• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pastor speaks perfectly to the indecency of Donald Trump

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,483
Reaction score
8,227
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
This describes my feelings about Donald Trump, and this is from a very reserved and decent pastor in San Antonio, Max Lucado.

It's important to note that this pastor has never publicly endorsed, or spoken against, a political candidate in his career.

As the father of three daughters, I reserved the right to interview their dates. Seemed only fair to me. After all, my wife and I’d spent 16 or 17 years feeding them, dressing them, funding braces, and driving them to volleyball tournaments and piano recitals. A five-minute face-to-face with the guy was a fair expectation. I was entrusting the love of my life to him. For the next few hours, she would be dependent upon his ability to drive a car, avoid the bad crowds, and stay sober. I wanted to know if he could do it. I wanted to know if he was decent.

This was my word: “decent.” Did he behave in a decent manner? Would he treat my daughter with kindness and respect? Could he be trusted to bring her home on time? In his language, actions, and decisions, would he be a decent guy?

Decency mattered to me as a dad.

Decency matters to you. We take note of the person who pays their debts. We appreciate the physician who takes time to listen. When the husband honors his wedding vows, when the teacher makes time for the struggling student, when the employee refuses to gossip about her co-worker, when the losing team congratulates the winning team, we can characterize their behavior with the word decent.

We appreciate decency. We applaud decency. We teach decency. We seek to develop decency. Decency matters, right?
Then why isn’t decency doing better in the presidential race?

The leading candidate to be the next leader of the free world would not pass my decency interview. I’d send him away. I’d tell my daughter to stay home. I wouldn’t entrust her to his care.

I don’t know Mr. Trump. But I’ve been chagrined at his antics. He ridiculed a war hero. He made mockery of a reporter’s menstrual cycle. He made fun of a disabled reporter. He referred to the former first lady, Barbara Bush as “mommy,” and belittled Jeb Bush for bringing her on the campaign trail. He routinely calls people “stupid,” “loser,” and “dummy.” These were not off-line, backstage, overheard, not-to-be-repeated comments. They were publicly and intentionally tweeted, recorded, and presented.

Such insensitivities wouldn’t even be acceptable even for a middle school student body election. But for the Oval Office? And to do so while brandishing a Bible and boasting of his Christian faith? I’m bewildered, both by his behavior and the public’s support of it.

The stock explanation for his success is this: he has tapped into the anger of the American people. As one man said, “We are voting with our middle finger.” Sounds more like a comment for a gang-fight than a presidential election. Anger-fueled reactions have caused trouble ever since Cain was angry at Abel.

We can only hope, and pray, for a return to decency. Perhaps Mr. Trump will better manage his antics. (Worthy of a prayer, for sure.) Or, perhaps the American public will remember the key role of the president is to be the face of America. When he/she speaks, he/she speaks for us. Whether we agree or disagree with the policies of the president, do we not hope that they behave in a way that is consistent with the status of the office?

As far as I remember, I never turned away one of my daughter’s dates. They weren’t perfect, but they were decent fellows. That was all I could ask.

It seems that we should ask the same.

https://maxlucado.com/decency-for-president/

Amen.
 
For those unfamiliar with Max Lucado (pronounced "Loo-Kay-Doh"), I think he is probably best known for his children's books and their beautiful illustrations.

His argument is "Decency for President." ;)
 
This describes my feelings about Donald Trump, and this is from a very reserved and decent pastor in San Antonio, Max Lucado.

It's important to note that this pastor has never publicly endorsed, or spoken against, a political candidate in his career.



Amen.

Thank you for posting this. It's as if he is reading my mind. Well done.
 
Not bad, not bad at all. It speaks well to the condition of our political spectrum these days, in a way that precedes Trump's campaign. Taping into anger as a means to ensure a vote is nothing new, even though it may be higher this time around and in this way among those who support Trump.

In some ways I think it was inevitable that in our process of two party division oriented politics we ended up at this point where appealing to a demographic's anger moves a campaign that political insiders did not see coming. My way of saying Establishment Republicans did not see Trump's campaign success coming.

Our issue is do we really have a candidate out there left, or right, or independent that is campaigning on decency?
 
Not bad, not bad at all. It speaks well to the condition of our political spectrum these days, in a way that precedes Trump's campaign. Taping into anger as a means to ensure a vote is nothing new, even though it may be higher this time around and in this way among those who support Trump.

In some ways I think it was inevitable that in our process of two party division oriented politics we ended up at this point where appealing to a demographic's anger moves a campaign that political insiders did not see coming. My way of saying Establishment Republicans did not see Trump's campaign success coming.

Our issue is do we really have a candidate out there left, or right, or independent that is campaigning on decency?

