Connect with us

Culture

Evangelical Pastor Prefers Murdered Infants Over Trump

Published

on

In a Thursday op-ed published by Washington Post, a Southern Baptist pastor argued that potentially overturning Roe v. Wade, the controversial Supreme Court case on abortion, was not worth compromising with President Donald J. Trump.

“During the general election and the early days of the Trump presidency, when hand-wringing was still viewed as public penance for having used that hand to vote for then-candidate Donald Trump, many evangelical Christians explained that their vote was not a vote for Trump as such but was the best option they had in light of the potential for appointing pro-life Supreme Court justices in the hope of overturning Roe v. Wade,”  wrote Thabiti Anyabwile, Pastor at First Anacostia River Church in Washington, D.C. “If one cares about protecting the lives of unborn children aborted by the hundreds of thousands each year, one can understand the logic.”

The piece was published after news surfaced of the upcoming retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, creating a vacancy on the Supreme Court which Trump will fill.

Trending: Arizona House Passes Law to Nullify Biden’s Federal Gun Control

But forget the hundreds of thousands of infants murdered each year, the Pastor argues. According to Anyabwile, Trump is a racist, and that is far worse.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“In sheer numbers, more lives are ended by legalized abortion,” Anyabwile wrote. “Christians are correct to focus energy and concern on ending the practice. But in quieter, sometimes less observable ways, the carnage mounts in racial injustice and discrimination. The potential nomination of a potential pro-life judge does not, in my opinion, alleviate the concerns I have about the racial injustices this same administration seems to multiply each day.”

Anyabwile’s justification for labeling Trump a racist?

He is upset that America has not reached a solution for so-called “dreamers.” Trump offered an amnesty compromise for 1.8 million “dreamers” in January, which Anyabwile conveniently failed to mention. He also disapproves with Trump’s travel ban from predominantly-Muslim countries, which the pastor calls “at odds with Christian views of religious freedom.” Anyabwile also feels that the Trump administration’s enforcement of drug laws  – which is not significantly different from the way Democrat President William J. Clinton handled drug offenders – is too harsh, and disproportionately affect minorities.

Perhaps Anyabwile is completely justified in his contempt for the aforementioned policies. But consider the moral equivalency he is making.

“It’s a deeply ironic article,” popular blogger and Southern Baptist Theological Seminary student Tim Dukeman told Big League Politics. “It takes a crazy person to say ‘I disagree with the travel ban and dreamer policy and those issues are significantly similar to the 63 million humans slaughtered by Democrats.’ That needs to be said.”

Dukeman describes Anyabwile as a very well-known figure in the Southern Baptist movement and a vocal supporter of Hillary Clinton who publicly endorsed the failed presidential candidate. According to Dukeman, Anyabwile is not actually pro-life, only gives pro-life lip service for its political expedience within the church.

“I don’t care what [Anyabwile] says,” Dukeman said. “His actions are different from his words. He is no way meaningfully pro-life.”

Free Speech

Texas Governor Greg Abbott Pledges to Outlaw Big Tech Censorship

Texas has had enough.

Published

on

Texas Governor Greg Abbott is pledging to outlaw Big Tech’s left-wing censorship, announcing his support of a bill in the Texas State Senate that would open social media monopolies to lawsuits from users at a state level.

State Senator Bryan Hughes Senate Bill 12 would provide legal recourse for users of Big Tech platforms who are banned from the services to return, designating Big Tech monopolies such as Twitter, YouTube and Facebook as common carriers.

“They are common carriers and they cannot discriminate against people … it’s a violation of the first amendment,” Hughes said. “This is going to protect Texas’ free speech and get them back online.

These are the areas that used to be the courthouse square where people would come and talk,” said Abbott of the legislation. “Now, people are going to Facebook and Twitter to talk about their political ideas, and what Facebook and Twitter are doing — they are controlling the flow of information, and sometimes denying the flow of information.

Texas is taking a stand against big tech political censorship. We are not going to allow it in the Lone Star state.

The law establishing legal recourse against online censorship may prove legally durable enough to avoid breaching Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. That law provides immunity for user-created content on internet platforms, and doesn’t give social media platforms a right to discriminate against active or potential users on the basis of political ideology.

The future for fighting Big Tech censorship lies at a state level. While some state Republican officials have proven reluctant to separate themselves from the lucrative business lobbies of Big Tech oligarchs, Hughes’ approach seems legally innovative enough to give free speech defenders a fighting shot at free expression online.


Follow me on Gab @WildmanAZ, Twitter @Wildman_AZ, and on Parler @Moorhead.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending