You Are Welcome Here — Part Two

you are welcome hereSeveral questions were raised about what I wrote in the post, You Are Welcome Here, so I thought I would take a stab at answering them and better explaining how I view Christian churches.

Churches can best be described as membership clubs. As clubs, each church has its own beliefs, rules, and practices. The club alone determines who can be a member. Members are expected to embrace the beliefs and practices of the club. No one should expect to be a club member without adhering to the beliefs and practices of said club.

Countless Philadelphia Eagles fans delusionally think that their team can beat the New England Patriots on Super Bowl Sunday. I am a diehard Cincinnati Reds fan. Every spring I say to myself, this is the year. The Reds are going to make it to the World Series. And by August the Reds will be out of the pennant race, just as in virtually every other year. Yet, I continue to cheer and root for the Redlegs. So it is with Christians. Their systems of beliefs have no rational foundation. Based on an ancient religious text, Christian beliefs find their foundation in the myths and hysteria of a pre-enlightenment world. Such beliefs, to put it simply, make no sense to me. (Please read The Michael Mock Rule: It Just Doesn’t Make Sense.) And they don’t need to. The particular beliefs and practices of a church (or other social club) are immaterial to me, and it matters not that I think Christian beliefs are fantastical myths. Thanks to the U.S. Constitution and federal/state law, people are free to believe whatever they want. It’s 2018, and countless Americans believe the earth is flat, evolution is a myth, the Moon landing was faked, the Holocaust didn’t happen, and 9/11 was an inside job. Still others believe that Donald Trump is the greatest president ever to sit in the oval office. I have long since stopped arguing with the supporters of the Orange-Haired Toddler. No amount of rational discussion will change their minds about Trump. That most of the President’s supporters also happen to be Evangelicals is telling — a double-dose of delusion.

When I struggle to understand how such-and-such a person could be a Fundamentalist Christian, I remind myself of the fact that people join churches for all sorts of reasons: family, social connection, absolution of sin, certainty of moral beliefs and worldview. I find it helpful to view Christianity from an economic perspective; particularly from a cost-benefit point of view. Yes, joining a Christian club costs the member. Club members are expected to give money to the club. They are also expected to submit to the club’s leaders and obey their teachings. If the club believes certain human behaviors are verboten, new members are expected to willingly and happily not do these things. At the same time, the club is expected to benefit its members. Club members expect to be welcomed and respected. They expect to have meaningful relationships and social connections. As long as the benefits outweigh the costs, most members will remain in the club. For those of us who are Evangelicals-turned-atheists, one of the reasons we left Christianity is that the costs outweighed the benefits.

Many Christians believe that people such as myself should respect their beliefs. How dare you criticize my God/beliefs/church, Christians say. They wrongly think that religious beliefs are special and should never be critiqued, criticized, or, if warranted, mocked. I completely reject such a notion. I don’t expect anyone to respect my beliefs. I expect my beliefs to be tested and tried in the public square. I do, however, respect Christians as individuals, as fellow citizens on Planet Earth. This respect of person I grant to others means I won’t criticize or condemn their club memberships. Want to join a Christian club? Want to join a Satanist club?  Want to belong to the Moose, Elks, or the Masonic Lodge? I don’t care one whit about which, if any, clubs people join. Each to his own.

What I do expect is that Christian clubs be honest in advertising what it is they believe and practice. I expect clubs to be clear about their membership requirements. And therein lies the problem, and the reason I wrote the first post. Evangelical churches love to advertise that everyone is welcome, when, in fact, this is not true. Inquiring prospective members deserve to be told the truth about what will be expected of them if they become a part of the church. Saying that LGBTQ people are WELCOME sounds wonderful, but Evangelical churches are being dishonest when they don’t disclose the fact that to be members, non-heterosexuals will be forced to deny their sexuality and embrace heterosexuality. In some Evangelical churches, new members will be expected to dress a certain way, abstain from certain foods/beverages, and only attend club-approved entertainment events. More than a few people have gotten saved at the “friendliest church in town,” only to find out that once they were baptized and became members, club leaders expected them to change their behavior.

Evangelicals love to say that they leave it up to the Holy Spirit to change people’s lives, but rarely is this actually practiced. Using sermons, Bible studies, and other means of coercive indoctrination, Evangelical churches expect newly minted believers to change, and if they don’t, they are branded as sinful, rebellious, backslidden, and out of the will of God. In some instances, misbehaving members are cast out of the club, returned to the world from whence they came. Such actions are fine as long as there was full disclosure of expectations. It is dishonest for churches to say to people that their assemblies are open to everyone and they let the Holy Spirit change people, when in fact they are only open to people who believe the “right” beliefs and live their lives a certain way.

What I am saying here is that Evangelical pastors and churches need to be honest and tell the truth to prospective members. Surely, if Christian beliefs and practices are as honorable and wonderful as Christians say they are, full disclosure should cause no harm. I suspect, though, that more than a few Evangelical pastors know that if they told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, their club memberships would be much smaller. Some Evangelical colleges refuse to give new students the conduct handbook until after they are on campus. Why do they do this? College administrators know that if they tell the truth before students are on campus, it is likely that more than a few of them will choose not to enroll. Students come to the college looking forward to freedom and fun, only to find out that the college is actually a prison work camp. It is scandalous that colleges such as Pensacola Christian College do not fully disclose to new students their draconian (and silly) rules. Yet, these same colleges expect students to be truthful in all things.

Cable and satellite TV companies hide taxes/fees/equipment costs from prospective customers so it seems that the service is cheaper than it actually is. (Case in point, my Vonage service plan costs $9.99 a month, yet my bill is $18.) So it is with many Evangelical churches. It’s the hidden beliefs and practices that I object to. Churches wait until new members have signed on the dotted line to tell them, as Paul Harvey used to say, the rest of the story. If Evangelical churches are upfront about everything and someone decides to join their respective club, fine. Lying, however, about expectations is always wrong, whether through omission or commission, and Evangelical pastors and churches shouldn’t be upset when this practice is exposed to the light of day. Just tell the truth, Evangelicals, and you will not hear a peep from me.

About Bruce Gerencser

Bruce Gerencser, 60, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 39 years. He and his wife have six grown children and eleven grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist. For more information about Bruce, please read the About page.

Bruce is a local photography business owner, operating Defiance County Photo out of his home. If you live in Northwest Ohio and would like to hire Bruce, please email him.

Thank you for reading this post. Please share your thoughts in the comment section. If you are a first-time commenter, please read the commenting policy before wowing readers with your words. All first-time comments are moderated. If you would like to contact Bruce directly, please use the contact form to do so.

Donations are always appreciated. Donations on a monthly basis can be made through Patreon. One-time donations can be made through PayPal.


  1. Matilda

    Re: LGBT are welcome. As an ex-fundy, I observe some of the goings-on in churches my family attend. I know a church that announced it is now gay-friendly and the pastor would officiate at a same-sex wedding. But I kind of feel that should a gay person start to attend on the strength of this ‘invitation’, they would be love-bombed and made a trophy. ‘See how inclusive we are, we allow this trans person to make the coffee, to work in the creche, play the piano’ or whatever.’ They did the same when a Judge joined the church, he was what I call ‘trophy-ised’. So, ‘welcome’ means something different to them…non-cis folk are notches on the belt. Because that’s how fundies are programmed to think..we must get new members, new ‘bums on seats’ as we say in the UK and if they are ‘different’ or important, then we get zillions of brownie points for the afterlife.

    1. maura a hart

      love bombed? weaponized zombie jeebus? zombie jeebus isis? love bombed and trophified. hmm. creepy. imagining a trophy case like a high school full of banners and statuettes and gays. perhaps a transgender or 2. maybe on a side altar, like the pieta in the vatican.

      1. Matilda

        LOL! ‘trophy-ing’ is my made-up word for what I’ve seen this church do. When a judge moved in, I really did hear one or two members say with some awe in their voices ‘We have a JUDGE in our membership’ and definitely put him on a pedestal… I kind of feel they’d do the same with any LGBT person…because it’s Such A Great Witness To The Heathen. Years ago a senior manager in a prestigious firm joined my church and was asked to speak about ‘My faith and my job’ to various midweek groups, like the men’s fellowship etc. Around the same time – and this is true – a street cleaner also joined and no one rushed to say proudly ‘our newest member is a man who empties the bins and cleans up dog-poo.’ or asked him to speak. What’s that jesus-verse about not taking the highest seats?