That is what is so concerning to me.

What does it say about our election process if it produces Hillary and Trump as our choices? The two most unlikeable people running end up in final two? Something is amiss.
 
Yep. Many people, especially his supporters say they are backing him because he 'tells it like it is'. That he's not 'PC'.

Like most things though there needs to be a balance. Trump has gone way too far the other way. As much as I like honesty and hate people who are too PC, I don't want a POTUS who acts like an immature, drunken Frat boy from Animal House with a potty mouth.
 
In 1992, there was a lot of information out that clearly showed Bill Clinton had the morals and values of a gutter rat. By the election of 1996, we had ample evidence that that was the case. And yet...in 1996, the people of the United States elected Bill Clinton to a 2nd term. Hell...that's not even on him...that's on the people. The point....

Decency is relative to voters. You can claim it all you want but you know I'm right. Who are you going to pull the lever for? Which liar are you going to elect? The country will likely be given by the 2 major parties candidates that are known and proven liars. And the country will spend the next 7 months explaining why THEIR scumbag is better than the other scumbag.

Decency wont come into play at all. That's NOT on the candidates...its on the voters.
 
That is what is so concerning to me.

What does it say about our election process if it produces Hillary and Trump as our choices? The two most unlikeable people running end up in final two? Something is amiss.

Think about it this way, with this question... what really stirs political movement?

When looking over the history of that political pendulum and social pendulum in this nation it tends to start with anger about something (or somethings.)

Politics then capitalizes on that in some way. Similar story when thinking about Establishment vs. alienated voters. Similar story when thinking about people who get angry and/or scared when they think their government is lying to them. Similar story when it ends up confirmed that their government looks at them with less regard in terms of Constitutional rights.

Since we often talk about modern politics being about showing why to not vote for the other party for whatever reason, it stands to reason that eventually that political pendulum would get so violent that we end up with people like Hillary and Trump looking like they will face each other in a general election to be our 45th President. We all still convinced Obama was really about "change you can believe in?" Anyone really think we are more unified as a nation?

Trump especially, who is riding that anti-establishment, "Obama, liberals, minorities, Muslims, and evil socialism" took the nation away from us is working that model. Legitimate or not, you have a sizable portion of the nation who leans right and thinks the nation is on the wrong path for a host of reasons. Legitimate or not, you have another sizable portion of the nation that views Republican Establishment as the basis for making the party a party of obstruction and exclusion. Division oriented politics has never been about getting to some better state, it is about taking a political group and making them less significant (perhaps so far as making them second class citizens.) On a social and political level we are as divided as a nation as we have ever been, and we have various movements all along the way tapping into that division and anger.

Speak of, we have "political commentary" business models entirely designed on idea of taking a demographic in this nation and making them more scared and/or more angry at all opposition.

Trump identified a way to tap that market to his own anti-establishment success. Decency be damned, it has not existed in politics in a very long time no matter how much worse it is this time around. The course we are on has one conclusion, probably more violence and lack of social cohesion. Much to the delight of left and right politics who benefits most from us being less decent with one another.
 
This describes my feelings about Donald Trump, and this is from a very reserved and decent pastor in San Antonio, Max Lucado.

It's important to note that this pastor has never publicly endorsed, or spoken against, a political candidate in his career.



Amen.

More flinging **** at a wall to see what sticks.

He would rather have a weak-willed coward that says "please and thank you" as we get screwed over in trade deals. This pastor/father can kindly **** off. I'm tired of politics as usual where politicians don't talk about the issues that matter.

edit: and btw, George w. bush was not a "decent man" by my standards.
He was a drunkard and a coke-head. And even though he reformed he never stopped talking with food in his mouth. Richard Nixon was not a decent man and neither was Bill Clinton. So to hell with all this talk about decency.
 
Last edited:
In 1992, there was a lot of information out that clearly showed Bill Clinton had the morals and values of a gutter rat. By the election of 1996, we had ample evidence that that was the case. And yet...in 1996, the people of the United States elected Bill Clinton to a 2nd term. Hell...that's not even on him...that's on the people. The point....

Decency is relative to voters. You can claim it all you want but you know I'm right. Who are you going to pull the lever for? Which liar are you going to elect? The country will likely be given by the 2 major parties candidates that are known and proven liars. And the country will spend the next 7 months explaining why THEIR scumbag is better than the other scumbag.

Decency wont come into play at all. That's NOT on the candidates...its on the voters.

This is true. It's on the voters.

Here's the inventory:

Hillary: Under serious FBI investigation and facing indictment unless Lynch can wriggle her out of it. Facing additional indictments for the sham of the Clinton Foundation. Enabled and ignored her pathological womanizing, and perhaps rapist, husband for four decades. An awful tenure as Secretary of State. Married to a man she probably hasn't slept with in 20+ years.

