The Morality of Voting for Trump

The Morality of Voting for Trump

#NeverTrumpers fails to persuade as Dems focus on helping their candidate win

by Laura Ingraham | Updated 12 Aug 2016 at 1:57 PM

Knowing what we know about Hillary Clinton and her plans for America, and the importance of the Supreme Court, we conservatives have a moral obligation to both oppose her and support Donald Trump.

That’s the choice the NeverTrumpers have made — a decision to do nothing.

This is the sentiment I expressed on Sean Hannity’s television show Thursday that has sent some #NeverTrump conservatives into a tizzy. Ben Shapiro is the latest in a long line of mostly Acela-corridor Republicans who spend much of their days “see-I-told-you-so’ing” about Trump.

Shapiro responded on behalf of Team #NeverTrump Friday in a piece titled “Hannity, Ingraham Say It’s Immoral Not to Vote Trump. Here Are 3 Reasons They’re Wrong,” published in the Daily Wire.

Here are his three arguments, none of which is persuasive:

1. Electing Trump as president will do more damage to the country in the long run because a Trump presidency would be the end of conservatism.
Really? What conservatism is that? The conservatism that ran up huge deficits in the 2000s? The conservatism that encouraged illegal immigration? The conservatism that pushed trade policies that led to the rise of China? The conservatism that rolled over for Obama on issue after issue? The conservatism that does whatever The Wall Street Journal editorial page wants? The conservatism of Jeb Bush, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain? That conservatism won’t be around anymore? Good.

Those are reasons to support Trump, not reasons to fear him. Over the last 25 years, the conservative movement has failed to win a single election against Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. They failed to stop social liberalism. They failed to stop the rise of China. They failed to shrink the federal government, balance the federal budget, return power to the states, or generally do any of the things that GOP voters wanted them to do.

Now, peeved and spiteful that the base no longer trusts them to do almost anything, they are supporting Hillary Clinton — a radical liberal whose 25 years on the national stage have been an absolute disaster for the average American.

If ending this record of failure, and launching a new conservatism that actually tries to help working-class Americans, is one of the consequences of the Trump campaign, then that campaign will have been well worth it.

2. There are costs to supporting Trump if he loses.
They’re worried about conservatism being tainted by Trump? Were they there when the housing bubble collapsed in 2008, and the nation watched in horror as a Republican president struggled to explain why the U.S. economy was in free fall? Were they there when the Bush administration disbanded the Iraqi military, which made stabilizing that sectarian quicksand impossible? Were they there when Republicans were crushed in the 2006 and 2008 elections — in large part because they could make no defense of the Bush administration? Of course they were.

To this day, conservatism is tainted by its association with the Bush administration — and yet the GOP re-took the House in 2010, and re-gained the Senate in 2014. If conservatives can overcome eight years of disastrous policies that left this country crying out for Barack Obama, of all people, they can certainly overcome Donald Trump.

 3. Your vote is a moral instrument, not just an instrument of policy.
Yes, it is. Voting for Trump means that when your country had been in decline for almost two decades, and you had the chance to set the country on a different course, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you finally had the chance to end the corrupt and decadent Clinton machine, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you had the chance to write in the history books that the country had rejected the last eight years of President Obama, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you had the chance to save the First Amendment, and the Second Amendment, and to restore the proper checks and balances that are at risk from another Clinton administration, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you had the chance to stand up to pro-China billionaires who make money off of a global system that is rigged in favor of a Chinese dictatorship, and rigged against the American worker, you took it.

Voting for Trump means saying yes to a 15 percent top corporate tax rate, which will boost American wages and jobs.

Voting for Trump means that we know how critical the Supreme Court is and if we lose it, game’s over on many of the policies and principles we’ve been fighting for decades.

Is Trump perfect? Of course not. Do you know how many perfect presidents we’ve had? Zero. In the real world, if you want to be a citizen — and have the responsibilities of a citizen — you have to be a grown-up, and you have to recognize that life presents us with difficult choices.

Voting for Trump means fighting against the ennui and decline that is destroying this country.

