Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41

Thread: Evangelicalism and Politics

  1. #1
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,293
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,324
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,728
    Thanked in
    1,066 Posts

    Evangelicalism and Politics

    The word "Evangelical" has taken on an almost entirely politically-hideous meaning. Used popularly it denotes an idiotic, "Make America Great Again," Trumpster. Understandably so reading the tweets of someone like Franklin Graham and how a lot of Evangelicals make knee-jerk defenses of guys like Judge Moore (while having lambasted Weinstein). The following Babylon Bee piece is sadly spot-on with this part of "Evangelicalism."

    Yet, as with most labels popularly used, it really doesn't adequately match the range of folk who are actually Evangelical. Sure there are those who match the caricature, but there are also others who fit the term, if you use an older, non-political, more theological definition. "Evangelical" (particularly in American and British context) is distinguished from Mainline-Liberal Christianity (or "Christianity" as I would prefer to note it), by an emphasis on personal conversion, a high view of the authority of the Bible, and an emphasis on the atoning work of Christ on the cross; and that distinguished it from Fundamentalism by an emphasis on a lived-out faith within the public market-place (old Fundies had been isolationists before Jerry Falwell came along and pulled many Fundies into the "Evangelical" fold). Those 4 points (personal conversion, high view of Bible, atonement, and activism) are known as the Bebbington Quadrilateral (Link). If you use that definition then Evangelicalism in the US now includes the Trumpster-Falwell types, a large group now uncomfortable with the term "Evangelical" that tend to be more active in regular church life within more confessionally minded churches (like conservative Lutherans, Presbyterians, Reformed Baptists, Anglicans, etc.) - think Ben Sasse - NeverTrumpsters (basically my tribe), large swathes of immigrants from Latin America and Africa and Asia, and a new and I think very promising bloc within Evangelicalism that is certainly underreported. This last group is typically young (Millennials) and urban. And there are about 5 commonalities they hold - being multiethnic, being concerned about economic justice, promoting civility in discourse, being pro-life (across the board), and adhering to historic-orthodox sexuality (but without being arseholes about it).

    To me it will be very intriguing to see if and how this last group develops because it really challenges both the Republican co-opters and the Democrat co-opters. It also has the potential to not only bridge to the confessionalists, and immigrant Evangelicals, but it also has the potential to be a bridge to African-American Christians who, though often holding to the Bebbington Quadrilateral (whether they know it or not), aren't considered Evangelicals because their activism has typically taken a different direction and they haven't been considered Evangelicals (regrettably). My personal hope, fwiw, is that the tribe of the Trumpsters weakens within Evangelicalism and that the movement's name can be salvaged.

    The following is courtesy of the Babylon Bee:

    Poll: Majority Of Evangelicals Would Support Satan If He Ran As Republican Candidate



    U.S.—A new LifeWay Research poll confirmed Wednesday that a majority of conservative evangelicals would vote for Satan, the Prince of Darkness, should he run for public office as a Republican candidate.

    The poll found that 72% of self-identified evangelicals would vote and even campaign for the prince of fallen angels should he promise to promote Republican policies while in office.

    “Most of those we surveyed agreed that they would in fact vote for Satan, as long as he verbally supported pro-life and pro-Second Amendment platform positions,” the head of the research study said. “A majority of respondents ‘strongly agreed’ that it was important for a candidate to pay lip service to the hot-button issues of the religious right, while strongly disagreeing that a candidate’s personal penchant for tempting countless millions of souls into the fires of hell would affect his public policies.”

    “Lucifer? Yeah, I’d vote for him, as long as he claims to be a Republican,” one member of a study focus group said. “He’s got some character flaws, sure—who doesn’t—but we’ve got to remember that ensuring we Christians get some fleeting political power is far more important than whether our chosen candidate does a little soul-devouring on the side.”

    The poll also looked at related issues, such as the willingness of evangelicals to overlook or minimize major moral failings in human candidates.

    “Personal indiscretions, shady business dealings, making blood sacrifices to Azathoth the Daemon Sultan in secret—Christians are now willing to forgive literally everything if it means they’ll have some kind of political clout,” the study head told reporters. “Our findings confirm that conservative Christians are actually more likely to vote for mobsters, cultists, and hellish demon kings than any other demographic.”

