I was privy, via a third party, to the believes of what I would say were a representative of Conservative Christian. Several of his opinions, based upon his apparent believes, I thought I would try to address.
Fortunately, for both of us, he and I did not have this conversation directly for I do not suffer fools very well. Given his contentions and lack of follow-through on this thoughts and opinions, a battle of wits would have meant that I would have been fighting an unarmed man.
There is some value in looking at what he had to say, however. If for no other reason than he does sadly represent a core group of like-minded people who seem to be the supporters of Little Boots, ultra-conservatives, and their ilk. While some of his specifics are unique, it seems that his overall prospective seems to be thematic of many other Conservative Christians. Thus my evaluation of some of the high points of his assertions:
GOD TOLD HIM TO BECOME A REPUBLICAN
He asserted that as a young man he was raised by parents who supported the Democratic Party. That he prayed over this and that God told him to become a Republican. Now I have a real hard time with this on so many levels. Here are a few thoughts to ponder:
- God does not support any party: Republican, Democrat, Green, Independent, etc. (And, we are only talking about American political parties). In fact I suspect this is an area that God would not involve Himself with as good (and bad) people exist in all parties and He would not be all-inclusive or all-exclusive. Logic points to that being foolish, but then what has logic to do with this.
- Why is it that God only talk to people who have a rather simple or naïve views of the world? No one who would review and evaluate the message from God gets any such message. No one who would apply logic and reason to the any such message receives one. Curious!
- I have heard several people who have communicated with God and received God’s advice. The strange thing is that not one (not one) has ever received advice that disagreed with their preconceived opinion or plan. Odd!
- According to what I have read in the Bible, one has to be cautious when communicating with God. Why? Because the Devil has been known to disguise himself as God in order to make decent people do bad. I will not dispute this man talking to God but given the above, I wonder if it was God that answered.
ON DONALD TRUMP
Now of Donald Trump, this man made several assertions that seemed to be piecemeal in an effort to justify his ongoing support of Little Boots.
- Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Now this has been a political football, but this person thinks that this is a great accomplishment because Christians must support the Jewish State to bring favor on ourselves. He read but did not understand. To wit:
- The United States has always supported the Jewish State, being the first country to recognize the new State of Israel in 1948.
- Recognition of Jerusalem has been a troubling issue because of the fact that Jerusalem is not officially completely part of Israel. The religious sensitivity just compounds that. That is why all Embassies are in Tel Aviv.
- Recognition of Jerusalem has nothing to do with supporting the State of Israel and everything to do with supporting the anti-Muslim actions that Little Boots was kowtowing to. Thus not a positive, but a negative.
- This person does not think all the stuff they are saying about Donald Trump are true.
- He seems to dismiss every claim as just political, media, bias.
- When my wife stated that she had actually heard him say some of the more egregious things, he decided not to discuss politics anymore.
VIETNAM WAR
How this one came up, I do not know but here goes.
The person asserted that he believed, because of something he read, the following: in the 1960’s, during the Johnson Administration, the United States was within 1 week of winning the Vietnam War but the Administration did something (this part is not clear) to continue the war. Ultimately, the efforts caused us to lose the war.
I do not know whether it is the writer’s fault, this person’s interpretation of the book he wrote, or both but despite some kernels of “facts” in the above, it is primarily horseshit.
- The ground troops were not able to fully fight the war in Vietnam. Politics, including extra-political entities like the CIA, interfered with the execution of the war.
- In the period referred to above seems to coincide with the Tet Offensive of 1968. At the time, it was considered a major victory for the North Vietnamese/Viet Cong. In truth, after being initially caught unaware, South Vietnamese and their allies, primarily the United States, kicked butt. The problem was that the press and the public believe was that it was over.
- By 1968, most people of both political viewpoints wanted to end the war. We had started to realize that it was perpetuation of a corrupt system to keep another bad system from taking over.
- No matter what your view of the war in Vietnam, there is no damned way that the war could have been ended in a week. Give me a break. Even if North Vietnam had be carpet bombed with nuclear bombs, there were just too damned many Viet Cong on the ground that would have fought to the last man. It would have been just a little bit longer than a week.
CONCLUSION
This person believes what he believes and does not let reason, logic, or facts get in the way of his beliefs. He never will. Discussions with him are pointless because he will never listen to anyone’s opinion unless it fits his pre-established biases and beliefs. He looks at the world with confirmation bias and will never change.
I say this not because I disagree with him. I say this because in order to hold his opinions, he has to actively ignore facts that are all around him.
Once again, my favorite refrain:
Do not let the facts get in the way of your truth.
