But it wasn’t a commencement like what Trump did. Sanders just gave a speech. Commencements have a bit more weight in terms of a university’s imprimatur because they are official university functions, usually with coinciding with speeches and appearances by other top university officials. In this case, Trump was also given an honorary degree.
A university providing a forum for a speech or appearance does not necessarily equate with an endorsement, a la Ann Coulter’s cancelled speech at Berkeley. A university inviting someone to give a commencement address and honoring the speaker with an honorary degree does suggest such an endorsement and approval.
I live by ‘Christion’ values I suppose. Don’t go to church or anything, it’s just a building that has some guy/woman telling me things I already know. The biggest is ‘Do unto others as you would yourself’.
Trump is so far from the values of a good person, that it confounds me that anyone thinks he is.
The corporation is still pushing its religious values on them if the health insurance provided to its employees is exempt for religious reasons from covering basic medical procedures, prescriptions, or what-have-you that have otherwise been mandated.
Maybe “forced upon them” was a little strong if you are a very literal person and believe that this literally means that they resorted to physical force to make the person not get contraception. (The fact that you demoted it from physical force to mere firing already indicates that you knew that “forced” was not meant this literally.)
I’m not seeing that. If it is determined that the First Amendment prohibits the government from forcing corporations to proved “X” benefit to its employees, then no one is pushing anything on anyone. I guess you could claim that the First Amendment is being pushed on us, but that’s true of the entire constitution, and doesn’t really seem like something one can legitimately complain about.
They will tolerate any flaw for a President that will nominate conservative justices. I don’t know if the Democrats would turn on a crappy Democratic president that was nominating liberal justices.
SOME Christians have deluded themselves that Trump is some kind of hero of morality (Jerry Falwell Jr. is the most prominent of them), but not many.
First, remember that Trump didn’t win the Republican nomination by appealing to Evangelical Christians. Most evangelicals were Cruz supporters. AFTER Trump won the nomination, the great majority of evangelicals came around and supported Trump, just as they supported Mitt Romney (with grave misgivings) four years earlier.
Trump NEEDS evangelicals, but they have never been his base.
Why have many embraced him? Various reasons.
A perception that, bad as Trump might be, he might at least give Christians SOME of what they want (a Gorsuch on the Supreme Court), while Hillary would give them nothing.
Many self-described evangelicals aren’t particularly religious, and vote their pocketbooks or self-interest more than their alleged moral values.
Some Christians feel their faith is under siege from the government and the secular Left. IF you believe times are that desperate, MAYBE you decide it’s time to get a tough guy, a no-holds-barred street fighter on your side (since “nice” conservatives haven’t helped them much).
Emphasis added - indeed those would be appealing angles to a large segment of the Religious Right groups, just as they are to some of the secular paleoconservatives, because of the feeling that the “mainstreamers” just haven’t delivered the goods. So let’s vote for this guy who’s a piece of work bit at least will actually do some of what we want.
As for the deluded, that is influenced in that IMO for a lot of the RR religious conservatives in general, plain and simple opposition to liberalism has long been considered a “Christian value”, even before there was a Moral Majority organization. The very existence and advance of Liberalism IS seen as having the faith be “under siege” – after all Liberalism brings with it secularization, sexual liberation (license, they’d say) and sex/gender equality, acceptance of other belief sets or NO belief set as equally worthy to Jesus, teaching that when reality and the Bible conflict reality wins, etc. To you or I, that merely means a more open society for all and a displacement of Christianity from the position of Privilege. But to the RR it is contravening the rightful and good order of the universe. They’d rather have a sinner in charge of a society that confesses Jesus and condemns sin, than a virtuous man in charge of a society that does not.