Voting for Trump does not mean that you agree with everything he says, or that you never criticize him. It does not mean giving up your right to disagree with him — or even oppose him — when he does something you think is wrong. Does anyone think that Paul Ryan — who is supporting Trump — will simply be a rubber stamp for Trump’s policies? Does anyone think that the numerous GOP Senators who support Trump will blindly follow wherever he leads? Of course not.

The NeverTrumpers like to pretend that Trump’s supporters are weak-minded simpletons who don’t understand how politics works. But the truth is that those of us who support Trump understand all too well the reality of the choice that faces us, and are doing the best we can to save this country.

On the other hand, not voting for Trump — and hoping that he loses — also represents a moral choice:

It means being worried every time you hear a story suggesting that Hillary still faces real hurdles before Election Day and could still lose this.

It means aligning yourself, at least temporarily, with left-wing nightmares Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and all the other radicals who want Trump to lose.

It means turning a deaf ear to your fellow Americans who can’t take four more years of decline, and who are desperate for new leadership.

It means allowing another four or eight years of flat-lining wages and growth, and high taxes on American businesses.

It means hardening your heart against people those who have spent 40 years trying to stop abortion.

It means rejecting the advice of Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, and the vast majority of elected Republican officials — all of whom are supporting Trump.

It means doing nothing when The New York Times, and The Washington Post, and every other left-wing outlet mocks and ridicules the Trump supporters as racists and bigots.

It means cheering (silently or not) along with every smear and every snide comment that Hollywood and the media can use to attack Trump’s voters.

That’s the choice the NeverTrumpers have made — a decision to do nothing, to wash their hands of the election, of the Republican Party, of the country itself.

That may represent some people’s version of morality. But it’s not mine.

Will two bone-headed ideas cost the church a third election in a row?

 

Will two bone-headed ideas cost the Church a third election in a row?

By Mario Murillo

There are two ideas that are bone-headed: The idea that we are choosing the lesser of two evils in this election and the idea that we must–no matter what–submit to ruling authorities.

We must realize that there is government we are supposed obey and government we are not supposed to obey.  Then we must realize that God brings judgment on evil authority–often through flawed people.

First, let’s expose the lie that we are supposed to submit to government no matter what.

Romans 13: 1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.  “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.”

No ruling authority from God is a threat to good works.  They do not persecute God’s people or enact laws to ban the Gospel.

German believers abused these verses to justify their apathy about Hitler.  Dietrich Bonhoeffer could not open the eyes of the German church about the horrors that were coming.  In a radio address in the late 1930’s, he warned the nation that cheap grace and a false sense of submission was blinding them to what Adolf Hitler was.

That same abuse of these scriptures is used by pastors right now who refuse to speak out against the Obama agenda that—left unstopped—will destroy our nation.  Hillary Clinton has vowed that she will not only continue these policies…she will increase them.

dietrich-bonhoffer 

The Bible clearly defines the leadership we are supposed to obey:  God’s appointed rulers are not a threat to good works.  They are agents of justice who bear the sword of wrath against evil-doers.

God will work vehemently to get good rulers, but He will not force us to choose the right leader.  We have to live with our choices.

Okay, here it comes one last time: The rulers that God raises up—the ones Paul is referring to in Romans 13—are not a threat to good works.

Hitler was not God’s will for Germany.  He did evil and God raised the Allied army against him precisely as the word of God predicted.  The Allies were God’s vehicle to bring wrath.

Nations can and do pick evil leaders.  Even Israel picked an evil leader: 1 Samuel 8:6 “But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” So Samuel prayed to the Lord. 7 And the Lord said to Samuel, “Heed the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them.”

King David represented many things but there is one thing that cannot be denied: He was also sent to judge and undo the damage of King Saul.

charade

Obama was never God’s choice for America.   We have the national wreckage and his acts against the righteous to prove it.  Here is what do we do now:  Pray and discern what God is doing.

When evil leadership reigns God begins a complicated process to reestablish justice. Human history is messy and God has chosen to work within that mess.  We want story book endings but humanity is tangled in the tentacles of wickedness–that’s why it is complicated.  Jehovah works in human history like a surgeon skillfully cutting around vital organs to get at the cancer.  Jesus spoke of the wheat and tares having to grow together until the end—otherwise the wheat would also be lost.

Jehovah

Now we must see how He can use flawed people:  God is working with the human gene pool. That is why the ruler God raises up to bring justice is often flawed.   Daniel was probably shocked to discover that God choose to use Nebuchadnezzar.

Habakkuk was even more shocked when God said He would raise up Babylon:   Habakkuk 1: 5 “Look among the nations and watch—Be utterly astounded! For I will work a work in your days Which you would not believe, though it were told you. 6 For indeed I am raising up the Chaldeans, A bitter and hasty nation Which marches through the breadth of the earth, To possess dwelling places that are not theirs.”

Daniel

When I hear a Christian say “vote your conscience,” they often really mean “vote for the one who has no sin.”  If God voted that way, the human race would have been obliterated.  Then they’ll say something like “we should not pick the lesser of two evils.”  How is it possible to pick an evil free human being?

Instead of asking who is without sin we should be asking where is God working?

That is exactly what Paul did:  Acts 23:6 “But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question. 7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided. 8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both. 9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees’ part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.”

Jesus said that the Sadducees and Pharisees were both evil.  So was Paul choosing the lesser of two evils by siding with the Pharisees?  Or, was he discerning where God could work?

Instead of seeking the perfect leader we should discern who God is working with—warts and all.

The evil ruler(whom God is trying to stop)  is easy to spot: they fight against Judaism, Christianity and Biblical morality.  Selah.

 

 

2016: OUR LAST YEAR AS A FREE NATION?

IS THISWill 2016 be our last year as a free nation?  Will Obama revoke the next election and declare himself president for life?   Is God using him to punish us for our sins?  Will cities go up in flames of racial war?  Are the voices who pronounce doom speaking the word of God?

What was the first thing Jesus said when asked about the end of the world?  Matthew 24: 3, 4 says, “Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” 4 And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you.”

Terrorism and the dictatorship of Obama are looming disasters.  But the threat of you being deceived–deceived by a false prophet is an equal disaster.   A tsunami of lies and human opinion—being pawned off as words from the Lord—is crashing into the church.   I am guessing that out of the current wave of “prophetic words” almost half are utterly false—generated by greed, anger, manipulation and arrogance.

The threat posed by false prophecy is greater than you know.  If you follow a false prophet you will experience misery beyond anything you could have thought possible.

Most of the readers of our blog are referred to us from Facebook.   In the last few days, Facebook has been a toxic waste dump site for every kind of half-baked, unscriptural prediction of 2016.   Without missing a beat—you will see juxtaposed—predictions of untold blessing and favor along with total doom.  We know that they both can’t be right.

So if you are ready for an honest-to-God conversation about 2016 then start by rejecting these two popular prophetic notions:

  1. America is blessed and no harm will come to her.
  2. America must be destroyed and there is nothing we can do about it.

No one in their right mind can possibly look at a holy God and tell him  we are incapable of being destroyed.   The nation of 70 million abortions—the leading exporter of porn—the nation that has erased God from every institution (including the church) cannot be destroyed?

We live in a cloud of misery and grief of our own making.   God did not pick Obama, Americans did.  The eyes of the average American are glazed over by despair and fatigue.  Our children feel old and have little or nothing to look forward to.   All of this is in direct proportion to our rejection of Christ.

Will Obama try to stay in office after 2017?  Of course he will.  The media will continue to  esteem him as president.  The liberal establishment has already proven they will follow him through the flames of perdition.  Obama thrives on setting aside the constitution and daring congress to stop him.

“But we will throw him out!”  I hear that a lot—but, if we were going to throw him out…wouldn’t we have done it after Benghazi and a thousand other impeachable offenses?

