And thus ended the political career of Trump... Evangelicals can now discard him...

[C_Clayton_Jones]

With the ruling overturning Roe V Wade, the deal is now complete. I refer to the unspoken deal the Evangelicals had with the GOP, Mitch McConnell, and with Trump.

Mitch cashed in the Trump presidency for one more SCOTUS judge, and now the winnings have been paid out.

The evangelicals no longer have any use for Trump. They will now climb back up on their high horse, having fallen off for a few years to justify and ignore all manner of unethical and immoral behavior by Trump.

It will be like they never fell off. Trust me.

And they can stitch up the schism in their own churches practically overnight. Trump will not win the primary, and *poof*... schism gone.

The Evangelical Church Is Breaking Apart

Christians must reclaim Jesus from his church.

www.theatlantic.com

“The truth is, many evangelicals long ago replaced the suffering servant of Christ with an image that more closely resembles Donald Trump than many would care to admit. They’ve traded a faith that privileges humility and elevates the least of these for one that derides gentleness as the province of wusses. Having replaced the Jesus of the gospels with an idol of machismo, it’s no wonder many have come to think of Trump himself as the nation’s savior.

Indeed, white evangelical support for Trump can be seen as the culmination of a decades-long embrace of militant masculinity, a masculinity that has enshrined patriarchal authority, condoned a callous display of power at home and abroad, and functioned as a linchpin in the political and social worldviews of conservative white evangelicals. In the end, many evangelicals did not vote for Trump despite their beliefs, but because of them.”

Donald Trump and Militant Evangelical Masculinity

Having replaced the Jesus of the gospels with an idol of machismo, it's no wonder many have come to think of Trump himself as the nation's savior.

religionandpolitics.org

Exactly.

 

[Clipper]

Why do you hate trump?

His orange hair maybe?

Or his blunt way of speaking his mind instead of candy coating it to please the focus groups?

He's a corrupt autocrat wannabe, hellbent on getting back into power & he'll burn the whole thing down to get there.

And his blunt way of speaking is based on a pack of lies.

 

[The Irish Ram]

You still haven't quite worked up the brain power to understand what the topic of the thread is. Or, maybe its the courage you can't seem to muster to face the topic.

You're gettin your ass kicked here by so many. May be time for you to give up the, "Please don't vote for Trump in Nov." agenda. We're voting him and stocked shelves and affordable gas and all the things he gave us before. What a great President!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The truth again is that the Roe decision WAS criticized from jump street.

As is every ruling. In fact, every ruling that isn't unanimous is criticized by justices sitting on the very court that just affirmed the ruling.

That's what the dissenting opinion is.

But, when one wipes away the tears from his eyes and the foam from his mouth and looks at reality, one sees Roe v Wade being being repeatedly reaffirmed by the SCOTUS over a 50 year period.

Until it was overturned, with the basis of this decision being the rejection of the basis of the ruling that also happens to be precisely the same basis as that of several other rulings.

Clarence Thomas, not being an ignorant, squealing little moron, knows this.

That's why he named the other rulings by name in his concurrent opinion and said they are errors that should be corrected, by the same court that overturned Roe v Wade and on the same basis.

And that's why normal, informed, rational adults who don't bleed from their wherevers on message boards all day are talking about the likely propect of this. On both sides of the aisle.


So you can join that adult discussion, or you can sit there and continue to smear yourself with your own poop.

It's your call.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

May be time for you to give up the, "Please don't vote for Trump in Nov." agenda.

Trump isn't running in November.

Thats twice I have had to tell you that.

If you are too squeamish or terrified to talk about the topic, there are lots of other threads.

 

[Clipper]

Christians will be voting for Trump in 2024.

Anybody who votes for Trump is not a "Christian". He sure as hell isn't.

 

[Clipper]

Trump isn't running in November.

Thats twice I have had to tell you that.

If you are too squeamish or terrified to talk about the topic, there are lots of other threads.

You may be right considering if he doesn't run he can continue to fleece the herd out of millions of dollars.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You may be right considering if he doesn't run he can continue to fleece the herd out of millions of dollars.

No, I mean he is not running in November.

Because he is not running for congress or for local office.


Because these are the only elections being held in November.

 

[BackAgain]

As is every ruling. In fact, every ruling that isn't unanimous is criticized by justices sitting on the very court that just affirmed the ruling.

Thats what the dissenting opinion is.

But, when one wipes away the tears from his eyes and the foam from his mouth and looks at reality, one sees Roe v Wade being being repeatedly reaffirmed by the SCOTUS over a 50 year period.

Until it was overturned, with the basis of this decision being the rejection of the basis of the ruling that also happens to be precisely the same basis as that of several other rulings.

Clarence Thomas, not being an ignorant, squealing little moron, knows this.

That's why he named the other rulings by name in his concurrent opinion and said they are errors that should be corrected, by the same court that overturned Roe v Wade on the same basis.

And thats why normal, informed, rational adults who don't bleed from their wherevers on message boards all day are talking about the likely propect of this. On both sides of the aisle.


So you can join that adult discussion, or you can sit their and continue to smear yourself with your own poop.

It's your call.

Your usually petty ad hominem efforts are sinking even lower now that I’ve bitch slapped you with proof of what I said. The thing you denied. So, now, you change the conversation to a different quibbling objection.

Typical bullshit pussy posting from a spineless dishonest board member of your lack of quality.

Your choice is simple:

(1) Admit that the Roe decision received a great deal of legal criticism (from jump street, as I accurately said) precisely on its lack of a valid legal foundation or

(2) continue to deny that which you have no basis to deny.

It was not just the outcome that was criticized, you empty troll. It was the disingenuous legal reasoning utilized to craft the opinion in the first place. But you’re not intellectually (or otherwise) honest enough to admit it.

 

[BS Filter]

Fascinating thread. The pain is excruciating, huh. Hahaha.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Admit that the Roe decision received a great deal of legal criticism (from jump street as I accurately said) precisely on its lack of a valid legal foundation

Already done. Also true of every ruling. Also true of justices sitting on the court in every non unanimous ruling.

And in this case, the basis for overturning it was to reject the basis shared by several other rulings.

Now the court will hear challenges to those other cases, too.

Quite contrary to your embarrassing baby hissy fits to the contrary.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Fascinating thread. The pain is excruciating, huh. Hahaha.

I understand you are too squeamish to talk about the topic. I knew which of the more extreme and far gone cultists would not be able to do it.

This thread is not really for them. Or you.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For all of the tantrums and pearl clutching and teeth gnashing by the Trumpers in the thread...

Not one has managed to even attempt an explanation of why Trump is any longer needed for anything the evangelicals want. Or why it will require Trump to beat Biden.

In fact, every one of them has happily seemed to admit that anyone can beat Biden. I dont think they realize how well they strengthen the point of the thread and the truth of the statements in the thread title, when they do this.

They also seem happy to talk about the fights in the states and the SCOTUS they consider to be in their pockets.

Which all entails absolutely no need for the involvement of the president.

Further making my point.

I guess I should just stand aside and let them talk, talk, and talk some more.

 

[BackAgain]

Already done. Also true of every ruling. Also true of justices sitting on the court in every non unanimous ruling.

And in this case, the basis for overturning it was to reject the basis shared by several other rulings.

Now the court will hear challenges to those other cases, too.

Quite contrary to your embarrassing baby hissy fits to the contrary.

No. You initially denied it. Then you quibbled, as you just repeated. And that means you’re still being dishonest.

The specific criticism the ruling got was ON ITS LEGAL FOUNDATIONS, AS I NOTED. AND IT WAS FROM JUMP STREET, AS I NOTED. contrary to your new quibble, it didn’t get criticized for its outcome. It got criticized for its lack of valid legal reasoning. And even Ruthie criticized it.

 

[BackAgain]

Already done. Also true of every ruling. Also true of justices sitting on the court in every non unanimous ruling.

And in this case, the basis for overturning it was to reject the basis shared by several other rulings.

Now the court will hear challenges to those other cases, too.

Quite contrary to your embarrassing baby hissy fits to the contrary.

You’re the coward. It’s plain to see. You still can’t admit the truth of what I said despite abundant proof being dumped all over your head. Unrebuttable proof.

Face it, Farty. You’re a shallow dishonest petty gutless troll.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No. You initially denied it.

As anyone can see for themselves, I directly responded to that idea immediately with the very first words of my response being:

As is every ruling.

You are one bizarre little time waster.

 

[BackAgain]

As anyone can see for themselves, I directly responded to that idea immediately with the very first words of my response being:


You are one bizarre little time waster.

And all can see that you’re still lying. Pussy that you are, you’ll never sack up.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And all can see that you’re still lying. Pussy that you are, you’ll never sack up.

Even when someone agrees with you, you bleed from your wherever.

This is embarrassing to watch.

I think we have reached the intellectual ceiling of what you have to offer to this topic.

I will wait for others to chime in.

 

[buckeye45_73]

So then you agree I may be right.

So that's our new starting point.

Now, let's talk about the chances of that.

Would you put those chances as high? Low? 50%?

Nah, by abondon, you mean they wouldn't vote for him, they will and would, but you always have to evalutate who's running. And only Desantis would beat him, no democrat would....

 

[Rigby5]

Conservatives are seeing this ruling against Roe Vs Wade as a victory of states over abusive federal power, but they are wrong because that is NOT what this is.
This is a ruling for abusive states over individual rights, so is a total disaster.
The Roe Vs Wade ruling was based on the defense of individual rights of the 14th amendment, and any attack or loss of individual rights is horrific.