Trump and Clinton on Religious Minorities

When Donald J. Trump addressed the Republican National Convention one week ago today in Cleveland, Ohio he promised Evangelical Christians that for their support he would work to remove the wall separating Church and State:

At this moment, I would like to thank the evangelical community who have been so good to me and so supportive. You have so much to contribute to our politics, yet our laws prevent you from speaking your minds from your own pulpits.

An amendment, pushed by Lyndon Johnson, many years ago, threatens religious institutions with a loss of their tax-exempt status if they openly advocate their political views.

I am going to work very hard to repeal that language and protect free speech for all Americans. We can accomplish these great things, and so much else. All we need to do is start believing in ourselves and in our country again. It is time to show the whole world that America is back, bigger, and better and stronger than ever before.”

The statement brought wild cheers from the Republican audience and foreshadowed a Trump White House in which the religious majority (Evangelicals made up just over 25% of the U.S. population in 2014) would enjoy greater prominence and empowerment.

By contrast, Donald Trump has on several occasions disparaged religious minorities for his political advantage, notably Muslims and Seventh-day Adventists.

Donald Trump’s Islamophobia Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric goes back to at least 2011, when he spoke with Fox News’s O’Reilly Factor.

Bill O’Reilly asked, “Is there a Muslim problem in the world?” Trump responded, “Absolutely. Absolutely. I don't notice Swedish people knocking down the World Trade Center.”

Trump later expanded on his comments in an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network:

“I mean I could have said, ‘Oh, absolutely not Bill, there’s no Muslim problem, everything is wonderful, just forget about the World Trade Center.’ But you have to speak the truth. We’re so politically correct that this country is falling apart.”

He then turned to the Qur’an, casting suspicion on Muslim sacred texts:

The Qur’an is very interesting. A lot of people say it teaches love. . . But there’s something there that teaches some very negative vibe. . . You have two views out there. You have the view that the Qur’an is all about love, and then you have the view that there’s a lot of hate in the Qur’an.”

Since announcing his candidacy for U.S. president, his sideways glances at the Muslim community have turned into outright aggression. He issued a statement in December, 2015 calling for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” which would include students and tourists, and remains a plank of his presidential platform.

Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric has played well with Republican voters who have an overwhelmingly dim view of adherents of Islam.

In the fiercely-fought Republican primary race, Donald Trump similarly maligned Seventh-day Adventists to dispatch Ben Carson, the only GOP candidate to (briefly) overtake Trump in polling. In early November, 2015, Carson temporarily knocked Trump from atop his perch as GOP frontrunner. Trump responded—effectively—by questioning Carson’s Adventist faith.

“I’m Presbyterian. Boy, that’s down the middle of the road, folks, in all fairness. I mean, Seventh-day Adventist, I don’t know about. I just don’t know about.”

Trump’s words were seen not as a statement of ignorance—“I don’t know much about the Seventh-day Adventists”—but as a statement about the suspiciousness of the Adventist faith. For many in the Adventist community, it called to mind Adventism’s long stigmatization as a non-Christian cult.

The Adventist Church in North America capitalized on the dismissive remarks, turning Trump’s aspersion into Adventism’s 15 seconds of fame. North American Division Executive Secretary G. Alexander Bryant went on a media offensive, defining Adventism in terms of its Christocentrism and Protestant ethos. But for Carson, the damage was done. Trump’s missive (accompanied by a series of Carson gaffes, to be fair), saw Adventism’s first presidential candidate collapse spectacularly.

SEE ALSO Ben Carson’s Next Move: Ride Trump’s Coattails?

It is no exaggeration to say that Donald Trump’s road the Republican nomination was paved with the denigration of religious minorities. If Trump’s rhetoric proves a portent of things to come, a Trump presidency will mean the prioritization of the dominant white, evangelical Christianity and the marginalization of minority religious groups. It will mean a significant diminishing of the separation of Church and State.

Hillary Clinton on Religious Minorities Trump’s Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, who tonight will accept her party’s nomination for president, has sought to provide a contrasting vision, calling for inclusion and collaboration. Speaking after the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Clinton said,

Here’s what we absolutely cannot do: We cannot demonize Muslim people. Inflammatory anti-Muslim rhetoric hurts the vast majority of Muslims who love freedom and hate terror. It’s no coincidence that hate crimes against American Muslims and mosques tripled after Paris and San Bernardino. Islamophobia goes against everything we stand for as a nation founded on freedom of religion, and it plays right into the terrorists’ hands. We’re a big-hearted, fair-minded country. We teach our children that this is one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all—not just for people who look a certain way, or love a certain way, or worship a certain way.

However the Clinton campaign has not been immune to criticism on its stance toward the Muslim community. Hillary Clinton’s top surrogate, husband and former president Bill Clinton elicited anger with his convention speech two nights ago when he reprised Hillary’s “freedom-loving Muslims” rhetoric.

“If you’re a Muslim and you love America and freedom and you hate terror, stay here and help us win and make a future together, we want you.”

The implicit assumption, for which President Clinton drew condemnation, was that being a Muslim, loving America and freedom, hating terror, and “staying here” might be mutually exclusive. Whether intended or not, Clinton implied that Islam doesn’t automatically overlap with love of country.

Those remarks notwithstanding, a Hillary Clinton presidency looks to embrace rather than demonize Muslims. Her campaign tweeted, “Let’s be clear: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people…”

Clinton has directly addressed Seventh-day Adventists, too, though not recently. In a 2003 video, she said, “The thing I admire most about the Seventh-day Adventists...is your commitment to preach, teach and heal.” She called Adventist education “a model for all people to follow.” She also highlighted Adventist work promoting religious freedom. Remarking on the role religion should play in society, she said, “When I think of what a good and decent society should look like, I imagine one in which the government does not hinder faith, but rather recognizes what people of faith do to make our communities stronger…” She acknowledged Adventist emphasis on family and on Sabbath-keeping.

(President George W. Bush also recorded a video message for Adventists. His message was recorded in 2002 and acknowledged the 150th anniversary of the denomination, saying, “The Seventh-day Adventist Church has enriched America, sustained the faith of millions, and provided comfort for many in need.”)

Both Trump and Clinton have selected running mates who reflect their stances toward religious minorities. Trump running mate Mike Pence initially rejected Trump’s call for a total ban on Muslim entry into the United States. However, today Pence stated that he now supports Trump’s (revised) position preventing Muslims from “terror states” to enter the United States.

Just before being named Hillary Clinton’s running mate, Tim Kaine moderated a conversation on immigration and on faith held at an Islamic center in Sterling, Virginia. Kaine extolled the value of religious tolerance in front of an appreciative crowd.

Adventist attorney and blogger Michael Peabody has compared Pence and Kaine on their religious liberty stances, examining their statements and actions on hot-button issues of interest to many people of faith. Peabody concludes, “Both are Catholics who are unlikely to shake up the status quo in terms of protecting or infringing upon the religious liberty rights of individuals or religious organizations.”

Look to the top of the ticket—to Clinton and Trump, respectively—for what religious communities can expect from Democrats and Republicans in this election, and expect more

Jared Wright is Managing Editor of SpectrumMagazine.org.

If you respond to this article, please:

Make sure your comments are germane to the topic; be concise in your reply; demonstrate respect for people and ideas whether you agree or disagree with them; and limit yourself to one comment per article, unless the author of the article directly engages you in further conversation. Comments that meet these criteria are welcome on the Spectrum Website. Comments that fail to meet these criteria will be removed.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at http://spectrummagazine.org/node/7577

Donald Trump also attacked Mitt Romney’s faith, stating that Romney is not a real Mormon. And he attacked Ted Cruz’s faith, stating that evangelical Christians don’t come from Cuba.

At present, 501©(3) organizations cannot endorse political candidates or devote a “substantial” measure of their resources toward influencing legislation. If Trump follows through with his promise to abolish these restrictions, then all political activities in the United States of America will be run by churches because of the comparative advantage churches have over organizations that cannot receive tax-deductible contributions. That is frightening. But what is more frightening about Trump is that he has exhibited no knowledge about the US Constitution, fundamental principles of religious liberty, or American ideals. He is a dystopian Hobbesian candidate for president. He is the antithesis of Ronald Reagan, whose campaign was positive, optimistic, and principled.

5 Likes

How totally ironic that after owning casinos, strip clubs and boasting about his sexual encounters, this revolting bigot will get the evangelical vote.

What’s going on?

@pattigrant

13 Likes

What’s going on, you ask? Revelation 14:8 and 18:2 continue their momentum of fulfillment.

You truly have touched on a key point. Whatever disagreements one might have with the evangelical crusade to unite church and state and to legislate consensual morality, a Bible-believing theological conservative can at least sympathize with many of their moral concerns.