Obama has committed more crimes than all 43 previous presidents combined.   If the congress has not been able to impeach him after all of this…what makes you think they can force him out of office?

Yes, America can be destroyed.  Yes, this could very well be our last year as a free nation.

It is often said that you don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone.  The truth is that you knew what you had; you just never thought you would lose it.   Thinking we could never lose America is fastest way to lose America. 

On the other hand…setting your hope on America’s destruction is insanity.  That Jehovah God has intervened—in American history when things look hopeless—is a centerpiece of our history.  

I was just read again about the winter in Valley Forge where George Washington saw no way to hold the Continental army together.  His men were starving and freezing to death.  Farmers nearby wouldn’t feed the men who were fighting for their freedom.  The farmers could get a better price for their crop from the British.

And yet they did hold on and defeated the greatest military in the world.  In the depths of his despair Washington wrote to his friend about why he could hold the army together…He wrote  “ I knew that heaven was in our cause.”

Heaven is in the cause of every pastor who reads this and says “my church will host a true revival.”  Heaven is in the cause of every Christian who says “I will heed the warnings and obey the voice of God for there is yet one more miracle left for America.

The answer is clear:  2016 will not be our last year of freedom if the “people who know their God”  will truly humble themselves beneath the mighty hand of God.  He stands ready to release miracles beyond our comprehension…because heaven is in our cause.

Trump and Cruz send shivers down GOP spines

Trump Ted

Trump and Cruz send shivers down GOP spines

The prospect of either man as the Republican nominee is setting off alarm bells among officials and operatives across the country.
By ALEX ISENSTADT 01/05/16 05:11 AM EST

With only weeks before GOP primary voters first cast their ballots, the level of alarm among establishment Republicans about the enduring dominance of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz is reaching new heights.

In private conversations with several former aides, Mitt Romney, who in March will keynote the National Republican Congressional Committee’s annual fundraising dinner, has expressed rising frustration about Trump’s prolonged lead in polls and has argued that the real-estate mogul could inflict lasting damage on the party’s brand.

In Washington and elsewhere, meanwhile, Republicans are on the hunt for a political entity that can be used to stop Trump. In recent weeks, Alex Castellanos, a veteran TV ad man who was a top adviser to George W. Bush and Romney, has been meeting with top GOP operatives and donors to gauge interest in launching an anti-Trump vehicle that would pummel the Manhattan businessman on the television airwaves.
Those who’ve met with Castellanos say he’s offered detailed presentations on how such an offensive would play out. Castellanos has said that an anti-Trump ad campaign, which would be designed to cast him as a flawed strongman, would cost well into the millions. It was unclear, the sources said, whether Castellanos, who did not respond to a request for comment, would ultimately go through with the effort.

One growing worry about Trump or Cruz, top party officials, donors, and operatives across the country say, is that nominating either man would imperil lawmakers in down-ballot races, especially those residing in moderate states and districts.

“At some point, we have to deal with the fact that there are at least two candidates who could utterly destroy the Republican bench for a generation if they became the nominee,” said Josh Holmes, a former chief of staff to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. “We’d be hard-pressed to elect a Republican dogcatcher north of the Mason-Dixon or west of the Mississippi.”

“Trump and Cruz are worrisome to most Republican candidates for governor, senator and Congress,” said Curt Anderson, a longtime GOP strategist and former Republican National Committee political director. “Some will say they are not worried, but they are.”

Romney has been calling around to former advisers to sound them out about the race, and to kvetch about Trump’s surprising durability. But in the immediate term, at least, he has expressed unwillingness to lend his hand to a stop-Trump effort — or to endorse a candidate more palatable to a GOP establishment paralyzed by his rise and worried that nominating him or Cruz would scupper an opportunity to control both the White House and Congress in 2017.

The concern is particularly acute in the Senate, where Republicans are fighting to preserve a relatively slim four-seat majority, defending more than half a dozen seats in hard-to-win swing states. Among them: Ohio, a presidential battleground state where Republican Sen. Rob Portman faces a perilous path to reelection.

When Trump traveled to the state in November, he met with Matt Borges, Ohio’s Republican Party chairman — who warned the front-runner that “divisive rhetoric won’t help us carry Ohio.”

“It’s time for people who have never won squat here to listen to the people who have been doing it for decades,” Borges said in an interview. “I’m just looking out for how we win in November.”

In Wisconsin, some party officials fret that a Trump or Cruz nomination could sink Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, who faces a tough race against his predecessor, Russ Feingold.
“Certainly, it would be bad for Ron Johnson if Trump is the nominee,” said Wisconsin Rep. Reid Ribble who, like Johnson, was swept into Congress in the Republican wave of 2010. “I think Trump is probably really bad down-ballot.”

Some top party strategists have spent months considering how the outcome of the primary will impact congressional races. Since last spring, the National Republican Senatorial Committee has been poring over research and polling data in hopes of better understanding how each of the Republican candidates running for president would affect GOP hopefuls running for Senate. The committee has held internal meetings to discuss the pros and cons of each presidential contender and how they would affect each key Senate race.

The House, where Republicans have a historic 30-seat majority, is more secure for the party. But there, too, the GOP has reason to worry: The party must defend nearly three dozen endangered seats — many of them in liberal-to-moderate states like California, New York and Florida.

Should Trump or Cruz win the nomination, party operatives say, some longtime officeholders in more conservative districts such as New Jersey Rep. Scott Garrett or Florida Rep. John Mica, who typically skate to general election wins, could find themselves in tougher-than-usual contests.

Cruz’s campaign pushes back on the idea that the Texas senator would imperil those running in House and Senate races. A Cruz nomination, they argue, would motivate conservatives to turn out to vote in a way that an establishment candidate couldn’t.

“Down-ballot Republicans need Ted Cruz at the top of the ticket because he is the only candidate in the race who can excite the base to show up in November,” said Rick Tyler, a Cruz spokesman. “If we chose another moderate, we will simply lose seats we would otherwise win.”

Trump’s campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Some, though, are already counseling Republican candidates to begin to think about how to distance themselves from a Trump or Cruz in the event either wins the nomination.

“Candidates will need to develop their own brand,” said Pennsylvania Rep. Charlie Dent, a Republican who has represented a swing district in Lehigh Valley since 2004. “A candidate will need to run his or her own campaign and distance themselves from the top of the ticket.”

Among the tricky questions candidates will be forced to consider: whether it’s worth endorsing either potential nominee.

Illinois Rep. Bob Dold, a Republican who represents a liberal-leaning, suburban Chicago district, said he had ruled out endorsing Trump. He declined to say whether he’d back Cruz.

While Dold said he was monitoring the primary, he argued that voters would be willing to look beyond the party’s presidential nominee when determining his fate in November.

“Illinois 10th District,” he said, “has a long history of ticket splitting.”

 

Because of Trump

Because of Trump blob

I was 10 years old playing cops and robbers with my friends. My side kept losing.  I was tired of losing.  So, when an opponent pointed his toy pistol at me and yelled “bang, bang you’re dead” I decided there and then not be dead. We won because I discovered I was wearing a bullet proof vest.

Feminists, environmentalists, the liberal media, Barack, Hillary, the thought and speech police and even RINO’s have all taken shots at Trump and yelled ”bang, bang you’re dead.”   What they wanted was a corpse—what they got was rising poll numbers.

-One famous columnist wrote an article entitled Don Voyage after Trump criticized John McCain.  

Don voyage

-Pundits were falling all over themselves to declare the Donald’s death after his tweet about Megyn Kelly.   One commentator said “Hurricane Trump blows away speech police.”

I cannot think of another time in American history where such a massive, collective bluff has been called.  By refusing to die, Trump is ending a reign of terror against free speech.  Statements that once ended careers can no longer do so. 

Because of Trump, you can call illegal aliens, well, illegal.  Because of Trump, you can say that Mexico is treating us rotten.  Because of Trump, you can declare China and Russia enemies.  Because of Trump, you can say that the Iran deal is the stupidest agreement in history.

Because of Trump you can call the entire political class “a bunch of losers.”  You can even say openly that Hillary “is a liar and a criminal.”

Because of Trump, an entire frustrated and disenfranchised group of Americans now speak out and “ain’t nothing you can do about it.”

Bullies–the usual suspects–used to control the narrative. Obama, Biden, Holder, Pelosi, Reid, Clinton, Sharpton and NBC spun that proverbial web of deceit called POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.

P.C. provided cover for unbridled stupidity.   Common sense was held at bay by threats of being called racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, hater, and a host of other labels. Trump-and-Kelly

It seems like forever that we have been ordered to look the other way as America was being ravaged, bled and left for dead.

In retrospect, doesn’t it seem insane that we were told to shut up when illegals murdered innocent Americans?

Because of Trump, Blacks are breaking ranks with Democrats. The party ordered them to side with illegals.

Monday night, a black woman stood before a city council meeting in Huntington Park, California and blasted its members after someone made a comparison between illegal immigrants and black slaves.

The woman, identified as Chanell Temple, said she had not intended to speak at the meeting, but the comparison was too much. And because the council had just appointed two illegals to city commission positions, Temple let them have it:

“Please do not tarnish the name of black slaves by comparing them to your plight. There’s no comparison. None. Black slaves did not break into this country, okay. They were brought here against their will. Also, black slaves are not immigrants. Immigrants are people with a choice, they come here by choice. Black slaves didn’t have choice.

The woman continued saying that America has “been good to illegal immigrants” and can’t recall a single one that has ever been “hung from a tree.” She added, “My people commit a crime, they go to jail. You people commit a crime, they get amnesty.”  She later said, ” I am backing Donald Trump all the way!”

Chanell

Do not construe this blog as an endorsement of Trump for president.  On the other hand, make no mistake; Donald Trump can be elected president.  He is gaining support among independents, Blacks and Latinos.  Just a couple of months ago he was down 27 points in the polls to Hillary Clinton.  Now he is within 6 points.

Now for a personal note: I can finally confess something to you. As a Christian Evangelist, I have faced every kind of accusation you can imagine from both inside and outside the Church because I spoke out against Barrack Obama. I faced threats you cannot imagine.  I was told that my ministry was over.  Even close pastor friends closed their churches to me. One pastor in Indianapolis said that the anointing had left me.

The greatest lie was when they said that young people would no longer turn to Christ in my meetings.

Because I knew that I was speaking the truth, I refused to back down or apologize.

The result is that every threat proved to be a lie…especially the one about young people, because they are coming to Christ in droves. Through it all, I knew that Christ was with me, and His power intensified within me.

When I began these blogs all you could hear in the American pulpit about Barack Obama was crickets.  Now many are bold to speak out.  Now it is almost fashionable for pastors to take open positions on many issues that were considered off-limits.

What I have just said I have never said publicly.  I have never defended myself against critics or cowards nor will I start doing it now.

Trump is by no means a role model for preachers but I identify with him.  He called their bluff and beat them.  Because of Trump I finally felt free to tell you.

During the debate, Trump looked at the other nine candidates and said, “if it weren’t for me, we wouldn’t be talking about this now.”  I gave a knowing grin to the T.V. and said, “exactly.”

Living Proof Branson ad

THE COMING PERSECUTION AND THE COMING POWER

healing blog

THE COMING PERSECUTION AND THE COMING POWER

By Mario Murillo

As I prayed, I experienced colliding emotions of dread and excitement.  The Holy Spirit made it clear that persecution against Christians is going to spike in the United States in the next few months.  He also made it clear that this would touch off a towering flow of miracles of healing.

I was led to a specific moment recorded in the Book of Acts: Acts 12:1-3, “Now about that time Herod the king stretched out his hand to harass some from the church. 2 Then he killed James the brother of John with the sword. 3 And because he saw that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to seize Peter also.”

That mood, the one that pleases people when Christians are harassed and blamed, is upon us.  I am warning you that it will start within weeks, and the mindless ferocity of it will surprise you.

Satan wants America destroyed.   It is the grand prize.  With America gone, the devil can unleash worldwide devastation.   But the global tyranny that he craves cannot happen until the American firewall is removed.

He also knows that he can only destroy America from within.  Somehow, he must pit us against each other. 

The only deterrent to civil war at this point is Christianity. Notice that I do not say the church, I say Christianity.  The church is sidelined by equal parts division and denial.  The Christianity that seeps out despite religion is the only thing protecting us.

destruction of family small

The only reason there was no rioting, looting, or arson in Charleston was Christians.  Individual believers, under the impulse of faith and forgiveness, won the day.

The devil’s weapon of choice is hate.  He must foment hate.  Today, that hate is coming from secular progressives who seek social justice. The things that were once loving, moral and trustworthy, including marriage, manhood, military service, freedom of speech, witnessing, the Bible and, yes, freedom itself, are now hateful.

Don’t let them fool you with the term “new normal.”  Their new normal is nothing but the old abnormal.

Hitler fueled a frenzy of hatred by blaming anything and everything bad on the Jews. He created a new form of right and wrong that made it your duty to hate Jews.

Today, as it was in Nazi Germany, only one side of the story is allowed in the media.  Only one narrative is legal.  That narrative redefines every element of our daily lives.  Even Tylenol has a commercial meant to brainwash you about gay marriage.

Why on earth would Tylenol feel the need to weigh in on gay marriage?  The answer is chilling: it is economics.   This is an early version of the mark of the beast.  The beast will bankrupt any business that stands against gay marriage.  You are not allowed an opinion on this or any other pet peeve of the social justice movement.

My great heartache is in the fact that God has lovingly been warning the American Church.  He has repeatedly ordered the church to stand as one against immorality, but she has flatly refused.  God reserves the right to allow persecution if it will wake up the church and spare the nation.

Look at these verses: Isaiah 8:5-8, “The Lord also spoke to me again, saying: 6 “Inasmuch as these people refused the waters of Shiloah that flow softly, and rejoice in Rezin and in Remaliah’s son; 7 Now therefore, behold, the Lord brings up over them the waters of the River, strong and mighty—The king of Assyria and all his glory; He will go up over all his channels and go over all his banks. 8 He will pass through Judah, He will overflow and pass over, He will reach up to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings will fill the breadth of Your land, O Immanuel.”  Why would God side with Israel’s enemy?  They had rejected the countless gentle tugs and warnings.GodBlessAmerica

Is there any good news in this?  There is much good news, but only for a certain group.  A core of Christians who refuse to side with the compromised church, and who are seeking Jesus, will be protected and used mightily. 

After this, Herod arrested Peter, but an angel appeared and brought him out.  This miracle ignited the church.  I am telling you what the Holy Spirit has told me.  Every vessel that seeks God right now will receive greater power and greater miracles.

Call it legend, call me crazy, but I know that this wave of persecution is here.  We can turn it all around.  We can regain lost ground.  Those who disobey God cannot escape this misery and those who obey God will not be denied special grace and increased supernatural power.

Opposing Gay Marriage is not Bigotry

 OPPOSING

Traditional teachings of marriage rooted not in animus, but in pursuit of happiness

BY TIMOTHY P. CARNEY | APRIL 23, 2015 | 5:29 PM

 Traditional marriage in the U.S. makes its last stand this week at oral arguments before the Supreme Court. If same-sex marriage wins out, the next question is what to do with the vanquished? Should we tolerate opposition to gay marriage?

What should be done, legally and socially, with photographers who don’t want to take part in a gay wedding, or churches that don’t want to consecrate a same-sex union? How should we all treat the old-fashioned view that marriage is between a man and a woman?

Many institutions, commentators and politicians already have their answer: Opposition to gay marriage deserves no more respect than racism. The government ought to force a photographer, a musician or a caterer to participate in a gay wedding, they argue, just as we forced racist diner owners to allow black customers to sit at their lunch counters.

But the premise here — that opposition to gay marriage is necessarily grounded in bigotry — is wrong.

But refusing to participate in a marriage ceremony is a different sort of thing. It’s not a statement about the people involved. It’s a decision about the ceremony itself — that one doesn’t want to endorse a definition of marriage that one doesn’t share.

And there are many valid reasons to believe in marriage as being between a man and a woman. There are many arguments to make here, but here’s one, from my own Catholic perspective:

There isn’t really a Catholic teaching on gay marriage — there is a rich Catholic teaching on marriage, which is a sacrament. Marriage is inextricably tied with sex and family formation. To deliberately separate these three things is a moral error, the Church teaches.

Sexual morality, as taught by traditional religions, isn’t terribly popular in the U.S. these days, but it’s a mistake to dismiss these views as archaic prescriptions followed blindly by the faithful. Such teachings are often far more complex than simple “shalls” and “shall nots” accepted as divine revelation.

Consider Aristotle’s view of virtue and happiness (eudaimonia, in Greek). Happiness — a deep, lasting happiness — is a life lived according to virtue, Aristotle writes. Morality can be seen as the roadmap to human happiness.

Over thousands of years, Christianity, building on the traditions of the Jews and ancient civilizations such as the Greeks, has tried to understand human nature ± — through experience, reason, and revelation. From that picture of the human soul, the Church has tried to craft a roadmap.

removing family

We need a roadmap because life is full of obstacles and pitfalls that we typically can’t see beforehand on our own, but which are well-known in prior human experience. Walking directly towards what we think we want can often be perilous to our happiness. Sacrifice, patience, and struggle are often required.

It’s not an old-fashioned or purely religious notion that sacrifice is necessary for happiness. Secular morality embraces that notion as well: You shouldn’t always eat whatever you want; you need to exercise; don’t get too drunk.

The road to happiness also involves giving up sex at times, even when following secular moral road maps. Perfectly irreligious, live-and-let-live moral systems often guard against (for example) prostitution, open marriages, sex in the early teen years, and extreme promiscuity. These activities may appeal to some people in the short run, but one need not believe any particular religion to understand how they can cause anguish and pain in the long run.

The roadmaps provided by conservative religious moral systems prescribe a narrower path and often call for more sacrifice. In many cases, for many people, the prescribed path is celibacy. If you want to be a Catholic priest, nun, or monk, you must also agree to a life of celibacy.

If you’re unmarried, most Christian teaching tells you to be celibate. Many men and women are unmarried, despite their best efforts, and asking them to forego sex is asking a lot. But the Church does so out of an understanding of human nature, and the true path to happiness.

Married Catholic couples are often called to abstain from sex if they want to space out the births of their children. And the limitations on divorce often mean a sexless life for married people whose marriages fell apart, or whose spouses suffered a debilitating injury, or were imprisoned.

Everyone is called to some level of sacrifice — some more, some less. Nobody says it’s fair. But it’s prudent, the Church teaches.

For people who are exclusively attracted to people of the same sex, the Catholic Church also prescribes celibacy.

I got this roadmap image from a conversation over coffee with Eve Tushnet, the author of Gay and Catholic. Her heartfelt book makes it clear that carrying the cross of gay celibacy is very different from, and often harder than, the chastity to which other Catholics are called. But she has concluded this is her cross, and her path.

These rules, again, aren’t terribly popular these days. I expect this column to persuade approximately zero people that they should give up premarital sex, birth control, or their same-sex relationship.

But however unappealing or unconvincing you find this approach to sexuality and marriage, how can you say this view is grounded in bigotry?

You don’t need to agree for an instant with Catholic, or Protestant, or Muslim, or Jewish teachings on sex, family, or marriage. But if you can grant that some of these teachings are grounded, not in animus, but in an understanding of love, then at least you can agree to this: We shouldn’t use the force of law to banish these views from our society.

Timothy P. Carney, The Washington Examiner’s senior political columnist, can be contacted attcarney@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Sunday and Wednesday on washingtonexaminer.com.