  2. Pingback: Quotes for the day | Civil Commotion

  3. Brian

    I have parked my skinny ass in many a pew over the years and tried all the flavours I could stomach. Chruches are indeed welcoming. Pastors are, if they follow the IFB, like boozers in terms of excess. They start as pigs, gobbling and regurgitating the Word as they have digested or half-digested it. Later, if they continue, they become monkies on the stage entertaining the congregation. Watch the rich televangelists dance and strut. They have a monkey-good time up there. The final stage is the tiger. Just as the boozer finally reaches the tiger stage and switches into attack-mode, preachers of this ilk, go for the throats of sinners, you vile, worthless shits of the world who do not deserve the air you breathe. You murdered baby Jesus, you prick, and you have no hope unless you listen to me. Give up your vomit of a life and come to church. Bring your wallet because though we know money is of this fallen world, the Bible says a percentage!.
    Pig, monkey, tiger…. The template of the welcoming Christian church anywhere across this land of the trumped.

    1. maura a hart

      true. roughly eloquent, but true. pig pastors for zombie jeebus. i love it.

  4. ObstacleChick

    One of the things I liked about attending Catholic masses was that I could go in, participate in the mass, then leave without having to be accosted by all the well-meaning “friendly” Christians who were hungry to recruit the fresh meat in the pews. Of course, those who wanted to raise their children as Catholics had to go through the motions of classes, etc., but for the most part, a random person could walk into a mass off the street and remain virtually anonymous throughout the mass. My husband and I attended a Catholic church for a few months when we were church-shopping, and not once did anyone try to recruit us – we were blissfully left alone. However, whenever we’d attend a protestant church, we’d be overwhelmed with people trying to sell us their church at the end of the service. We really just wanted to be left alone.

    It’s so much easier being an atheist.

    1. maura a hart

      sending your kids to catholic school? well, no nuns left at the school of our lady of perpetual guilt and the merciless nuns. non sure about letting my kid be an altar boy.

  5. PobodysNerfect

    I have to agree with you except I could have done without the comments about Trump. I’m wondering if all “clubs” are equally harmless. Would you endorse the unfettered freedom of white nationalist or KKK clubs as fully as political islam centers?

    1. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

      As long as they play within the rules of the Constitution and the law, yes. Freedom of speech and the freedom for like minded people to freely associate with each other can be a bitch when these freedoms are used by groups like the ones you mention.

      As far as Trump is concerned, 82% of white Evangelicals voted for Trump. This connection deserves careful and full study. By supporting Trump, Evangelicals exposed their true nature. That’s good news, by the way. It is time for Americans to see that the Evangelical emperor has no clothes. Tony Perkins said recently that he gives Trump a mulligan over his cavorting with a porn star while married. I’m sure that is what Jesus would have said too.

      1. PobodysNerfect

        I hear you. As an LGBT former member of what some would call a fundamentalist protestant religion (and others might call a cult), I was neither concerned nor impressed with Trump’s religiosity. I was more concerned about Pence truthfully. But in the end, I was far more troubled by the huge support of Democrats by and of a middle eastern religion that has very anti-democratic, anti-LGBT, anti-women’s rights beliefs and practices (not to mention a strict belief in a warrior prophet). I recently happened upon an LGBT video that more or less expressed the thoughts I had come to independently:

        1. Connie

          I don’t follow links; my phone is too old.

          MidEastern religion that discriminates against women and the LGBTQA community and acts like a cult? Hmmmmm.

          You are going to have to be more specific PobodysNerfecf as all of the faiths of Abraham when pursued to the extreme fit your cryptic description.

          1. PobodysNerfect

            Connie, most libraries have computers, and the majority of your friends do too. You are missing out on significant information if you can’t view YouTube!

            Now as to specifying which middle eastern political ideology still believes in a warrior prophet, I’ll let you google The Masked Arab YouTube channel. Some branches of Abrahamic religions have mellowed. The one in question has, if anything, become more rigid and deadly than ever. It has open political ambitions and every country where it becomes a majority oppresses other religions, gays, and women. Yet in Anerica it plays the victim although workd wide it is one of the most powerful and repressive ideologies complete with laws apostacy and significant support (even in the west) for capital punishment for being gay, apostacy, or adultery. No significant Evangelical christian group comes close because unlike this middle eastern group, christians know not to take every word of their scripture literally.

          2. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

            You said “No significant Evangelical christian group comes close because unlike this middle eastern group, christians know not to take every word of their scripture literally.”

            I’m not sure if you are a regular reader of my blog…

            Virtually every day I post articles about Evangelicals who most certainly take every word of the Bible literally and try to put it in practice. Millions of Americans believe the Bible is inerrant, the universe was created in six days, and the earth is 6,023 years old. Millions of Americans believe dead people can resurrect from the dead. Millions of American Evangelicals believe the United States is a Christian nation uniquely chosen by God to do his bidding. One of the reasons for our government’s bloodlust is that many of our leaders believe they were chosen by God to advance his Kingdom and law on earth. Some of them believe the laws found in the Bible should be binding on all people everywhere.

          3. PobodysNerfect

            Bruce, I read and appreciate your blog regularly, and I am no fan of fundamentalists of any persuasion, including christians. But it is dangerous to focus on them to such an extent that we ignore even more sinister and deceptive dangers. The same media that has painted christians as villains has painted a huge worldwide ideology group as victims, when in fact where this ideology is in the majority it punishes christians and gays with death. I am not aware if ANY christian fundamentalist Evangelical group that practices old testament public stoning, amputation, “honor” killings, or throwing gays from rooftops. Check out the Pew research studies done in the west of the people who follow the ideology which does still advocate these things.

            Christians in the west have resigned themselves to not following parts of the bible they chose not to. The holy book of the other ideology is still followed and admired even in the violent parts.

            Again, this is not a defense of evangelicalism, merely an observation that there are more serious and immediate threats to western civilization as we know it.

          4. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

            I agree that Evangelicals currently don’t do these things, but give them the power of the state and I suspect things would be much different.

            The seeds of violent Fundamentalist Christianity are sown every Sunday in countless American churches. All it would take is political unrest or social upheaval for these seeds to grow and mature.

            The militia movement that gave us Tim McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing was/is Evangelical theologically. The most dangerous Evangelicals in America are people with theocratic tendencies. They must never gain the power of the state.

          5. PobodysNerfect

            According to McVeigh’s 2010 manifesto, the bombing of the Murrah building was in retaliation for federal government overreach in past events such as the Waco incident and other fiascos. While I do abhor his methods, I do have some sympathy for any argument that supports protection of individual freedom from oppression.

            But more to the point at hand, I am less concerned about a theoretical risk without clear precedent than an actual politico-religious ideology that has had violent political ambitions and world domination as a goal since it’s 7th century day one with Pew research showing significant support for the 10’s of thousands of terrorist events occurring around the world since 9/11 (as it has throughout history, despite any claims of “peaceful” coexistence which actually usually means dhimmitude.

            Compare this with the average evangelical that claims Jesus as their role model. Nasty as they can seem to us atheists, I don’t recall any evangelicals beheading others in the name of their leader Jesus. There’s a good reason for this.


          6. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

            Again, Evangelicals lack the power of the state to fulfill their theocratic tendencies.

            The only difference between Islam and Christianity is time — about a thousand years.

            As far as terrorism is concerned, an argument can be made for the actions Christianity America being the fuel that stoked the flames of radical Islam. That said, we have a major terrorism problem in the world. How to best address that is a discussion best left to another day.

            As far as McVeigh and Co are concerned. I was friends with one of the leaders of the Michigan militia movement. Fundamentalist Christianity was very much a part of their ideology.

          7. PobodysNerfect

            I understand yet reject the notion that the US has caused Islam to become violent. It has been violent since at least the time that allah massacred the jewish tribes near Medina that had initially helped him but for some reason he later believed had betrayed him. I don’t think there is any evidence whatsoever that Jesus ever ordered such revenge. He said turn the other cheek, and allegedly died for these subversive anti establishment beliefs.
            Islam throughout history has expanded at the edge of the sword. I’ll take Christianity’s 1000 years of progress over Islams fundamental immunity to reformation anyday (the Qu’ran is perfect and cannot be changed and still be considered islam…which means submission, not peace, as you know).

            Terrorism is a fuzzy concept overlappiñg with war and jihad. In my opinion it is a mistake to try to treat it as a common crime, rather it should be seen as the act of war intended to produce intimidation of a group of people that it is. And an ideology that tends to encourage such acts must be acknowledged for what it is, rather than what we wish it was.

