The other gaffe was this comment about it being "above his pay grade" to determine when a child deserves rights and constitutional protection. But, he considers it within his pay grade to say when a child does NOT deserve rights and protection. This was a huge gaffe. He is clearly without a clue in this area. He does not even see the contradictions. If he doesn't know and it is "above his pay grade," how can he be so cocky, confident, and sure when to declare an unborn child does not deserve constitutional rights and protection from bodily harm and murder?
The scandal of his bizarre moral theology gets goofier each time he opens his mouth on these subjects. That he quoted the Gospel of Matthew on "the least of my brothers" apparently without being aware this should apply especially to the unborn and recently born, and to unwanted children is...beyond words. Did he really NOT know this when he started his answer and alluded to the Gospel? Does he really think Jesus would side with abortionists? That Jesus doesn't think the unborn deserve rights?
As soon as I heard him quote "the least of my brothers" and allude to Matthew, immediately, the VERY moment he said this, I thought, "is he REALLY going here???!!!" Because he is going to lose this one if he can't see it applies to unborn and unwanted children.
The problem with the moral theology at Trinity United and the theological mind involved here is it is not very logical and has these kinds of strange, kooky contradictions. It's not just a "God Damn America" theology but also a "God Damn the Unborn" theology. Whatever that is, it's not Christianity. Christianity does not teach that it is acceptable to take the life of the unborn. There are very specific guidelines and rules about the taking of human life which require clear "self-defense" conditions. It's a very serious matter. Christians can't claim this is "above their pay grade."