goldberg is shouting "hypocrite" because "social conservatives" that didn't like Slick Willie lying under oath about asking an employee to service his wee willie in a hotel room (Paula Jones), as well as presidential "emissions" being found on the blue dress of an employee, are not concered about the alleged Trump - porn star alleged liasion / alleged payoff.
Some discussion. "Christians" are actually NOT to be judgemental about others. Jesus is famously not judgemental about the woman at the well, the prostitute washing his feet with her hair, or even the adultress who was to be stoned until Jesus drew "something" in the dirt and everyone who was supposed to stone her walked away.
HISTORICALLY, back in the old days of "America", which was a Christian Nation, Christians felt that the leader of the country ought to be a professing Christian. BOistan is clearly NOT a Christian Nation as has been well covered here and elsewhere. Much as Christ once had little to say about Pontius Pilate and Caesar, Christians have little to say about Trump -- he leads a pagan nation where they happen to live. He is not their MORAL leader, he is the leader of BOistan. In a pagan nation, you need to support the pagan least likely to crucify you.
Slick Willie was actually president during the blue dress affair, and governor at the time of the whipping it out and asking for "service" with Jones. AFIK, the "Stormy" thing (if it IS a "thing") happened when Trump was a private citizen .. AFAIK, nobody has ever went after Slick about anything prior to him being at least governor. (and I pray they don't, I REALLY don't want to hear the details!)
So what is the "issue" here? Has Goldberg confused "Christians" or "Social Conservatives" with Pharisees? My understanding is that social conservatives are against abortion, gay "marriage", and forcing communities to allow "men" into womens bathrooms and locker rooms. Most of them are probably not in favor of adultery with porn stars as a general rule, however given the rather lax morals in BOistan, if private citizens indulge and cover it up, it seems more of a "Pharisee charge" than a "Social Conservative" or "Christian" one.
It doesn't sound to me like Trump was holding "Adultry with a porn star PRIDE week". I don't believe he was in any way saying "hey, bake me a cake! My morals are YUGE and you ought to be forced to CELEBRATE them!" If Trump is seeking sexual favors from interns in the Oval Office, or paying off porn stars for dalliances while he is serving as president, then it seems that a charge of "hypocrisy" is somewhat warranted. As it is, isn't it the "PRIDE" folks that ought bear the "hypocrisy" charge for trying to claim that someone ought have "morals"? (excuse me? What is "moral" in BOistan? Forcing a pro-lifer to bake a cake celebrating your abortion?)
Do I "approve" of sex with porn stars not your wife? Certainly not! However, Jesus also did not pass judgement on the woman at the well who had five husbands and was not married to the man with whom she was currently living. My "approval" or lack thereof not the point! I believe that Christ will be the ultimate judge -- in general, he was MUCH more direct in condeming the sin of judgement (eg. "you brood of vipers") than he was for your standard, or even "significantly" sinful person. Mathew was a tax collector, and in those days, that was about as bad as it got! (our "morals" seem quite different today!)
If Trump violates LAWS while he is an elected official, than he ought to be removed -- as Slick Willie ought to have been removed for doing just that. IMHO however, the bar is MUCH higher now -- Slick WAS NOT removed, and his party was in no way interested in removing him for obvious sexual harrassment, perjury, and likely rape, as well as a long list of financial and other improprieties. BO used the IRS against conservatives and did all sorts of extra-constitutional things including funding parts of BOcare without congressional approval. These are now the new "standards" estabilished by "The Party" (TP-D). Certainly I understand that TP, and apparently Jonah, think it is somehow incumbent on "Christians" to hold their political leaders to higher standards than the "other sides" political leaders in a pagan nation.
What even is "the other side" in BOistan? As near as I can see, many in the R party would certainly be just as anxious to be rid of the pesky "Christians" or "Social Conservatives" ... I'd put Jonah in this camp. I suspect they would likely be rather happy to see those "deploreables" thrown to the lions, and would likely pay good money to sit up with Chuck S and Nancy P to watch the "festivities". ( "I've tithed my cumin today, how about you Chuck? Wow, those Lions really enjoy Christian meat")
Christians have PERSONAL standards -- to the extent we lived in a nation where those standards were shared by BOTH political parties, it was reasonable to expect politicians of BOTH SIDES to follow them. News at 11, we don't live there anymore! Where we live now, there are officially NO RULES .... which means that POWER is the only "rule".
If you like to judge others behavior, the sort of religion you are looking for has Pharisee positions ... it isn't Christianity.
'via Blog this'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment