General Question

rockfan's avatar

If there was video/audio of Trump angrily bashing religion and Christianity, do you think that would hurt his chances of winning the primary?

Asked by rockfan (13755points) 1 week ago
40 responses
“Great Question” (4points)

We all know (including a lot of Trump supporters) that he isn’t a devout Christian or really cares all that much about religion in general. If a video like this came out, I think it would do some damage, but not a lot. What do you think?

Observing members: 0
Composing members: 0


elbanditoroso's avatar

I don’t think it would move the needle one way or another.

The Trump true believers are going to make excuses for him, like they always do. They wilfully look the other way.

ragingloli's avatar

It would go something like this:

RayaHope's avatar

@ragingloli from what I have heard I think you’re right.

kritiper's avatar

If they are true team players, it won’t matter enough to count.

JLeslie's avatar

I have a feeling it wouldn’t matter to most, maybe a select few.

When I asked someone how they could believe Trump was a Christian, she said she had listened to him and he sounded sincere in his faith. Then she followed it by saying even if he wasn’t Christian or a theist, sometimes nonbelievers are used to help usher in what God wants for us. Something like that. You know, the whole prophecy thing for the second coming of God.

Plenty of Republicans I know, “don’t like Trump as a person, but like his policies.” So, they’d probably just decide it’s fine if he’s an atheist, even though up until that point they would never vote for an atheist. Just like family values and fidelity were so important, until it wasn’t important.

Plus, they could just believe the recording is a fake and carry on or develop amnesia.

RayaHope's avatar

@JLeslie It’s sad that people can throw away everything that matters and common sense just because someone can hurt other people that they don’t like :(

Smashley's avatar

I think his chances of winning the primary are zero already, so no, it couldn’t go any lower. But for anyone else, yes it would hurt.

rockfan's avatar

@Smashley Zero? He’s the favorite so far. But DeSantis is slowly getting up there.

LadyMarissa's avatar

FYI…there was a news report (NBC I think) back in the late 70’s where he said that there was NO God & even IF there was, he didn’t need Him because he was a self-made man who ONLY needed himself. He used to say that quite frequently, but I bet you’ll NEVER see it shown on the news!!! My guess is that he’s bought up ALL the copies of it & they had a nice bonfire at Mar-a-Lago!!!

There’s also one where he declared himself to be a Democrat. It was shown once in 2016 & it’s NOT seen the light of day since!!! There’s also one where he was complaining that his pregnant mistress was refusing to have an abortion & forcing him to leave his wife & kids to support her sorry ass.

Those were some of his nicer comments!!!

Smashley's avatar

@rockfan – fair enough. Hyperbole must be contagious these days. Let’s just say I don’t see him as the favorite.

Nomore_Tantrums's avatar

Not a bit. Those Trumpers are fanatics, to far lost in their cult.

JLeslie's avatar

I think DeSantis has more momentum now than Trump for 2024.

LadyMarissa's avatar

FOX, McConnell, & many others are putting their trust in DeSantis. Honestly, DeSantis scares the hell out of me. He’s every bit as unscrupulous as 45 was & he’s a LOT smarter; so, he could easily pull off a coup!!!

gorillapaws's avatar

I think there’s a large contingent of Trump fans who believe that JFK is coming back from the dead to fix the voting machines that were hacked with a Jewish space laser. This is a team sport now and has nothing to do with ideas of values.

filmfann's avatar

Trump made fun of Pence being a “church boy”. No one cared.
Typical hypocrisy.

LadyMarissa's avatar

IF 45 was to walk into a church, he’d burst into flames!!!

KNOWITALL's avatar

None of us ever believed he was a devout Christian, so no. But look at our Supreme Court now. Words matter far less than actions.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL I have plenty of friends who think he is devout Christian now, so it’s interesting to me that your experience is people don’t think he is. So, are you saying the Christian community just sees him as a vehicle for doing what the Christian community wants done? That’s sort of what I was saying above.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie Correct.

gorillapaws's avatar

@KNOWITALL And if they ban homosexuality? contraception?

gorillapaws's avatar

Too late to edit: I should have said “If they open the door to allow states to ban homosexuality and/or contraception, by denying that we have the rights to those things?”

KNOWITALL's avatar

@gorillapaws Then people who believe that’s what needs to happen will be happy, I suppose. I doubt that will happen though.

gorillapaws's avatar

@KNOWITALL “Then people who believe that’s what needs to happen will be happy,”

You mean like Pastor Dillon Awes? The guy who recently said this in his sermon:

“These people should be put to death. Every single homosexual in our country should be charged with a crime. The abomination of homosexuality that they have, they should be convicted in a lawful trial. They should be sentenced with death. They should be lined up against the wall and shot in the back of the head.” (source)

That’s what happens when you start mixing church and state.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@gorillapaws So you think the rest of us will declare open season on gays, since we’re in a red state? Many of us are allies, no ruling can change that.

mazingerz88's avatar

Some Christians would vote for Satan if he could win elections and get rid of abortion rights. Trump is just a pathetic money-making clown douche celebrity. They’re fine with him saying anything.

gorillapaws's avatar

@KNOWITALL I think mixing church and state has been proven time and again to be horrible: genocides/ethnic cleansing, slavery, burning witches. I’m using Christian examples because that’s most applicable to this question, but there are plenty of other faiths with similar outcomes throughout history when mixing church and state. When you have unelected religious leaders who are given the authority to determine the laws of a state, that is beyond terrifying.

The concern is people willing to engage in religious intolerance which all anti-choices are by definition. To not respect a diversity of belief, but instead enforce their own beliefs on others seems like a great idea when your beliefs are being pushed, until they cross a line for you and you realize that you can’t reason with faith—it’s inherently authority-based. The only solution is to draw that hard line, and that may allow for things we personally disagree with, but the alternative of not allowing a plurality of beliefs is so much worse that we have to accept it: just like holding our noses and defending the rights of KKK members to peaceably assemble.

Fundamentalist Christians are in the company of some pretty psychotic pieces of shit that really would be thrilled to see women treated as property again: something to own, fuck, bear your kids, raise your kids, serve your needs, etc .Alito quoted Sir Matthew Hale in his opinion, a guy who literally had women executed for witchcraft for fucks sake! You’re going to think you’re winning until you realize that the demon you unleashed is much worse than whatever you’d hope to gain. The cult Barrett was a literal ‘handmaid’ in should raise anyone’s eyebrow—especially a Christian’s.

You’re cheering on the Leopards Eating Peoples Faces Party. Don’t be surprised when the leopard tries to eat your face too. I think it’s very likely that they’re coming for LGBTQ+ rights as well as things like contraception. Not to mention you’ve got politicians like Marjorie Taylor Greene proudly declaring herself a “Christian Nationalist.”

KNOWITALL's avatar

@gorillapaws Okay. I grew up in Fundy church so maybe you have a few misconceptions.

I was the first to balk at using taxpayer funds at a religious institution, so I do agree on that.

RayaHope's avatar

OH, how horrible this statement below upsets me to my core. How could someone say that?
“These people should be put to death. Every single homosexual in our country should be charged with a crime. The abomination of homosexuality that they have, they should be convicted in a lawful trial. They should be sentenced with death. They should be lined up against the wall and shot in the back of the head.” (source)

elbanditoroso's avatar

@KNOWITALL I don’t know how old you are- maybe 40s or 50s. The fundamentalist churches that I am aware of (I’m Jewish, so I wasn’t directly involved) were less militant and strident back 40 years ago than they are today.

Yes, they had their strong opinions, but they didn’t feel (back then) that they had the calling or the right to promote fundamentalist religion on everyone else.

I think that’s a huge difference between then and now.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@elbanditoroso Oh indeed they did but in other countries. Now Democrats have made them re-focus on the US.

gorillapaws's avatar

@KNOWITALL ”...maybe you have a few misconceptions.”

The core problem is that they are intolerant of other faiths and beliefs and want to convert everyone else. Dividing the world into “the saved” and “the damned” is dangerous thinking that can lead to pretty horrific outcomes. You can justify some pretty heinous shit if you believe that in the end it means eternal salvation (“Sure I’ll marry my 12-year-old daughter to the religious leader because she’s guaranteed a golden ticket to heaven!”). You see this with Islamic fundamentalism too (“If my son dies defending Islam then he will get his golden ticket to heaven.”).

The other major problem is the epistemic foundation really begins and ends with their texts, as interpreted by their religious leaders. If their leader says homosexuality is a sin and finds scriptural justification to support their position then that’s the end of the discussion. Questioning them on this or anything else can get you shunned/excommunicated/banished, and even marked for death. Evidence becomes meaningless. It comes down to respecting and obeying authority.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@gorillapaws Some are intolerant, sure, like all groups of people.
While I don’t attend church now (for much of the reasons we’re discussing) I still believe in God.
We as compassionate human beings can’t speak for Jesus, but we can guess by his example , with his chosen companions, that he wasn’t judgy.
I truly don’t understand how other Christians can be so nasty to anyone, let alone a minority group. But I have family who still believes thay way and no argument will sway them.
My very strict male Rep cousin fought with my openly gay female Dem cousin about it. My mom argued with my grieving uncle that if he wasn’t a Christian he couldn’t join his wife in paradise. I mean, if I can’t reason with them, I don’t see anyone else doing so.

gorillapaws's avatar

@KNOWITALL “Some are intolerant, sure, like all groups of people.”

Respectfully, I think this is kind of dodging the point. There is a tremendous momentum in these organizations built around converting other people. Such a project assumes that the Church members are right and everyone else is wrong and condemned to an eternity of misery and torture. The intolerance is baked in, the intolerance is a defining attribute of the Church in that aspect.

@KNOWITALL “I truly don’t understand how other Christians can be so nasty to anyone, let alone a minority group”

It’s because extremist variants of any faith will demand members to shut off their critical thinking mind and become obedient to the authority of religious leadership. For people in 2022 to believe that Noah literally built an ark that had two of every kind in it, also necessitates that one abandons belief in engineering, physics, biology, geology, basic animal husbandry and common sense.That’s an extreme view. Same with insisting the Earth is only 6k-10k years old.

Religious leaders pushing some of these hateful narratives (that seem in direct conflict with many of the teachings of Christ as you rightly point out) are often empowered by unifying their congregations behind an us vs. some “foe” they’ve constructed. It helps maintain their power and may keep the congregation in fear of that energy being directed at them: obey, tithe, recruit, fight the “other.”

KNOWITALL's avatar

@gorillapaws Since I grew up in it and met people from around the world, I think you may be singling out Christianity. Many people of other faiths and no faith at all believe their religion or way of life is best.
But to each their own.

gorillapaws's avatar

@KNOWITALL “I think you may be singling out Christianity.”

I am to an extent. The question explicitly mentions Christianity and American politics as it relates to religion in the US. Christianity dominates that religious landscape and in particular the intersection of faith and the voters who supported Trump in particular. So you’re correct in pointing out that my criticism in this particular thread has mostly focused on Christianity. That said, I agree there are extremists in other faiths that are also very concerning.

@KNOWITALL “Many people of other faiths and no faith at all believe their religion or way of life is best.”

I’d say pretty much all people of all faiths or no faith believe their religion or way of life is best—certainly in places where they’re legally allowed to choose their faith. They’d probably leave and join one that they like better otherwise.

@KNOWITALL “But to each their own.”

Ironically this is the part where we have the problem. It isn’t that people generally think their religion is the right one. It’s that in the mind of extremists, they can’t accept “to each their own” as most people of most faiths (including many Christian denominations). The extremist mentality is not “to each their own,” but “I need to change/enforce my correctness upon them.” That’s where you end up with the most extreme convert or die kinds of scenarios. When was the last time you had a Buddhist knock on your door and ask “would you like to talk about how life is suffering and how the Noble Eightfold Path might lead you life with less sadness?” or an Amish guy going door-to-door to hop on his horse and buggy and ride back to renounce all technology and join his church? And further still, the concern isn’t “hey we love our religion, it’s so great, you should check us out!” it’s the “You’re WRONG and I’m obligated to try to make you right.”

KNOWITALL's avatar

@gorillapaws But the question was about Trump, I certainly feel no obligation to defend religious extremists.

That being said the right to live is not extremist in my opinion. Murdering innocents on the other hand, is not something many of us consider normal.

gorillapaws's avatar

@KNOWITALL “Murdering innocents on the other hand”

What you’re really saying here is “killing life that I believe to be persons according to how my set of beliefs defines it is wrong and should be applied to everyone else regardless of their beliefs on the matter.”

You would agree with that statement wouldn’t you?

Furthermore, once you’ve crossed that very critical line, of imposing your beliefs on everyone else then you’ve opened the door to potentially unintended consequences like outlawing homosexuality and things you may disagree with. Because we’re no longer in the realm of recognizing a plurality of belief but imposing one group’s beliefs on everyone else.—THAT IS the extremism.

It’s not extreme to believe that abortion is murder or even that homosexuality is a sin. It’s not extreme to say so publicly and try to convince others your position is correct (if it’s being done respectfully). It is extreme to take the enormous leap to compel everyone else to go along with your position through the state’s enforcement of laws, based on your interpretation of a religious text.

You seem really happy about the current Supreme Court, and I’m communicating that you shouldn’t be surprised when the Trump-appointed, former ‘handmaid’ in the People of Praise ‘Christian’ group who lived in a house owned by the leader (accused of sexual abuse btw) could lead to some pretty extreme outcomes that could really upset you. “I just wanted to force women to have birth against their will, but I had no idea that it could result in something extreme like my friends being locked up for being gay!”

KNOWITALL's avatar

@gorillapaws Many of us choose life for ourselves. Politicians and trigger laws chose the rest, minus Kansas who got to vote.

SSM is legal in my state, and Mississippi dropped their weird battle to make SSM illegal. Let’s stop with the fear-mongering and stick to facts.

As far as ‘seeming happy’ with this SC, I am glad that they recognize state rights, absolutely. But you and I have talked maybe twice so I wouldn’t assume anything about me, if I were you.

gorillapaws's avatar

@KNOWITALL “As far as ‘seeming happy’ with this SC, I am glad that they recognize state rights, absolutely. But you and I have talked maybe twice so I wouldn’t assume anything about me, if I were you.”

I was basing my statement on this comment you made:

“None of us ever believed he was a devout Christian, so no. But look at our Supreme Court now. Words matter far less than actions.”

Maybe I’m misinterpreting your statement?

“Let’s stop with the fear-mongering and stick to facts.”

Fact: Justice Clarence Thomas is open to revisiting:

Griswold v. Connecticut— “the Constitution of the United States protects the liberty of married couples to buy and use contraceptives without government restriction.”

Lawrence_v._Texas “was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that sanctions of criminal punishment for those who commit sodomy are unconstitutional.”

Obergefell v. Hodges “a landmark civil rights case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

This isn’t some hypothetical fear mongering or hyperbole. The SCOTUS has signaled where it wants to go next.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@gorillapaws Bush nominated Thomas in 1991, this Q is about Trump.

I’ll briefly explain that Trump stacked the SC for 2024 to show the Religious Right he could get the work done. It was smart.

The fact that actions are louder than words in no way conveys my approval or disapproval in any past or future decisions.
What I will say, again, is that I haven’t read any state other than MS was trying to make SSM illegal. And again, they dropped it.

I guess if you’re worried about Thomas you can have your people impeach him,, otherwise it’s a lifetime appointment.

Answer this question




to answer.

Mobile | Desktop

Send Feedback