    At publishing time, study officials had confirmed evangelicals would also be willing to support Sith lords, elder gods, and the evil Dr. Robotnik if they were to run for office as members of the GOP.
    Last edited by BedellBrave; 11-18-2017 at 11:37 PM.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BedellBrave For This Useful Post:

    Jaw (11-18-2017), Runnin (11-18-2017)

  3. #2
    Expects Yuge Games nsacpi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    47,432
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,704
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11,384
    Thanked in
    7,533 Posts
    it seems to me Evangelicals have been clear-eyed and unsentimental in using politics to advance their cause as they see it...and I say that with a degree of admiration

    my reading of the last election cycle is that Cruz was the preferred candidate for most Evangelicals...Trump's strongest supporters were "new Republicans" who were more secular...once they say how things were going the Evangelicals had no problem switching horses on the perception that Trump would deliver on things that matter most to them like judicial appointments...and I think he will deliver on that score
    Last edited by nsacpi; 11-18-2017 at 05:39 PM.
    "I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."

    "I am your retribution."

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to nsacpi For This Useful Post:

    BedellBrave (11-18-2017), Jaw (11-18-2017)

  5. #3
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,293
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,324
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,728
    Thanked in
    1,066 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nsacpi View Post
    it seems to me Evangelicals have been clear-eyed and unsentimental in using politics to advance their cause as they see it...and I say that with a degree of admiration

    my reading of the last election cycle is that Cruz was the preferred candidate for most Evangelicals...Trump's strongest supporters were "new Republicans" who were more secular...once they say how things were going the Evangelicals had no problem switching horses on the perception that Trump would deliver on things that matter most to them like judicial appointments...and I think he will deliver on that score

    Of the four sub-groups within American Evangelicalism, I suspect that the first group was in on Cruz, Carson, Huckabee or Trump; the second on Rubio, Paul, Bush, Cruz, or Kasich; the third Rubio, Bush, Clinton, or Sanders; and the fourth Rubio, Kasich, Paul, Clinton or Sanders.

    Yeah, I think he'll deliver a bit better than Bush did on judicial appointments.
    Last edited by BedellBrave; 11-18-2017 at 05:57 PM.

  6. #4
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,001
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    368
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,204
    Thanked in
    847 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BedellBrave View Post
    The word "Evangelical" has taken on an almost entirely politically-hideous meaning. Used popularly it denotes an idiotic, "Make America Great Again," Trumpster. Understandably so reading the tweets of someone like Franklin Graham and how a lot of Evangelicals make knee-jerk defenses of guys like Judge Moore (while having lambasted Weinstein). The following Babylon Bee piece is sadly spot-on with this part of "Evangelicalism."

    Yet, as with most labels popularly used, it really doesn't adequately match the range of folk who are actually Evangelical. Sure there are those who match the caricature, but there are also others who fit the term, if you use an older, non-political, more theological definition. "Evangelical" (particularly in American and British context) that is distinguished from Mainline-Liberal Christianity (or "Christianity" as I would prefer to note it), by an emphasis on personal conversion, a high view of the authority of the Bible, and an emphasis on the atoning work of Christ on the cross; and that distinguished it from Fundamentalism by an emphasis on a lived-out faith within the public market-place (old Fundies had been isolationists before Jerry Falwell came along and pulled many Fundies into the "Evangelical" fold). Those 4 points (personal conversion, high view of Bible, atonement, and activism) are known as the Bebbington Quadrilateral (Link). If you use that definition then Evangelicalism in the US now includes the Trumpster-Falwell types, a large group now uncomfortable with the term "Evangelical" that tend to be more active in regular church life within more confessionally minded churches (like conservative Lutherans, Presbyterians, Reformed Baptists, Anglicans, etc.) - think Ben Sasse - NeverTrumpsters (basically my tribe), large swathes of immigrants from Latin America and Africa and Asia, and a new and I think very promising bloc within Evangelicalism that is certainly underreported. This last group is typically young (Millennials) and urban. And there are about 5 commonalities they hold - being multiethnic, being concerned about economic justice, promoting civility in discourse, being pro-life (across the board), and adhering to historic-orthodox sexuality (but without being arseholes about it).

    To me it will be very intriguing to see if and how this last group develops because it really challenges both the Republican co-opters and the Democrat co-opters. It also has the potential to not only bridge to the confessionalists, and immigrant Evangelicals, but it also has the potential to be a bridge to African-American Christians who, though often holding to the Bebbington Quadrilateral (whether they know it or not), aren't considered Evangelicals because their activism has typically taken a different direction and they haven't been considered Evangelicals (regrettably). My personal hope, fwiw, is that the tribe of the Trumpsters weakens within Evangelicalism and that the movement's name can be salvaged.

    The following is courtesy of the Babylon Bee:

    Poll: Majority Of Evangelicals Would Support Satan If He Ran As Republican Candidate



    U.S.—A new LifeWay Research poll confirmed Wednesday that a majority of conservative evangelicals would vote for Satan, the Prince of Darkness, should he run for public office as a Republican candidate.

    The poll found that 72% of self-identified evangelicals would vote and even campaign for the prince of fallen angels should he promise to promote Republican policies while in office.

    “Most of those we surveyed agreed that they would in fact vote for Satan, as long as he verbally supported pro-life and pro-Second Amendment platform positions,” the head of the research study said. “A majority of respondents ‘strongly agreed’ that it was important for a candidate to pay lip service to the hot-button issues of the religious right, while strongly disagreeing that a candidate’s personal penchant for tempting countless millions of souls into the fires of hell would affect his public policies.”

    “Lucifer? Yeah, I’d vote for him, as long as he claims to be a Republican,” one member of a study focus group said. “He’s got some character flaws, sure—who doesn’t—but we’ve got to remember that ensuring we Christians get some fleeting political power is far more important than whether our chosen candidate does a little soul-devouring on the side.”

    The poll also looked at related issues, such as the willingness of evangelicals to overlook or minimize major moral failings in human candidates.

    “Personal indiscretions, shady business dealings, making blood sacrifices to Azathoth the Daemon Sultan in secret—Christians are now willing to forgive literally everything if it means they’ll have some kind of political clout,” the study head told reporters. “Our findings confirm that conservative Christians are actually more likely to vote for mobsters, cultists, and hellish demon kings than any other demographic.”

    At publishing time, study officials had confirmed evangelicals would also be willing to support Sith lords, elder gods, and the evil Dr. Robotnik if they were to run for office as members of the GOP.
    You know, this would all be a lot funnier if it didn't all sound so familiar.

  7. #5
    It's OVER 5,000! Runnin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    12,769
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,396
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,946
    Thanked in
    2,064 Posts
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...4e_story.html#

    President Trump is an ultimate and consummate worshiper of money, sex and power. American Christians have not really reckoned with the climate he has created in our country and the spiritual obligation we have to repair it. As a result, the soul of our nation and the integrity of the Christian faith are at risk.

    As Abraham Lincoln, a politician with a deep knowledge of Christianity, stated in his first inaugural address, political action can, undertaken rightly, appeal to the “better angels of our nature.” But political action undertaken badly, and reckless inaction, can mislead and dispirit us — and appeal to our worst demons, such as greed, fear, bigotry and resentment, which are never far below the surface.

    Trump’s adulation of money and his love for lavish ostentation (he covers everything in gold) are the literal worship of wealth by someone who believes that his possessions belong only to himself, instead of that everything belongs to God and we are its stewards. In 2011, before his foray into politics, Trump said, “Part of the beauty of me is that I’m very rich.” And in his 2015 speech announcing his candidacy for president, he said: “I’m really rich. . . . And by the way, I’m not even saying that in a braggadocio — that’s the kind of mind-set, that’s the kind of thinking you need for this country.” Later, during the campaign, Trump suggested that our country must “be wealthy in order to be great.”
    FFF - BB, BB, 2B, HR, 2B, HR, 1B, BB, BB, 1B, BB, BB, HR

  8. #6
    It's OVER 5,000! Jaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    7,309
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,202
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,344
    Thanked in
    1,625 Posts
    No love for us UMC people Bedell?
    Go get him!

    Founding member of the Whiny Little Bitches and Pricks Club

  9. #7
    It's OVER 5,000! Jaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    7,309
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,202
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,344
    Thanked in
    1,625 Posts
    My personal experience with active Christians (I hate saying evangelical for the reasons) who voted for Trump says that nsacpi is correct about motivation.
    Go get him!

    Founding member of the Whiny Little Bitches and Pricks Club

  10. #8
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,001
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    368
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,204
    Thanked in
    847 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaw View Post
    My personal experience with active Christians (I hate saying evangelical for the reasons) who voted for Trump says that nsacpi is correct about motivation.
    I would have to say that many Christians, at least according to my "unconventional" opinion is that when they voted for Trump (more based on his promise to nominate anti-Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Justices) was that they thought they could "dance with the devil all night but then send him home at dawn" with no long lasting ill effects was about as short sighted from a spiritual standpoint as when Chamberlain thought he could do the same at Munich in 1938. Trump was a fine candidate for secular money first damn the consequences Americans, but from a strictly spiritual standpoint Trump was/is IMO not different from or better than Hilldog. Sucky/suckier with each person trying to decide which was which. This is why I have long said that I shudder when Christians get involved in politics for the same reason that I shudder when Christians get involved in amateur bomb diffusal, cause they simply aren't any good at it.

  11. #9
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,293
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,324
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,728
    Thanked in
    1,066 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Runnin View Post
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...4e_story.html#

    President Trump is an ultimate and consummate worshiper of money, sex and power. American Christians have not really reckoned with the climate he has created in our country and the spiritual obligation we have to repair it. As a result, the soul of our nation and the integrity of the Christian faith are at risk.

    As Abraham Lincoln, a politician with a deep knowledge of Christianity, stated in his first inaugural address, political action can, undertaken rightly, appeal to the “better angels of our nature.” But political action undertaken badly, and reckless inaction, can mislead and dispirit us — and appeal to our worst demons, such as greed, fear, bigotry and resentment, which are never far below the surface.

    Trump’s adulation of money and his love for lavish ostentation (he covers everything in gold) are the literal worship of wealth by someone who believes that his possessions belong only to himself, instead of that everything belongs to God and we are its stewards. In 2011, before his foray into politics, Trump said, “Part of the beauty of me is that I’m very rich.” And in his 2015 speech announcing his candidacy for president, he said: “I’m really rich. . . . And by the way, I’m not even saying that in a braggadocio — that’s the kind of mind-set, that’s the kind of thinking you need for this country.” Later, during the campaign, Trump suggested that our country must “be wealthy in order to be great.”

    I'm not a Wallis fan, but other than the bold print above, he's right. The bold is hyperbole and a particularly Western bias. If he means by that, "White Christian expressions of faith" he's a bit closer to the target.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to BedellBrave For This Useful Post:

    jpx7 (11-19-2017)

  13. #10
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,293
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,324
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,728
    Thanked in
    1,066 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaw View Post
    No love for us UMC people Bedell?

    Much love for some of my UMC brethren and I do believe there are true Christians & congregations within the mainline denominations. But as to the mainline as a whole (and I'd add the Prosperity Gospel folk), I'm with Machen. It's a different animal when creedal Christianity is denied (even if the words are retained).

  14. #11
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,293
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,324
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,728
    Thanked in
    1,066 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaw View Post
    My personal experience with active Christians (I hate saying evangelical for the reasons) who voted for Trump says that nsacpi is correct about motivation.

    For the most part I agree. Sadly though the further we go - and I know this is anecdotal - but I'm sensing that many who started out voting for him mainly for that reason are defending the defenseless.

  15. #12
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,293
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,324
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,728
    Thanked in
    1,066 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Oklahomahawk View Post
    I would have to say that many Christians, at least according to my "unconventional" opinion is that when they voted for Trump (more based on his promise to nominate anti-Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Justices) was that they thought they could "dance with the devil all night but then send him home at dawn" with no long lasting ill effects was about as short sighted from a spiritual standpoint as when Chamberlain thought he could do the same at Munich in 1938. Trump was a fine candidate for secular money first damn the consequences Americans, but from a strictly spiritual standpoint Trump was/is IMO not different from or better than Hilldog. Sucky/suckier with each person trying to decide which was which. This is why I have long said that I shudder when Christians get involved in politics for the same reason that I shudder when Christians get involved in amateur bomb diffusal, cause they simply aren't any good at it.

    And sadly, within deep blue contexts, it's all making being an Evangelical of the other 3 stripes in any public degree all the harder. Spending time with New Yorkers this week underscored that for me.

  16. #13
    Secretary of Statistics AerchAngel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Eau Claire, WI
    Posts
    7,565
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,115
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,282
    Thanked in
    882 Posts
    I don't understand, almost 90% of the blacks are Evangelical and they don't vote Republican.

    I guess they mean Whites only. They must clarify that.

  17. #14
    It's OVER 5,000! Runnin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    12,769
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,396
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,946
    Thanked in
    2,064 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BedellBrave View Post
    I'm not a Wallis fan, but other than the bold print above, he's right. The bold is hyperbole and a particularly Western bias. If he means by that, "White Christian expressions of faith" he's a bit closer to the target.
    I agree with you on that, but perhaps for a different reason. I see both as having long since been compromised.
    FFF - BB, BB, 2B, HR, 2B, HR, 1B, BB, BB, 1B, BB, BB, HR

  18. #15
    Arbitration Eligible
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,886
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    481
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    431
    Thanked in
    314 Posts
    I can only speak for myself, but I am less religious and more secular than I have ever been in my life and it's all because of the blind mainly white followers of Trump from the pulpit. He stands for nothing the Bible claims you should.

