Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,683 posts)

14. It's not the magazine, it's the publicity that the editorial has stirred up,

Reply to MineralMan (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 23, 2019, 11:22 AM

Dec 2019

which apparently has reached far beyond the publication's usual readership - and CT evidently does have some cachet in fundie circles because of its association with Billy Graham. I'd never heard of the magazine myself until this controversy came up (not that I'd be interested in it anyhow - I always thought Billy Graham was a crackpot, and he wasn't even the worst of them. But his grandchildren have endorsed the editorial even though his dreadful Trumpist son Franklin opposes it). If it sows the seeds of division among those nutballs, even small ones, I think that's a good start.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

30 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why "Christianity Today" Is Irrelevant. [View all] MineralMan Dec 2019 OP

What started out as merely symbolic has blown up on RW media and /w Trumpsters to be hlthe2b Dec 2019 #1

If nothing else it shows that all White Evangelicals are not total nutjobs. walkingman Dec 2019 #2

True. Only 81% of white Evangelicals voted for Trump in 2016. Mariana Dec 2019 #10

That doesn't make what they say irrelevant in my view. pwb Dec 2019 #3

maybe ... but they are persistent dweller Dec 2019 #4

Trump only "won" by a margin of 70,000 votes in 3 states. trotsky Dec 2019 #5

None of whom, I'm sure, has ever read that magazine. MineralMan Dec 2019 #6

Well yeah, but the media firestorm caused by the magazine. trotsky Dec 2019 #15

No doubt, but that's not my point. MineralMan Dec 2019 #16

I don't think it's irrelevant - the editorial has received so much publicity The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2019 #7

It's irrelevant to the evangelical Christians who support Trump. MineralMan Dec 2019 #8

It is creating discussion and controversy, even in those circles. The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2019 #9

My point is that it will not materially affect attitudes toward Trump. MineralMan Dec 2019 #11

It's not the magazine, it's the publicity that the editorial has stirred up, The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2019 #14

Evangelical support for Trump has dropped TlalocW Dec 2019 #12

Do you have a source for that drop in support? MineralMan Dec 2019 #13

Alas, no TlalocW Dec 2019 #21

That's OK. I was just hoping to be able to look it up. MineralMan Dec 2019 #22

I just did a quick search, and every story/poll seems to say the opposite. nt. Mariana Dec 2019 #23

The military isn't happy with Trump either. I would like very much to secondwind Dec 2019 #17

May not be a big deal, but it is showing results. safeinOhio Dec 2019 #18

Well, that's nice for the publication. MineralMan Dec 2019 #19

I bet those new subscribers already opposed Trump, before this story. nt. Mariana Dec 2019 #24

you are very, very wrong. all cracks in the wall matter. mopinko Dec 2019 #20

The point is to refute the idea that evangelical Christians guillaumeb Dec 2019 #25

There's always a few in any group, however defined. AtheistCrusader Dec 2019 #26

We disagree. guillaumeb Dec 2019 #27

Which suggests religion is actually irrelevant. AtheistCrusader Dec 2019 #28

Which actually suggests that no group is a monolithic bloc. guillaumeb Dec 2019 #29

Who the hell says it is? Act_of_Reparation Dec 2019 #30