But these seem not to matter anymore, at least to the great majority of evangelicals who have thus far voted in the present campaign. The one who has taken them captive claims never to have asked God for forgiveness, has repeatedly boasted of his extramarital escapades, and has wildly gyrated in his views on such issues as abortion and gay rights—without any clear explanation as to why.

But these issues are apparently less important to politically active evangelicals in the current election season than economic insecurity and keeping Mexicans and Muslims out of the country. Much as I differ from the evangelical political agenda as it has developed over the past several decades in America, at least one could respect the courage of their convictions. Sadly, it seems those convictions have been jettisoned in favor of one who has skillfully manipulated ethnic and economic paranoia.

As I have noted before, anyone watching these raging rallies of stoked hatred and unfettered fear need have no doubt that the classic Adventist end-time scenario found in Revelation 13 and The Great Controversy is fully viable in our present day, despite naive claims to the contrary on the part of revisionists in recent decades. The moral bankruptcy of persons who would permit themselves to be manipulated in this fashion offers increasing evidence that the spiritual fall of Babylon continues, and that persecution at the hands of such individuals is no hyped fantasy on the part of those Adventists who still hold to their classic heritage of faith.

2 Likes

I’m the “odd woman out” here - politically conservative but liberal with theology. I’m not here to trumpet for Trump. I am here to side with the conservative ideology - an ideology that respects the US constitution and the laws that emanate from it. It was that ideology that the world I’m from saw as that light in the harbour that welcomed me here as well. I was one of those immigrants and was grateful for it. They say you appreciate what you have to work for - my family worked hard to come to the US five years of waiting and preparing.

So I watched both pep-rallies, after following the whole process, which will amount to nothing in the end - because we have adopted “power packs” - “big money backers”, who are looking for payback from Washington. My conclusion is there are no more good men/women standing ready to lead - big money on both sides wins the day. The lady in the $12,000 pantsuit wants us to think she’s looking after “the little people” while raking in the dough through her “foundation”. For Trump, on the other side, it’s more obviously about money - which just might help pull back the national debt and create more jobs. Then there was Bernie, who is still picking straw from Woodstock out of his hair. He must have been too stoned during the “cold war” to see what “free everything” really means.

The DNC platform sounds like the Miss American Pageant - “world peace” all over the place. The reality is - even if we did the Berlin airlift thing over the entire MiddleEast, dropping sheet music for “Cumbia”, (which sounds a lot like Kumbaya :blush:) we would still be at war. Is it the “end of war” when one side sticks its head in the sand ?

The liberal administration has had almost eight years to fix everything, even if by fiat. Maybe if Obama had known that the Cabinet isn’t a piece of furniture in his Oval Office, he might have accomplished more to benefit all those who are constantly calling for all cops to be fried, and gotten them off the streets and found them a job. Instead, we’re looking more and more like a banana republic. With Hillary having been handed the baton, we can look forward to more of the same - loving Isis to oblivion, and looking at weekly police killings. Of course guns are the problem - if we only got rid of all guns the bad guys would go away. We’re forgetting that this is exactly how the world is to end, not by “whimper but a bang”.

5 Likes

I’ll join you…make it 2 odd women out. You said it so much better than I could have, Sirje.

Agree 100%.

2 Likes

Thanks Jared. A helpful article that nicely summarizes the issues involved. I am appreciating more and more as time goes on how commitments to political kingdoms shape the way we are able to hear and respond to what it means to live as a part of God’s Kingdom. It’s one thing to observe it in history with a critical eye and wonder at how that could happen, and another to live in the midst of it with various levels of self-awareness. However one works out all the application of all of the details, the themes of Revelation are certainly with us.

2 Likes

Culture trumps religion. Always has. Our religious ideals and expression are processed through family systems and cultural habits, and we end to pick, choose, and interpret scripture that way. Please don’t look for sense-making; this is all about sensibility. We can’t argue people into right thinking, although we can sometime embarrass them into right-doing. Too many Adventist evangelists miss this.

5 Likes

This article completely ignores that a Trump Administration would include the highest-ranking SDA ever in the U.S. government: Ben Carson. I wish Spectrum would stay out of politics.

