CBS tries using Christ against MAGA Christian — but it backfires big-time
The legacy media's double standard for Christian politicians was on full display last week.
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) is a lawmaker known for speaking openly about his Christian faith. Last week, he appeared on "CBS Mornings Plus" to promote his new book, "One Nation Always Under God: Profiles in Christian Courage." But instead of asking about the book, CBS News anchor Adriana Diaz chose to challenge the legitimacy of Scott's faith with a now-familiar line of attack.
The faith test becomes just another political weapon — one wielded not to clarify the truth but to embarrass political opponents.
"As a practicing Christian, how do you reconcile your support for President Trump when many people see his actions as lacking Christian values?" Diaz asked.
It's the same question we've heard repeatedly asked of Trump-supporting Christians, and, to his credit, Scott did not flinch.
But the question reveals something much bigger than Scott, Trump, or even the Republican Party. It exposes the media's asymmetrical "faith test" — one applied rigorously to Trump-supporting conservatives but never to Democrats.
Faith on trial
The question itself is a rhetorical sleight of hand. It implies that supporting Trump is inherently anti-Christian and that real Christianity is whatever Trump isn't. By that logic, Scott stands guilty until proven innocent.
But the problem isn't just the question. It's the blatant double standard.
If it's fair to interrogate Tim Scott on whether his support for President Trump squares with the teachings of Jesus, then surely it's fair game to press professing Christian Democrats on whether the policies and people they support align with Christian theology and ethics, right?
Except that almost never happens.
When was the last time a news anchor interrogated a Democrat — like former President Joe Biden, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), or Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), for instance — on how the support for abortion comports with 2,000 years of unambiguous Christian teachings about protecting innocent life, especially of the unborn?
Has any Democrat, for that matter, been grilled on whether endorsing the LGBTQ agenda — including radical trans procedures for children — is consistent with biblical ethics?
If such questions have been asked of Democrats, they've gone unnoticed, which is telling because these aren't minor theological quibbles. They're fundamental biblical issues, and Christianity has been clear-eyed about them for thousands of years.
Tested, then twisted
Diaz's question reveals an underlying assumption: that Christianity naturally aligns with progressive politics.
That's why journalists feel compelled to question Trump-supporting Christians about the congruency of their politics and theology, but never think to challenge a Democrat for supporting policies that clearly contradict Christian orthodoxy and biblical teaching. It's because they don't recognize or perceive the obvious inconsistency.
This double standard is as dangerous as it is subversive.
It redefines Christianity in the public imagination, not as an ancient faith with its own transcendent moral authority, but as a soft and therapeutic set of values (i.e., tolerance, inclusion, "compassion"), conveniently shaped to match the political priorities of the left.
RELATED: How the liberal media twists 'church and state' to hide what it truly fears
The media isn't actually interested in theological nuance or serious conversations about faith and politics. Their agenda is clear: to police the boundaries of acceptable public religion.
And in their eyes, supporting Trump is a grave sin.
If journalists truly believe that public officials should be held accountable to the moral standards of their faith, that's fine. But that standard must be applied equally. You can't grill Republicans for supporting Trump but never interrogate Democrats championing abortion, the LGBTQ agenda, and the destruction of the traditional family.
Otherwise, the "faith test" becomes just another political weapon — one wielded not to clarify the truth but to embarrass political opponents who dissent from the liberal consensus.
Sacred spin shattered
If the press were honest and intellectually serious, they would apply the faith test fairly.
It would look something like this:
- Mr. Biden, as a Catholic, how do you reconcile Roman Catholic teaching on the sanctity of life with your support for abortion?
- Mrs. Pelosi, how does your Christian faith inform your views on marriage and family policy?
- Mr. Warnock, how do you interpret biblical passages on protecting vulnerable life in light of your support for abortion and the trans agenda?
These aren't "gotcha" questions. They're parallel to what Scott faced last week — only aimed in the other direction. And if politicians can't answer these questions without spin and deflection, that would tell us something important.
Scott handled himself with grace and focus. But Trump-supporting Republicans shouldn't be the only side forced to reconcile their faith and politics on the public stage. If the media wants to play referee on Christian consistency, they need to enforce the rules on both sides.
Fairness — and honesty — demands equal scrutiny.
Anything less is not journalism. It's partisanship dressed up as moral concern, and it's why Americans no longer trust the mainstream press.
Diaz tried to weaponize Christ against Scott and MAGA Christians. But the shot backfired, exposing yet another double standard in the media.
Photo by Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com
Major college fires worker after posts celebrating Charlie Kirk's assassination. It's just the tip of ugly leftist iceberg.
In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk's assassination last week, leftists far and wide who didn't like the words or politics of the TPUSA founder let loose on social media and celebrated Kirk's horrific death from a gunshot at an outdoor student event at Utah Valley University.
One of those anti-Kirk voices is a Clemson University employee — and the South Carolina public college suspended that unnamed worker Saturday.
'After being notified on Friday to stay out of the classroom, two faculty members now have been removed from their teaching duties pending investigation for termination.'
"Clemson University continues to thoroughly review the inappropriate social media content posted by employees in response to the tragic murder of Charlie Kirk," the school said in its Saturday statement. "As stated previously, the University will take decisive and appropriate action in cases where speech is not protected under the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment."
The Post and Courier said assistant music professor Melvin Earl Villaver Jr. allegedly posted remarks about Kirk’s death. The paper noted in a separate story that one screenshot appearing to reference Kirk states, "Today was one of the most beautiful days ever."
U.S. Rep. Russell Fry (R-S.C.) was livid over the alleged posts and called out Villaver: "Celebrating Charlie Kirk's death is sick. What kind of depraved person thinks this is acceptable? Our tax dollars should not pay him another damn dime. I call on Clemson to fire him immediately!"
Screenshots included with Fry's takedown showed comments and retweets allegedly from Villaver saying:
RELATED: Charlie Kirk hater goes nuclear on supporter of slain activist — then pays price after allegedly unleashing physical attacks
Well, Clemson on Monday afternoon announced that "following an immediate and deliberate investigation into inappropriate social media content, Clemson today terminated an employee due to their social media posts." The school's statement did not name the employee or say what the posts were about.
The Post and Courier said Villaver could not be reached for comment; the X account @MelvinEarlMusic — from which the paper said his alleged remarks and reposts were cited — now "doesn't exist."
But WHNS-TV reported that Clemson called a special Board of Trustees meeting scheduled for Monday afternoon after facing backlash over comments believed to be made by some employees and professors about Kirk’s death.
The paper, citing a university spokesperson, reported that the remarks attributed to Villaver were not the only ones to draw criticism.
Indeed, the school's Monday statement on X added the following: "After being notified on Friday to stay out of the classroom, two faculty members now have been removed from their teaching duties pending investigation for termination."
Prior to the firing announcement, U.S. Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) wrote the following X post: "Your First Amendment rights do not include a right to a job! Clemson's professors were completely inappropriate. The vile and disgusting celebration of a murder must compel the university to take clear and immediate action."
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) also called on Clemson to commence firings: "Free speech doesn't prevent you from being fired if you're stupid and have poor judgement. The despicable, inappropriate and classless statements about a tragic event should not diminish a great university like @ClemsonUniv. However, in my opinion, those who made these despicable, inappropriate and classless statements should be good candidates for termination by this public university."
RELATED: Professor who shared vile response to Kirk's assassination receives lesson about consequences: 'Sick people'
As readers of Blaze News are no doubt aware, the number of reports about people from all walks of life spouting off inappropriate comments about Charlie Kirk's assassination seem to be piling up at an astronomical rate.
What's more, it doesn't seem to be ending well for many of them:
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!