            Trump was elected not for racism or even his fundamentalist beliefs. He was elected to protect Americans from the obvious dangers to life and economy that the other side refused to address convincingly, unstead portraying such special interests as the victims they claim (falsely in most cases) to be.

            We can agree to respectfully disagree.

          8. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

            Oh, we definitely disagree. ? I do, however, appreciate the discussion.

          9. PobodysNerfect

            That’s Ok. The right to independent free thought is one of the most beloved aspects of US separation of church and state, and one of my bigger concerns with islam, conmunism, or PC group think of any kind.

          10. PobodysNerfect

            ps sorry for the typos but for some reason it got posted but no edit button appears.
            *America not Anerica
            *world wide, not workd wide

        2. Rebecca

          I think you have brought up some points worth noting. I’ll be honest. I personally did not like either major candidate in this last general election. I wonder, really, if there have been two more unpopular folks who won the nomination of their parties in recent history? I seriously considered not voting at all. But, then I thought about our past ancestors who gave their lives for this very right to hold free elections. How could I not vote or just throw away my vote? I was literally struggling up to the point I cast my ballot, and came away weeping. Yes, I voted for President Trump. It was not because I thought he was a “good” man with wonderful character. He would have been literally my last choice for the party’s nomination. I would have voted for the libertarian candidate if I thought he had a fighting chance.

          If the conservative evangelical Christians believe that President Trump is a Christian believer, I think they are being sorely deceived. I suspect he is either actually an atheist or perhaps an apatheist. However, after doing research to the best of my ability, and considering all of the issues on the table, I felt that the platform of the Republican party would be more beneficial to the long term future of our country, and serve our better interests than would the platform of the Democratic party. And, neither did I have a lot of trust and confidence in Mrs. Clinton.

          So, in terms of candidates, I chose what I thought was the lesser evil. If only there had been a viable third alternative.

          I’m posting this to share that people’s reasons for thinking and voting a certain way can be more complex than what might appear on the surface.

          There are plenty of good people on both sides. I can see this in my own family. It is sad how we have become so polarized around these political and social views, even feeling that people are our enemies if they feel or have voted differently. I think it is when we are able to be open to one another, and have honest dialogue, that real progress and change become possible.

          1. ObstacleChick

            One of my problems with American politics is its reliance on a 2 party system, and unfortunately, I don’t see that going away anytime soon. Gary Johnson has been on a mission for years to open up the presidential debates beyond D and R, and it looks like that will happen next time around. Too bad it didn’t happen for the 2016 election where voters could have heard other voices more easily without having to go out and find them on their own. The 2-party system is inherently “us vs. them” and obviously not healthy. I had to remove myself from social media for awhile around the 2016 election because of the vitriol – people were barking at each other instead of genuinely engaging in an exchange of ideas. There was an automatic labeling of people as “enemy” based on their political choice, and that divisiveness is just dangerous.

          2. PobodysNerfect

            Rebecca, thank you for your bravery both in sharing your supported candidate and participating in the democratic process in a thoughtful way. You are not alone.

            The issues are complex, no candidate was ideal. At least one of them advocated policies that would not dilute America’s voter base with people who break US law and do not have American values and who would at least try to defend American secular values of separation of church and state (I am not one who believes that simply adding democracy to a theocratically brainwashed group of people in a theocracy (like Iran or NK) will produce an egalitarian secular society, and for the same reason I worry about importing people of certain religions who refuse to assimilate to American culture.

            ObstacleChick is correct about the problem of our 2 party system. I have wondered whether an ‘instant runnoff’ type voting system would help this. Vote for your most favorite candidate, then your second, then third etc. If your first doesn’t have sufficient support, your vote automatically moves to your second choice and so on. At least that way, we would have less risk of being forced to vote for the ‘lesser evil’ and there would also be some kind of index of public sentiment available for the winners to ponder in their future decision making as well.

          3. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

            I will remind you, again, that 82% of voting white Evangelicals voted for Donald Trump. This is a fact, not an opinion. Without their votes he would not have been elected. He knows this. All you need to do is look at his cabinet appointments and his continued pandering to their cause.

            You will find few Trump supporters on this site. Personally, I think the man is a narcissistic megalomaniac who is doing all he can to undo a century of social progress. His views on everything from the environment to economics are rooted in delusion, not fact. His views on North Korea and Iran are dangerous and could lead to world war. He treats nuclear weapons like a 5 year old does his toys — Mine, mine, mine. I can do what I want with them.