  19. #16
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,293
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,324
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,728
    Thanked in
    1,066 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by VirginiaBrave View Post
    I can only speak for myself, but I am less religious and more secular than I have ever been in my life and it's all because of the blind mainly white followers of Trump from the pulpit. He stands for nothing the Bible claims you should.

    And friend, you and others like you, are what makes me lament this all. Such blatant hypocrisy is cancerous.

  20. #17
    Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is. jpx7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,903
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    47,591
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6,441
    Thanked in
    3,830 Posts
    Several questions, one historical, and a couple practical.

    When did this divide between evangelism (the "good announcing" at etymological root) and evangelicalism (the "Bebbington Quadrilateral") come about, and how do you think that subtle shift in nomenclature conditions the activism of the latter?

    Is it possible to be "pro-life" without advocating for either the institutional (de jure) or effective (de facto) illegality of abortion? Say, through an activism that seeks to encourage a decline in unwanted pregnancies (since studies show more robust sex education and more ubiquitous/inexpensive availability of contraception both serve to decrease the rates of abortion)?

    Is it possible to "adhere to historic-orthodox sexuality" without institutionally litigating those standards? Say, eschewing those kinds of relationships personally, and discouraging them in the community, without enforcing standards on the broader polity?
    "For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jpx7 For This Useful Post:

    BedellBrave (11-19-2017), nsacpi (11-19-2017)

  22. #18
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,293
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,324
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,728
    Thanked in
    1,066 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jpx7 View Post
    Several questions, one historical, and a couple practical.

    When did this divide between evangelism (the "good announcing" at etymological root) and evangelicalism (the "Bebbington Quadrilateral") come about, and how do you think that subtle shift in nomenclature conditions the activism of the latter?

    Is it possible to be "pro-life" without advocating for either the institutional (de jure) or effective (de facto) illegality of abortion? Say, through an activism that seeks to encourage a decline in unwanted pregnancies (since studies show more robust sex education and more ubiquitous/inexpensive availability of contraception both serve to decrease the rates of abortion)?

    Is it possible to "adhere to historic-orthodox sexuality" without institutionally litigating those standards? Say, eschewing those kinds of relationships personally, and discouraging them in the community, without enforcing standards on the broader polity?

    Great questions - let me get to the historical ones later - I need to crash - got to work tomorrow ;-). But I'll answer the latter now. Pro-life - Yes (particularly realizing that it is the heart that needs to be reached chiefly) but I think many Evangelicals will be suspicious of a Democrat party that mouthes that and yet treats abortion as a hallowed rite/sacrament. Sexuality - yes (although discouraging them will begin to be more and more costly). I suspect that's the route that will be followed by the 4th segment of Evangelicalism as I have described it.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to BedellBrave For This Useful Post:

    jpx7 (11-19-2017)

  24. #19
    Arbitration Eligible
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,886
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    481
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    431
    Thanked in
    314 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BedellBrave View Post
    And friend, you and others like you, are what makes me lament this all. Such blatant hypocrisy is cancerous.
    Hypocrisy from the pastors and ministers?

  25. #20
    It's OVER 5,000! Jaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    7,309
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,202
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,344
    Thanked in
    1,625 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BedellBrave View Post
    And friend, you and others like you, are what makes me lament this all. Such blatant hypocrisy is cancerous.
    I'm not sure I understand your position here. There was no realistic option in this election who any Christian could proudly proclaim as a shining example of our faith, but one candidate and one party certainly seemed more inclined to include us in their decision making. The other party continues to look for ways to minimize and quite frankly to ostracize us.
    Go get him!

    Founding member of the Whiny Little Bitches and Pricks Club

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to Jaw For This Useful Post:

    AerchAngel (11-20-2017)

Similar Threads

  1. Global Events & Politics Überthread
    By Hawk in forum LOCKER ROOM TALK
    Replies: 8488
    Last Post: Today, 11:17 AM
  2. The 2 Rabbles Theory of American Politics
    By nsacpi in forum LOCKER ROOM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-08-2017, 02:29 PM
  3. The Politics of Cowardice...
    By goldfly in forum LOCKER ROOM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-28-2017, 02:13 PM
  4. Faith and Politics
    By BedellBrave in forum LOCKER ROOM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-31-2014, 08:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •