Conservative Christians Express Frustration Toward Congressional Republicans

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I didnt call them a hate group just because they disagree with me. Plenty of groups disagree with me, and I dont call them all hate groups. That's just you propping up a little strawman for yourself to knock down.

Give me the single strongest example of their "hate" then to support your claim.

The anti-LGBTQ Family Research Council, labeled as a hate group by the SPLC, has hosted its annual summit since its inception in 2006.

The group organizing the summit has previously commented on homosexuality. “Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects.”

Donald Trump will be the first sitting president to address a hate group's annual summit

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

So, holding an opinion is unConstitutional?


Care to support that with a cut and paste for the Constitution?

"So, holding an opinion is unConstitutional?"

Clearly he meant the opinion itself is unconstitutional, in the ideas it conveys. When did it become fashionable to pretend to be mentally retarded during a discussion?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Give me the single strongest example of their "hate" then to support your claim.

The anti-LGBTQ Family Research Council, labeled as a hate group by the SPLC, has hosted its annual summit since its inception in 2006.

The group organizing the summit has previously commented on homosexuality. “Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects.”

Donald Trump will be the first sitting president to address a hate group's annual summit

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

And they want these beliefs codified into the laws of our country. On what authority do they think these ideas should be binding? Is it, humanism? Protection of individual rights? Compassion, or altruism, or collectivism?

No, they cite only one authority: Gawd.

And this simple truth is what makes these apologists twist themselves into little pretzels to defend their bullshit. They know how ridiculous it is to simply say, "Because I think gawd said so, that's why!" So they have to equivocate, and lie, and backward think in an attempt to drudge up bullshit reasons for their bullshit beliefs. They should unburden themselves of this stupidity, and just admit their magical bullahit is no more important than any other voodoo, when it comes to writing laws.

All political groups want their beliefs codified into laws.


That you single out Christian groups for that to be a "problem" is you being the bigot.

"All political groups want their beliefs codified into laws."

No shit Sherlock, which is why I specifically spoke to why these ideas are bad, why their rational support is non-existent, and why the actual ideological support for them is dumb.

This is like talking to a child.

 

[Correll]

Give me the single strongest example of their "hate" then to support your claim.

The anti-LGBTQ Family Research Council, labeled as a hate group by the SPLC, has hosted its annual summit since its inception in 2006.

The group organizing the summit has previously commented on homosexuality. “Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects.”

Donald Trump will be the first sitting president to address a hate group's annual summit

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

So, holding an opinion is unConstitutional?


Care to support that with a cut and paste for the Constitution?

"So, holding an opinion is unConstitutional?"

Clearly he meant the opinion itself is unconstitutional, in the ideas it conveys. When did it become fashionable to pretend to be mentally retarded during a discussion?

What is "unconstitutional" about thinking that homosexuality is unhealthy?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The anti-LGBTQ Family Research Council, labeled as a hate group by the SPLC, has hosted its annual summit since its inception in 2006.

The group organizing the summit has previously commented on homosexuality. “Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects.”

Donald Trump will be the first sitting president to address a hate group's annual summit

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

So, holding an opinion is unConstitutional?


Care to support that with a cut and paste for the Constitution?

"So, holding an opinion is unConstitutional?"

Clearly he meant the opinion itself is unconstitutional, in the ideas it conveys. When did it become fashionable to pretend to be mentally retarded during a discussion?

What is "unconstitutional" about thinking that homosexuality is unhealthy?

Shut up dummy, nobody said that.

 

[Correll]

The anti-LGBTQ Family Research Council, labeled as a hate group by the SPLC, has hosted its annual summit since its inception in 2006.

The group organizing the summit has previously commented on homosexuality. “Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects.”

Donald Trump will be the first sitting president to address a hate group's annual summit

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

And they want these beliefs codified into the laws of our country. On what authority do they think these ideas should be binding? Is it, humanism? Protection of individual rights? Compassion, or altruism, or collectivism?

No, they cite only one authority: Gawd.

And this simple truth is what makes these apologists twist themselves into little pretzels to defend their bullshit. They know how ridiculous it is to simply say, "Because I think gawd said so, that's why!" So they have to equivocate, and lie, and backward think in an attempt to drudge up bullshit reasons for their bullshit beliefs. They should unburden themselves of this stupidity, and just admit their magical bullahit is no more important than any other voodoo, when it comes to writing laws.

All political groups want their beliefs codified into laws.


That you single out Christian groups for that to be a "problem" is you being the bigot.

"All political groups want their beliefs codified into laws."

No shit Sherlock, which is why I specifically spoke to why these ideas are bad, why their rational support is non-existent, and why the actual ideological support for them is dumb.

This is like talking to a child.

Actually you did none of that, you merely asked, oddly, what the Authority would be for these laws.


You did nothing to address the value of the ideas themselves or why supporting them is ideologically dumb.


You attempts to spin this with insults in noted as evidence that you know your case is weak, and you think personally attacking me will give it the illusion of credibility.


That is you being an ass.

 

[MarkDuffy]

I didnt call them a hate group just because they disagree with me. Plenty of groups disagree with me, and I dont call them all hate groups. That's just you propping up a little strawman for yourself to knock down.

Give me the single strongest example of their "hate" then to support your claim.

That would be their views on homosexuality.

They hold views you don't like?


That does not meet the common definition of "hate group".


Do you want to expand on that?

Their views on the LGBT community fit the definition of hate group. I did not suspect you would agree with me, nor am I seeking any validation from you.

NOpe. Just thinking that homosexuality is unhealthy does not fit the definition of hate group.


Hate group - Wikipedia



"A hate group is a social group that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, nation, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or any other designated sector of society. According to the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), a hate group's "primary purpose is to promote animosity, hostility, and malice against persons belonging to a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin which differs from that of the members of the organization."

FRC’s Values Voters Summit, an influential watering hole for many anti-LGBTQ politicians with national ambitions, provides a platform for candidates to spew anti-LGBTQ vitriol, including Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee. At past Values Voters Summits, speakers have compared same-sex couples getting married to drug use and people marrying children and dogs.

With more than $50 million raised over the last four years reported to the IRS, FRC promotes the dangerous – and debunked – idea that people can and should try to change their sexual orientation, and that even if you can’t stop “involuntary attraction,” you can just not act on it. Easy, right? Except every major medical and mental health organization in the country has condemned practices aimed at trying to change a person’s sexual orientation. Why does FRC continue to rely on discredited researchand anecdotal evidence?

FRC says the best way to keep young people from committing suicide is to make sure they all know homosexuality is wrong, and to avoid creating welcoming environments for people who may be questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity. FRC’s Peter Sprigg: “the most effective way of reducing teen suicide attempts is not to create a positive social environment for the affirmation of homosexuality. Instead, it would be to discourage teens from self-identifying as gay, lesbian, or bisexual.”

FRC hates Girl Scout Cookies and the Girl Scouts who sell them, just because the Girl Scouts of the USA are open to all girls, including transgender scouts. FRC has sought to publicly shame transgender scouts for being themselves and the organization that supports them. And FRC previously supported the Boy Scouts for excluding gay scouts, but now they hate them too. When the Boy Scouts of American (BSA) was still considering changing its policy to allow openly gay scouts, FRC paid a lot of money to run an ad in the nation’s largest newspaper to oppose it. It later said lifting the ban would “dramatically alter the culture and moral landscape of America.”

FRC thinks that transgender people “threaten the public safety of women and children” when given access to necessary legal rights and protections. According to FRC’s Peter Sprigg, trans women are either peeping toms, rapists or pedophiles. Yet Sprigg offers no evidence to back up this assertion. That’s because it's entirely false. What is true is that trans people face exponentially higher levels of discrimination and prejudice than people who are not transgender, thanks in large part to the harmful and misleading propaganda distributed by groups like FRC.

FRC thinks that businesses should be allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ people simply because of who they are. They assert a personal religious belief ought to be reason enough for a business to deny service to someone if they find that person’s sexual orientation or gender identity objectionable. Religious respect is a core American value just like respect for other differences. But when individuals or businesses go out into the commercial market, they must abide by non-discrimination provisions. So if lesbian grandmothers show up to a hotel with their grandchildren during a trip to a national memorial or park, the local hotel shouldn’t be able to turn them away because the owners or staff’s personal religious beliefs disagree with the women’s existence.

FRC fought against the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and claimed that “homosexuality helped create” the military’s problem with sexual assault. False. UCLA’s Palm Center released a report, “One Year Out: An Assessment of DADT Repeal’s Impact on Military Readiness” and responded directly to FRC’s shocking claim about sexual assault. “Despite warnings about an increase in assaults,” the report reads, “we did not uncover any evidence suggesting that DADT repeal has led to a rise in violence among service members.”

FRC thinks gay people should be imprisoned and that our very existence should be outlawed.

FRC, suggesting that gay people are harmful to society, wantsPresident Obama and the U.S. government to stop advocating against the archaic criminal punishment of LGBTQ people around the world, and quit “forc[ing] acceptance of the world's gays and lesbians.” There are millions of LGBTQ people around the world who live in fear and isolation under the rule of governments that criminalize their very identities, often with harsh prison sentences – or worse. FRC thinks it’s wrong for U.S. government to use its power and influence to champion LGBTQ equality abroad, suggesting, “Our global neighbors have the freedom to believe that homosexuality is wrong--just as they have the freedom to legislate against any behavior they think is harmful to society.”

FRC claims that LGBTQ activists “work to normalize sex with boys,” seek to “abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order” – these lies are just a few of the many reasons the Southern Poverty Law Center classifies them a Hate Group.

10 Facts about the Family Research Council | Human Rights Campaign

 

[Correll]

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

So, holding an opinion is unConstitutional?


Care to support that with a cut and paste for the Constitution?

"So, holding an opinion is unConstitutional?"

Clearly he meant the opinion itself is unconstitutional, in the ideas it conveys. When did it become fashionable to pretend to be mentally retarded during a discussion?

What is "unconstitutional" about thinking that homosexuality is unhealthy?

Shut up dummy, nobody said that.

That is the way I interpreted your statement.

If I was wrong, the obvious thing to do would be to explain HOW I was wrong and to clarify what you actually meant.


Instead you just insulted me.


Because I called it exactly and you didn't like being called on what you actually said.

 

[rightwinger]

“At the Values Voters Summit, thousands of conservative Christians are expressing their simmering frustration toward Republicans in Congress for not doing enough to support President Trump.”

Conservative Christians Express Frustration Toward Congressional Republicans

What ‘values’ do they support.

They value lies.

They value stupidity.

They value hatred.

They value ignorance.

They value bigotry.

They value misanthropy and misogyny.

Fortunately there are a few Republicans who refuse to advance conservative Christians’ agenda of fear, bigotry and hate.

They value infidelity
They value destroying families
They value not supporting a religion
They value bigotry and hatred

 

[Correll]

Give me the single strongest example of their "hate" then to support your claim.

That would be their views on homosexuality.

They hold views you don't like?


That does not meet the common definition of "hate group".


Do you want to expand on that?

Their views on the LGBT community fit the definition of hate group. I did not suspect you would agree with me, nor am I seeking any validation from you.

NOpe. Just thinking that homosexuality is unhealthy does not fit the definition of hate group.


Hate group - Wikipedia



"A hate group is a social group that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, nation, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or any other designated sector of society. According to the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), a hate group's "primary purpose is to promote animosity, hostility, and malice against persons belonging to a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin which differs from that of the members of the organization."

FRC’s Values Voters Summit, an influential watering hole for many anti-LGBTQ politicians with national ambitions, provides a platform for candidates to spew anti-LGBTQ vitriol, including Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee. At past Values Voters Summits, speakers have compared same-sex couples getting married to drug use and people marrying children and dogs.

With more than $50 million raised over the last four years reported to the IRS, FRC promotes the dangerous – and debunked – idea that people can and should try to change their sexual orientation, and that even if you can’t stop “involuntary attraction,” you can just not act on it. Easy, right? Except every major medical and mental health organization in the country has condemned practices aimed at trying to change a person’s sexual orientation. ...n

Except that I have personally seen close friends change their sexual orientation.

 

[MarkDuffy]

The majority voted for the other side. Where do their interests get a mention ?

WHy do you respond when you don't actually address anything I said?



They won the election. Across the board.


And their interests and agenda, their ACTUAL, interests and agenda, not your asshole lies, are not being advanced.



That is a valid complaint.


There is something wrong with our nation when one side can win EVERYTHING, and still not get to have it's interests represented.

Well, her's the big problem with your nonsense:

Not everyone who votes for a party votes for every agenda of every component of the party. People who voted for Trump because of the jobs issue did not necessarily vote to put Jaysus in science class.

People who voted for Trump because of immigration did not necessarily vote to restrict abortion or gay marriage.

Maybe if the GOP would shed the loonies, they would get more done. Of course, if they did so, they would never win another election. Catch-22

By the voting together for the same candidate, those groups showed a willingness to work together that should be reflected by their representatives.

If winning EVERYTHING, does not lead to change, then what is the avenue to get the change that we want?


Your insulting partisan swill is dismissed as you just being an ass.

If winning EVERYTHING, does not lead to change, then what is the avenue to get the change that we want?

Move to Iran, or the Taliban in Afghanistan would probably make you happy.

Your post was just you being an ass.


My question is still unanswered.


If winning EVERYTHING, does not lead to change, then what is the avenue to get the change that we want?

If your opinion does not lead to change, you obviously do not hold a common opinion.

 

[Correll]

“At the Values Voters Summit, thousands of conservative Christians are expressing their simmering frustration toward Republicans in Congress for not doing enough to support President Trump.”

Conservative Christians Express Frustration Toward Congressional Republicans

What ‘values’ do they support.

They value lies.

They value stupidity.

They value hatred.

They value ignorance.

They value bigotry.

They value misanthropy and misogyny.

Fortunately there are a few Republicans who refuse to advance conservative Christians’ agenda of fear, bigotry and hate.

They value infidelity
They value destroying families
They value not supporting a religion
They value bigotry and hatred

And you pretend like you want to cut deals with them. Shame on you.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Give me the single strongest example of their "hate" then to support your claim.

The anti-LGBTQ Family Research Council, labeled as a hate group by the SPLC, has hosted its annual summit since its inception in 2006.

The group organizing the summit has previously commented on homosexuality. “Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects.”

Donald Trump will be the first sitting president to address a hate group's annual summit

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

And they want these beliefs codified into the laws of our country. On what authority do they think these ideas should be binding? Is it, humanism? Protection of individual rights? Compassion, or altruism, or collectivism?

No, they cite only one authority: Gawd.

And this simple truth is what makes these apologists twist themselves into little pretzels to defend their bullshit. They know how ridiculous it is to simply say, "Because I think gawd said so, that's why!" So they have to equivocate, and lie, and backward think in an attempt to drudge up bullshit reasons for their bullshit beliefs. They should unburden themselves of this stupidity, and just admit their magical bullahit is no more important than any other voodoo, when it comes to writing laws.

All political groups want their beliefs codified into laws.


That you single out Christian groups for that to be a "problem" is you being the bigot.

No one is singling out Christian groups. The FRC is neither Christian nor do they have value.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What’s sad and tragic is that the Christian right will one day realize its goals of hate, bigotry, and discrimination – the consequence of Trump’s judicial appointments.

 

[Correll]

WHy do you respond when you don't actually address anything I said?



They won the election. Across the board.


And their interests and agenda, their ACTUAL, interests and agenda, not your asshole lies, are not being advanced.



That is a valid complaint.


There is something wrong with our nation when one side can win EVERYTHING, and still not get to have it's interests represented.

Well, her's the big problem with your nonsense:

Not everyone who votes for a party votes for every agenda of every component of the party. People who voted for Trump because of the jobs issue did not necessarily vote to put Jaysus in science class.

People who voted for Trump because of immigration did not necessarily vote to restrict abortion or gay marriage.

Maybe if the GOP would shed the loonies, they would get more done. Of course, if they did so, they would never win another election. Catch-22

By the voting together for the same candidate, those groups showed a willingness to work together that should be reflected by their representatives.

If winning EVERYTHING, does not lead to change, then what is the avenue to get the change that we want?


Your insulting partisan swill is dismissed as you just being an ass.

If winning EVERYTHING, does not lead to change, then what is the avenue to get the change that we want?

Move to Iran, or the Taliban in Afghanistan would probably make you happy.

Your post was just you being an ass.


My question is still unanswered.


If winning EVERYTHING, does not lead to change, then what is the avenue to get the change that we want?

If your opinion does not lead to change, you obviously do not hold a common opinion.

So, in your opinion, the power of the Congress and the Presidency and the Court, UNITED, is being checked by "opinion"?

 

[Correll]

The anti-LGBTQ Family Research Council, labeled as a hate group by the SPLC, has hosted its annual summit since its inception in 2006.

The group organizing the summit has previously commented on homosexuality. “Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects.”

Donald Trump will be the first sitting president to address a hate group's annual summit

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

And they want these beliefs codified into the laws of our country. On what authority do they think these ideas should be binding? Is it, humanism? Protection of individual rights? Compassion, or altruism, or collectivism?

No, they cite only one authority: Gawd.

And this simple truth is what makes these apologists twist themselves into little pretzels to defend their bullshit. They know how ridiculous it is to simply say, "Because I think gawd said so, that's why!" So they have to equivocate, and lie, and backward think in an attempt to drudge up bullshit reasons for their bullshit beliefs. They should unburden themselves of this stupidity, and just admit their magical bullahit is no more important than any other voodoo, when it comes to writing laws.

All political groups want their beliefs codified into laws.


That you single out Christian groups for that to be a "problem" is you being the bigot.

No one is singling out Christian groups. The FRC is neither Christian nor do they have value.

What other religious groups have you personally attacked like this?

 

[Correll]

What’s sad and tragic is that the Christian right will one day realize its goals of hate, bigotry, and discrimination – the consequence of Trump’s judicial appointments.

Jeez, maybe it was a mistake to turn the courts into a source of laws? lOL!!!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The anti-LGBTQ Family Research Council, labeled as a hate group by the SPLC, has hosted its annual summit since its inception in 2006.

The group organizing the summit has previously commented on homosexuality. “Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects.”

Donald Trump will be the first sitting president to address a hate group's annual summit

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

And they want these beliefs codified into the laws of our country. On what authority do they think these ideas should be binding? Is it, humanism? Protection of individual rights? Compassion, or altruism, or collectivism?

No, they cite only one authority: Gawd.

And this simple truth is what makes these apologists twist themselves into little pretzels to defend their bullshit. They know how ridiculous it is to simply say, "Because I think gawd said so, that's why!" So they have to equivocate, and lie, and backward think in an attempt to drudge up bullshit reasons for their bullshit beliefs. They should unburden themselves of this stupidity, and just admit their magical bullahit is no more important than any other voodoo, when it comes to writing laws.

All political groups want their beliefs codified into laws.


That you single out Christian groups for that to be a "problem" is you being the bigot.

No one is singling out Christian groups. The FRC is neither Christian nor do they have value.

"No one is singling out Christian groups"

100% correct.

 

[Correll]

SO, they hold an opinion that offends you, that's the extend of them being a "hate group"?


That's not generally enough to call someone a hate group. Do they do anything beyond disagreeing with the liberal agenda?

No fool. They hold an opinion that is anti-American and unConstitutional.

And they want these beliefs codified into the laws of our country. On what authority do they think these ideas should be binding? Is it, humanism? Protection of individual rights? Compassion, or altruism, or collectivism?

No, they cite only one authority: Gawd.

And this simple truth is what makes these apologists twist themselves into little pretzels to defend their bullshit. They know how ridiculous it is to simply say, "Because I think gawd said so, that's why!" So they have to equivocate, and lie, and backward think in an attempt to drudge up bullshit reasons for their bullshit beliefs. They should unburden themselves of this stupidity, and just admit their magical bullahit is no more important than any other voodoo, when it comes to writing laws.

All political groups want their beliefs codified into laws.


That you single out Christian groups for that to be a "problem" is you being the bigot.

No one is singling out Christian groups. The FRC is neither Christian nor do they have value.

"No one is singling out Christian groups"

100% correct.

I see a lot of attacks by lefties on Christian groups like this.

NOt so much JEwish Groups, or Islamic Groups, or ect ect ect.

 

[Dragonlady]

“At the Values Voters Summit, thousands of conservative Christians are expressing their simmering frustration toward Republicans in Congress for not doing enough to support President Trump.”

Conservative Christians Express Frustration Toward Congressional Republicans

What ‘values’ do they support.

They value lies.

They value stupidity.

They value hatred.

They value ignorance.

They value bigotry.

They value misanthropy and misogyny.

Fortunately there are a few Republicans who refuse to advance conservative Christians’ agenda of fear, bigotry and hate.

They won the election. Across the board.


And their interests and agenda, their ACTUAL, interests and agenda, not your asshole lies, are not being advanced.



That is a valid complaint.


There is something wrong with our nation when one side can win EVERYTHING, and still not get to have it's interests represented.



Your vile lies are dismissed.



Did I call you an asshole?

Yeah well they won with Reagan and Bush I and II as well and their bigotry, misogyny and racism wasn't institutional adopted then either. Donnie can't get this stuff done either. No sane person would vote for such blatantly unconstitutional crap.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Well, her's the big problem with your nonsense:

Not everyone who votes for a party votes for every agenda of every component of the party. People who voted for Trump because of the jobs issue did not necessarily vote to put Jaysus in science class.

People who voted for Trump because of immigration did not necessarily vote to restrict abortion or gay marriage.

Maybe if the GOP would shed the loonies, they would get more done. Of course, if they did so, they would never win another election. Catch-22

By the voting together for the same candidate, those groups showed a willingness to work together that should be reflected by their representatives.

If winning EVERYTHING, does not lead to change, then what is the avenue to get the change that we want?


Your insulting partisan swill is dismissed as you just being an ass.

If winning EVERYTHING, does not lead to change, then what is the avenue to get the change that we want?

Move to Iran, or the Taliban in Afghanistan would probably make you happy.

Your post was just you being an ass.


My question is still unanswered.


If winning EVERYTHING, does not lead to change, then what is the avenue to get the change that we want?

If your opinion does not lead to change, you obviously do not hold a common opinion.

So, in your opinion, the power of the Congress and the Presidency and the Court, UNITED, is being checked by "opinion"?

LOL they are not united. Where did you get this nonsense?