            I’d rather not use this post for a long discussion about Trump. Such a discussion has little to do with what I wrote. I’m sure I’ll write things in the future that will lend themselves to discussions about the Toddler in Chief (and this is not pejorative…Trump acts likes a spoiled brat toddler).

  6. Brian

    No problem, Pobod…. PobodysNerfect you know….!

    1. PobodysNerfect

      Thanks, Brian. I should know!

  7. maura a hart

    nothing but whores in the pulpit and sheep in the pews. since reagan all elections have been to choose the lesser evil. but the lesser of 2 evils is still evil. if the liars in the pulpit tel the sheep that the orange ferret wearing shitgibbon is a christian, and the sheep buy in to that b.s. as well as their 20000+ year old book of fairy tales, myths, allegory, metaphor genocide, rape and kidnapping , clearly they are not capable of critical thought or independent thinking.
    they say love,but they meanfear and rage.

    1. PododysNerfect

      maura a hart, no one in politics can win as an atheist. So we have to put up with all the false pretenses. Your creative names for Trump reminds me of the uncivilized explitive loaded non-thinking verbiage unloaded by liberals on anyone who disagrees with them. The fear and rage expressed by liberals is remarkable. You would think Trump had brought the end of civilization!

      Look behind the news media whitewashing of Bill & Hillary and you find a lot more to think about than hair color. It amazes me that they both got so many free passes for betraying the causes they professed to support. Which brings us around to the original topic of disengenuous promises of acceptance. When I see feminists wearing headscarfs as a sign of respect for the religion in a middle east country (where women cannot even drive) all while complaining about western oppression I find it highly hypocritical and nonsensical. It is certainly arguable that Trump is saving western civilization! Trump did not get nominated based on fundamentalist evangelical support. If the evangelicals had had their way, the Republican candidate would have been someone else entirely. But that’s a topic for another day.

  8. PobodysNerfect


    Your original post said “I have long since stopped arguing with the supporters of the Orange-Haired Toddler. No amount of rational discussion will change their minds about Trump. That most of the President’s supporters also happen to be Evangelicals is telling — a double-dose of delusion.”
    then when I commented that Trump supporters are not the lunatics the media tries to paint them, you said you enjoyed the conversation even though we agreed to disagree.

    I myself said in response to another commenter ‘that’s a topic for another day’, but you offered:
    >>82% of voting white Evangelicals voted for Donald Trump

    The implication is that if evangelicals vote for something, it must be bad. Really? If only 90% of white Evangelicals said the earth was round, I would still agree with them.

    But if as you imply, ‘birds of a feather flock together’ and we are going to vote on candidates based entirely on their voters I must ask: Which candidate got the majority of the islamic vote?

    72% of muslims intended to vote for Hillary. So if you had your choice between living in an islamic country or the bible belt, which one would you feel safer if you were LGBT? This is not a hypothetical issue for 1000’s of LGBT people and the answer is clear: You are obviously much safer (although not entirely safe) in the bible belt than in a islamic country where even the laws basically say LGBT don’t exist. Democrats failed us. Ever since Bill reneged on his promise to allow LGBT in the military it was clear they were not as accepting of LGBT as they claimed. Liberal support for a religion antithetical to western values only sealed the deal.

    1. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

      I’m not going to argue this with you. Trump would not be president without the Evangelical vote. They sold their soul to keep political power. These statements are facts.

      Please respect my wishes. You’ve been given ample opportunity to beat the anti-Islam, pro-Trump drum. All you are going is repeating yourself.

  9. Brian

    PobodysNerfect supports Trump because? Oh wait, I have to get personal and PobodysNerfect does not like that because it would mean he has to confront his extreme hatred of Islam, or rather his own family experience of the faith. Rather than face the therapy, he finds solace in Trump, in denial. He knows Islam is evil and has even read the Koran.
    Trumps supporters are good, balanced Christians, Pobody… Sure, right, I see that… Trump is playing you like a flute. Face yourself and your pain instead of vilifying the masses… Be a bit more brave in the face of the harm done to you. Talk some about your family life, your upbringing. Talk about something real.


Please Leave a Pithy Reply

%d bloggers like this: