06-28-2020, 05:54 PM
(06-28-2020, 05:50 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Reed's explanations begs the question; what levels of immorality would evangelicals tolerate / attempt to justify, if it leads to the achievement of their ultimate goals? Using Reed's rationale, it seems the end goal is far more important than the path you chose to take to get there. I would argue that if the path itself is compromised, then the ends have been tainted by the means, leaving you with the same problems of having been stained by the very immorality you profess to be fighting against.
You mean like, what if a super gay abortion doctor who is a loud atheist got elected and then stacked the supreme court with neo con judges?
It is rather interesting that absolution has now taken the form of stacking the Supreme Court. I wonder if St Peter is aware of this.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