1 Like

The problem with classifying Muslims as a “religious minority” is that it obscures the problematic nature of Islam the political system. Islam is both a religion and an aggressive, universalistic, imperialistic political-jurisprudential ideology. The true Muslim believer believes in sharia law, Allah’s law, and does not believe in “man-made law”–that is, law passed by elected legislatures and signed by elected executives. This alone makes Islam an extraordinarily poor fit with American constitutional representative democracy. Islam commands the believer to fight jihad–by terror if that works (“I have been made victorious through terror” Bukhari 4.52.220)–until sharia is supreme across the entire world. Sharia law is a totalitarian system that, among other things, makes Islam supreme, outlaws any criticism of Islam or of Muhammad, forbids Christians to evangelize Muslims, relegates non-Muslims to a second-class status known as “dhimmitude,” relegates women to the status of slaves, encourages enslaving non-Muslims, etc.

To invite inside America a cohort whose religio-political ideology is so absurdly incompatible with basic Americanism is irresponsible, to put it mildly. Trump is right in calling for a ban on Muslim immigration, and he himself does not understand how right he is.

Leftist radicals like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton (both Alinskyites) well understand that Islam is not compatible with the America that now exists (that barely still exists), but view Muslims as their temporary allies in destroying that America. This is why overwhelming America with immigrants at odds with America’s founding values is such a crucially important part of the Left’s platform. Eventually, the Left hopes to construct a new, utopian Leftist America atop the ruins of today’s capitalistic, Christian America. I wonder, however, if the Left has adequately thought through the problem of what to do with all the Muslims they’ve imported when it comes time to build their Leftist utopia. I guess Albania proves that if your Leftist utopia is horrifically oppressive enough, even a majority Muslim country can be neutralized.

2 Likes

Rohan,

The contrast in the appreciation of religious freedom between Trump & Clinton is astounding (thank you Jared). But you have been given the answer

Well there you have it. Kevin has spoken and this is clearly the time of the end. Trump will ban Muslims and, enact Sunday laws as a test of being a true american. SDA’s will be persecuted, then Christ will come again. Russia trying to nuke Israel will be part of the puzzle too.THAT is why Trump will get the evangelical vote because God needs it to happen so he can come again.

Conversely, Listen to Ben Carson and Lucifer working through the writings of Saul Alinsky, who’s book Hillary once read, will basically give our government to wall street. Wall street through Apple Pay and Pay Pal will control who can buy and sell. Tim Kane the Catholic vice president will give the Papacy the ability to pass a Sunday law and together Wall Street and Rome will control everything. SDA’s will be persecuted, then Christ will come again. Russia trying to nuke Israel will be part of the puzzle too. THAT is why Clinton will not get the evangelical vote but still win because God needs it to happen so he can come again.


As an alternative that is serious, I think the answer your question is answered by the fact that the concept of Evangelicalism began on the faulty premise of certainty about religious belief and that those beliefs had to be defended at all cost. In the late 70’s evangelical leaders saw that it was politically expedient to hard wire their certainty about abortion, marriage, and other Biblical “Truths” to the political process and at that point evangelicalism as a relevant spiritual descriptor died. The term evangelicals became a shorthand descriptor to describe conservative republicans or libertarians who were certain about the biblical truth they claimed to own (For SDA evangelicals 28 fundamental beliefs to be defended as truth).

It is also important to see that the evangelical movement is concurrently the strongest in industrial communities that had their guts ripped out by free trade agreements that promoted a race to the bottom for the cheapest labor. Externally in Asia, South America, and a few other developing nations AND of the jobs that remained in the US, with decimated union power, allowed what manufacturing that remained to fill the gap with low wage & often immigrant workers. So Evangelicals. at the risk of stereotyping are displaced and middle aged families in decaying small cities and rural towns who see their hope eroded. Making America Great again, taps that psyche. Hence Evangelicals flocking to Trump (including power hungry SDA extremists like Carson & Batchelor).

They can endorse and vote for Trump because Evangelicals have to hold a large amount to cognitive dissonance in order to make their world of “religious truth” stay bullet proof. For example James Dobson in endorsing Trump said "Trump recently accepted a relationship with Jesus Christ as his Savior, making him a “baby Christian,” (funny thing is Trump has never said that). BUT that is how cognitive dissonance works. Because Dobson Thinks Trump said that he can ignore Trump’s casinos, strip clubs boasting about his sexual encounters, and the fact he is a revolting bigot.

That said, the good news (hate to disappoint those waiting in their ascension robes) is that this may be the time that True Christians stand up to the evangelicals and say “the emperor has no clothes.” As one theologian suggests this election is The Religious Right’s Last Gasp. Perhaps that will be the sliver lining of this election season: to think about our morality and to vote accordingly. Indeed, that is the only way we can prevent the further destabilization of our civil society.

6 Likes

Thank you, Jared! A very balanced article, pointing out the differences between the candidates on the issue of religious liberty. And yet Jared Wright gets criticized for even mentioning politics! Surely, U.S. Seventh-day Adventist voters don’t want to go to the polls uninformed about the impact each candidate would have on religious liberty! Surely they don’t want to be ignorant of the candidates’ positions and previous actions! I’m assuming SDA voters are intelligent and want to vote based on current knowledge, certainly not “because that’s the way I’ve always voted”. I appreciate Spectrum’s reporting on all issues relating to the SDA church. I wonder if some folks don’t like this Spectrum article because it creates cognitive dissonance for them–which is exactly why I started reading Spectrum many years ago–to be intellectually challenged so I could really know what and why I believed–and be ready to embrace new truths.

9 Likes

Wow! Dangerous prediction. Be careful what you put in writing on the internet.

To gfunkalicious:
Ben Carson’s rise in the Trump administration is not a given. No one thought Trump would choose Pence for a VP. There are other surprises in store on both sides.

We have had an SDA influencing things for many years - Rear Admiral Barry C. Black - Chaplain to the U.S. Senate for 13 years. He reports that his daily Bible classes “on the Hill” are standing room only, and sometimes not even room to stand. The crowds to hear God’s word and get divine guidance from the Lord would surprise many. His prayers a few years ago made the cover of every major newspaper in the country and the cover of Time magazine. We have long had a positive influence. Ben Carson is a MEMBER of an SDA church, but does not represent the faith. Barry Black is an ordained minister of the Gospel, ergo a representative of the S.D.A. Church.

Just wanted to set the record straight. I like this article, Spectrum. Thank you.

1 Like

Chelsea Clinton rightfully accused Donald Trump of CHILD ABUSE!
This was because, imbedded in the Republican platform is a position promoting Conversion Therapy…
This Is a pseudo-science allowing parents/family to coerce their gay/lesbian offspring into “change therapy” to change their sexual orientation. This has resulted in extreme psychological damage and even teen suicide.
The most extreme form was practiced by the Mormons who used electric shocks to the genitalia of their gay offspring to deter same sex interests.

Conversion therapy is condemned as ineffective and pernicious by the AMERICAN PSYCIATRIC/MEDICAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL/FAMILY MARRIAGE COUNSELORS ASSOCIATIONS.

It is currently banned in five states and more are pending. That this unsubstantiated, medieval, cruel and damaging therapy would be included in a party profile is pitiful.

I support Trump’s trade policies and his legitimate call for closed borders. I cannot support his lack of fairness for LGBT rights, his pandering to the gun lobby and the extreme positions on abortion that some Republicams take.

If my daughter/granddaughter/niece were pregnant from a rapist, or carrying a ZIKA baby, I would want the availability of a LEGAL termination of pregnancy. If I had gay/lesbian offspring I would enfold them with love and not subject them to abusive and ineffective therapies.

PROFESSOR KENT:
You are entirely correct, the words CONVERSION THERAPY do not appear, as such, in the platform. They muted/euphemized it to read: “Parents should be able to make medical decisions for their children without interference” a reference to those states where conversion therapy is prohibited by law.

5 Likes

In the 50’s and 60’s when I was growing up, almost all Adventists were Republicans. What I see now is a church with a lot of people who can’t come to grips with the fact that the Republican Party has changed. They completely embraced the uniting of church and state. Every Republican appointed Supreme Court Justice has made statements about destroying the wall of separation between church and state, while every Democratic appointee has been totally supportive of the wall of separation. Fact check this so you can see I am 100% correct.

9 Likes

It’s disconcerting to see so much emotion in these comments. Spectrum has made an effort to address the candidates ideas on religious minorities. But in doing so they have presented a totally biased article and one that really does not talk about religious liberty. In doing so, they have taken sides, an unwise decision for a site that is for all members. No, I am not a Trump supporter, nor a Clinton supporter. The choices make it impossible for me to conscientiously pick one over the other. This is based on character where they both fail) and not on politics. Too many of the comments here are based on politics and emotion. In truth I believe there are good and bad ideas on both sides. But none will compromise and the country will suffer. Will the church follow in the same divisive way as the world?

For a people who believe in the Kingdom, it seems unwise to choose a political party. I still believe in an adversary, and he/it is neither Republican or Democrat but will use both to his ends and manipulate our emotions. I don’t think it will matter who wins, since both are clever manipulators. I almost think the bluntness of Trump could be more real and rejects the PC of trying to please everybody. I remember how we used to condemn Communism because of its goal of world domination. (It was a religion too.) Now we are afraid to reasonably discuss the threat of Islamic radicals and their stated goal of terrorizing and domination. Now it looks like a subtle drift towards the former and no one is taking it seriously. Both will destroy religious liberty.

1 Like

Let me offer another opinion to balance @kevindpaulson take on “Adventists who still hold to their classic heritage of faith.”

Could it be that this alarmist attitude of adventism’s “classic heritage of faith” is evidence of something else that has nothing to do with prophecy? Because although the prophecy may be fulfilled or close to being fulfilled, the Lord is still to return. If one were to plot longitudinally the “sins” of a person, a pattern will emerge. The chances of anyone who is still to develop abstract thinking cannot be accused of lying because in order to lie full cognitive functions should have been fully developed which normally begins in early adulthood. Similarly, the chances of anyone who has entered the twilight years and has began to manifest cognitive decline cannot be accused of lying since in order to lie the person should still posses full cognitive functions. The same can be said of sexual behaviors. The chances of anyone below prepuberty being accused of inappropriate sexual behaviors would be negligible similarly to anyone entering twilight years getting old whose sexual prowess has began to decline because of falling levels of sex hormones would be guilty of inappropriate behaviors. Similarly, someone who has remained single would be more vulnerable to sexual temptations than someone who is stable and happily married. Someone who has the experience of raising children would have a wider and deeper understanding of what love is than someone who has not. Etc., etc.

One has to be keen with issues of developmental factors to understand this pattern. It would appear than a number of “sins” cluster around developmental milestones secondary to emergence of maturity and /or loss of cognitive skills. The emergence of maturity and the time necessary to develop skills to manage these emerging behaviors and/or the loss of cognitive functions present as vulnerable times that could be misinterpreted as sins by the clergy.

The same can be said of social issues. Perhaps the reason why the prophecies are always fulfilled but the Lord has still to return is instead evidence of our lack of understanding about the dialectic process of social behaviors starting with a thesis, then the emergency of its antithesis and finally the reconciliation of both ending in a synthesis, an example being the current struggle from the rise of fundamentalism as a reaction to modernism. As there was once a “God of the gaps,” could there be also “prophecies of the gaps?”

3 Likes

And just what does Ben Carson know about running a nation / government and about international affairs? You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to know that a brain surgeon, brilliant as he may be, is not qualified in the area of governance. He has absolutely nothing in his resume to indicate any experience or skill in government or politics!

How foolish it would be to promote his having a high place in the U.S. Government just so “one of our people” will be there!

4 Likes

i honesty believe that a trump presidency would be disaster for america and, ultimately, the world…trump isn’t going to be able to say, “you’re fired”, to the numerous congressmen and senators who disagree with him…and attaching some kind of trivializing descriptor to each member of the house and senate who annoys him - little marco, lyin’ ted, crooked hillary - is going to make watching the evening news each night exhausting and totally regrettable…not only will the dems make mince meat out of trump within his first six months of office, but republicans will also gang up on him…race riots in every major city, featuring crescendoing gun violence, will be regular occurrences…ultimately businesses will all relocate due to basic security considerations, and with them, jobs…no-one will have money to pay their bills, or their taxes, which means america’s credit rating will plummet…none of america’s allies will cooperate…all of america’s enemies will see an opportunity to take advantage…within a single year, america will become a thoroughly stalemated entity that has fallen, and can’t get up…definitely, definitely, whoever wins the democratic nomination in 2020 will win by a landslide if the pope hasn’t stepped in to rescue the world before then…

on the other hand, a hillary presidency won’t achieve even ten percent of what she hopes to achieve - free post-secondary education will definitely never happen, and neither will any improvements in race relations or gun control - but at least the world will be able to continue as is for four more years…in terms of adventist eschatology, the world will have a longer period of human probation before the time of trouble hits…

3 Likes

Sharia law simply refers to religious regulations governing the lives of Muslims. It’s comparable to the 10 Commandments that govern the lives of Christians. In both cases, they are expressions of God’s will for our behavior and worship.

The problem is not Sharia law, per se; it’s the interpretation of it by humans. And you are portraying a very narrow interpretation, David.

Very legitimate concern, Phil.

I don’t see this anywhere in the platform.