Ignorant Secular Press Too Eager to Label Evangelicals Hypocrites


Ignorant Secular Press Too Eager to Label Evangelicals Hypocrites
October 14, 2016|7:25 am

Many of America’s main news sources failed to accurately describe the relationship of Evangelicals to Donald Trump this past weekend. For the sake of our shared profession and the country, we urge them to get this right.

Following the release of an 11-year-old videotape showing Trump bragging about sexually assaulting women, much (but not all) of the coverage oozed accusations of Evangelical hypocrisy.

“Evangelicals condemned Bill Clinton’s sexual sins in the 1990s but now they are excusing Donald Trump’s sexual sins,” many story lines read.

Granted, a few Evangelical leaders provided ammunition for this narrative. We condemn those types of responses. What Trump said was abhorrent. …

… Most Evangelical leaders, even those who have endorsed Trump or have said they will vote for Trump without endorsing him, condemned Trump’s behavior unequivocally, and so do we.

**The coverage of this past week often led to the impression that there are only two types of Evangelicals, 1) #nevertrumpers and 2) enthusiastic Trump supporters, with most being in the latter camp. This is not true. In relation to this year’s election, there are at least four types of Evangelicals. … there are (also) 3) Hillary Clinton supporters and 4) reluctant Trump voters.

The vast majority of Evangelicals are in category #4, but much of the recent media coverage failed to convey this fact.

There is nothing hypocritical in saying that you feel compelled to make an excruciating choice between two deplorable candidates, as the reluctant Trump voters continue to convey. If you disagree, if you think that is hypocrisy, then at least be consistent and label reluctant Clinton voters hypocrites as well, as even more evidence of her immoral, criminal and incompetent behavior surfaces daily. (Side note: It would be refreshing to hear Evangelical Clinton voters convey the same degree of consternation regarding their choice that most Evangelical Trump voters convey about their choice.)**

The MSM speaking ignorantly - or lying about - Evangelical Christians? The MSM not caring to understand Evangelical Christians? What a NON-shock.

That said, the paragraphs I bolded capture rather succinctly what I believe to be reality: many Christians, many Evangelicals among them, will vote Trump, but reluctantly. They (we) view HRC as far, far, worse, and Johnson and Stein as non-viable.

Since one of my first reaction to many articles by/about Christian “leaders” and leaders is, “Who is (s)he?” here are links to Christian Post’s About Us and Leadership & Editorial Staff pages. CP is well within the mainstream of US Evangelicalism.


I also know of no credible charge that has been leveled at Trump regarding sexual misconduct, to my knowledge the vice he has been shown to be guilty of is lewdness and vulgarity in his speech habits; I also have heard no Christian or any other subgroup defend this flaw with the exception of Atheists (which is to be expected).

I won’t be voting for Trump but it is for far more significant reasons than his childish and buffoonish communication skills.


There is a new Trump allegation today.

Hillary has got these women lined up from now till Election Day. It’s a shame they can’t be charged with perjury if they are lying because their allegations are effecting the election. If they are lying, they should face fines and jail time.


I WILL be voting for Trump…though reluctantly…in large measure not because of anything HE has said or even done, but because I see who it is that opposes him…the media, Wall Street, Democrat Hillary supporters–including GOP Rinos–the entertainment industry–almost to a person–and people like Glenn Beck who actually pledged to help sneak into this country unvetted Syrian “refugees.”


Christians who needed help. Who they did vet.

All this rhetoric of “***If you want to help them so bad, why don’t you invite them into YOUR home?***”

People with Beck do that, and then you complain about it. It’s so pathetic.

The living history of Christianity is under attack, Glen Beck works to protect it, and you complain about him doing it.

***Get off your *** damn horse Dave. *** There is a Christian Genocide happening, in case you didn’t notice. Either roll up your sleeves or get the **** out of the way.


Yes, surely no member of ISIS would ever do anything so unscrupulous as* lie* about their religion. I’m sure we can safely bring in any self-identified Christian from Syria and have zero problems.


You’re ignorant; they ask people they know who are Christians, like pastors, to vouch for those they bring here.

It was well enough that Slovakia, who said they would not bring in Islamic refugees under any circumstances, accepted 139 Christian asylees from them.

Look up the process they use, and then kindly knock off the half-arsed commentary.


If a leader in the church says this person is legit and won’t harm anyone, you can trust him. The Catholic Church proves this :yes:


Stirring the pot, because you’re caught red handed talking out of your arse. Typical.

The lives being saved are what matters; you’ve made it clear that you don’t have anything of substance to say.

Conversation done.


Jesus was all about turning away people in need unless they were properly vetted.

“Lepers, if you would like to be healed, please form a line so my Apostles can do a body cavity search.”


Wrong, AS. Beck is claiming to arranging to SNEAK these people in across the porous, Mexican border. He has NO WAY to “vet” them–especially AFTER they get to Mexico. Get back to us six months or so AFTER you’ve invited 4 or 5 Syrian refugees to live with you. Seems to me that I recall the “Christian” Serbs committing multiple atrocities just a few years ago. It’s the CULTURE they live in…not their professed religion that determines how they will integrate in this country. The Syrian “culture” (if you can bastardize the term when applied to Syria) is much the same, regardless of professed religion.


No, Full stop. Beck is saying his organizations vets them.

He’s saying it himself, right here:

"*Johnnie Moore, the project head of The Nazarene Fund, just sent me the photos from today’s Mass and gathering of the Christians YOU just saved from crucifixion, beheading, slavery and torture.

Because we stopped waiting for someone else to do what we all know needs to be done, our first 150 Christians were relocated in Slovakia.

We are paying to relocate, set them up for a year, give them training and culture and language classes.

They have all been vetted and for safety reasons ONLY they are all Christians. We figure it is better to save some than stand around arguing and saving none.

So we begin here. The Arab states can easily take the Muslims who need to flee.

Here are the photos of the people who would not be alive today if it wasn’t for you. Celebrating the Birth of Christ with family.*"

People in Beck’s organizations say they vet them. He has People who are ex-CIA, that he uses to vet them.
He doesn’t help anyone he hasn’t vetted.

If you listened to Beck’s radio program, like I do, you would have known this, and just how he does it.

Since you don’t, you didn’t know.

Dave, go look up the Nazarene Fund. Actually look at what they’re doing.

As it stands Dave, all you have is soundbites, not substance. Please examine more than that.


That is indeed the argument that Clinton makes for dragging hundreds of thousands of them over here. I think it’s a bad idea. I prioritize Americans over Syrians.


My guess is supporters on both sides are reluctant supporters with no segment of the population particularly overwhelmed with joy about these two choices. It’s a vote against the worst of two evils.


Alaska Slim, You as a far left guy, open border guy, who does not want The United States to have a defendable boundary for our country, listen to Glen Beck? Shame on you! As a committed globalist you should not be polluting you mind with his right of center message.

I have read your posts on controlling our borders and have seen how little you care about those who work hard and pay taxes. You can get angry at me, but I have been angry with your positions for a while and have held my tongue until now. And no, I won’t answer you because we have no common ground on border security. You are an extremist who does not care about border security.


Those “soundbytes” as you characterize them are from Beck’s own MOUTH. I USED to listen to him–until he started spouting that stuff about sneaking Syrian refugees into the US through Mexico…which is what HE said he was going to do.


In case you can’t figure it out, Jesus was quite capable of vetting without manmade help. We don’t wield that kind of power. And He testified against those who rejected Him.


Heh! If you assume the truth of part of the accounts of what Jesus did, it gets pretty sticky to be ignoring - or to be unaware of - the full accounts.

Hint, DHL: throwing the Bible into the faces of “Fundies” works better if there’re no Evangelicals or Fundamentalists in your audience. They’re probably more familiar with the Bible than you are, and have probably heard before whatever chestnut you’re tossing at them.


I’m very enthusiastic about Trump. He’s the first person I’ve been truly excited about in my entire life. I generally liked Ron Paul, but it was about 1/2 my interest in Trump. Paul was just as against the global corporate uniparty system as Trump, but I just never felt like he had much of a chance. Trump’s the underdog, but he always was. I’m way happier with a chance than a surefire corporate globalist.

I’m also much happier than in 2004. Even if Trump loses, I don’t think Clinton will be as bad as either Kerry or Bush. So worst case scenario for me is a pretty standard result. More of the same perpetual war, and Wall Street First governance. That’s all I’ve had my entire life, and I’m quite happy. So I’ll manage either way.


I doubt it. American Christianity and actual Christianity are two entirely different things.