Trump: Under continuous IRS audit. Known business dealings that have mob ties. Four bankruptcies, including casinos (how do you bankrupt a casino?). Horrific display of behavior toward women, veterans, the disabled, and various religious groups. Three marriages and countless affairs, with who knows how many illegitimate children. Married to a gold-digging woman close to his kids' ages.

And both of them lie like it's absolutely nothing. No conscience about it whatsoever.

Those are your front runners. We're choosing between Commodus and Caligula.
 
More flinging **** at a wall to see what sticks.

He would rather have a weak-willed coward that says "please and thank you" as we get screwed over in trade deals. This pastor/father can kindly **** off. I'm tired of politics as usual where politicians don't talk about the issues that matter.

edit: and btw, George w. bush was not a "decent man" by my standards.
He was a drunkard and a coke-head. And even though he reformed he never stopped talking with food in his mouth. Richard Nixon was not a decent man and neither was Bill Clinton. So to hell with all this talk about decency.

The famous words of decent Germans everywhere, circa the early 1930s.
 
Not bad, not bad at all. It speaks well to the condition of our political spectrum these days, in a way that precedes Trump's campaign. Taping into anger as a means to ensure a vote is nothing new, even though it may be higher this time around and in this way among those who support Trump.

In some ways I think it was inevitable that in our process of two party division oriented politics we ended up at this point where appealing to a demographic's anger moves a campaign that political insiders did not see coming. My way of saying Establishment Republicans did not see Trump's campaign success coming.

Our issue is do we really have a candidate out there left, or right, or independent that is campaigning on decency?

Greetings, OrphanSlug. :2wave:

I may be in the minority on this, but Kasich comes closest to campaigning with decency, IMO. He did not participate in the attempted massacre like some of the other candidates did to their competitors on stage, which seemed to be encouraged by some of the moderators - Wolf Blitzer seemed to be disgusted by it, BTW and good for him! :thumbs: I really don't care how they personally feel about each other, I wanted to hear their thoughts on America's future, and Kasich spent his allotted time in trying to do that. I know politics is a dirty game, but we can't change that. Some say Kasich is "establishment," then they proceed to criticize him for being too "non-establishment" in the way he would handle things to benefit all the people of this country, immigration being an example! WTH? Does anyone really think we are going to round up thousands of people and deport them? Weird...
 
Immediately send the IRS to Oak Hills Church, and issue a tax summons.

Tax the hell out of these churches that get politically involved, and then hide behind 501c
 
RELATED

Trump advises to ‘look up’ Cruz’s wife: ‘There are things about Heidi I don’t want to talk about’
………….Trump advises to ‘look up’ Cruz’s wife: ‘There are things about Heidi I don’t want to talk about’…….


“…………. During an interview with ABC News, Trump insisted that his threat to “spill the beans” on Cruz’s wife, Heidi, only came after the Texas senator “started it” by attacking his wife, Melania.

“The campaign has nothing to do with it,” Trump said of the National Enquirer story. “I have no control over the National Enquirer. I didn’t even know about the story, I just got it last night.”

“The National Enquirer did a story, it wasn’t my story,” he added. “It was about Ted Cruz. I have no idea whether it was right or not. They actually have a very good record of being right.”……….


…………..“There are things about Heidi that I don’t want to talk about,” Trump opined. “I’m not going to talk about them. I mean, you know, you could look, but I wouldn’t talk about them.”

“I’m just responding to what he does, I just respond, I counter-punch,” he argued. “But always the press likes to make me the bad guy. He’s the one that started it.”
Donald Trump threatens to 'spill the beans' on Ted Cruz's wife Heidi - CNNPolitics.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah8Cs9uSBvU&feature=player_embedded

Everyone who thinks Donald Trump is a dirty bag…………and someone you believe is a role model for your kids……….NOT…………….raise your hand………..
 
Churches and their flock enjoy the tax free benefits by law, and of the separation of church and state, but continue to preach politics.

I say we start taxing churches.
 
Christians should support the strongest leader running, not the most polite. This isn't a race for a teacher board. We need a leader who can fight aggressively in the national interest. George Washington wasn't polite and was far from a good Christian, but his tenure laid the foundation for the freedoms Christians enjoy. The point is that it's not always the most 'upright' Christian who is the best leader for Christians.

Men like Charles Martel, Sobieski and Charlemagne defended Christianity in its darkest hour and were far from polite. We don't need politeness in a leader, and we shouldn't judge others' faith as a matter of principle.
 
Back
Top Bottom