It's ok to decorate a police car with rainbow flags, but not bible verses

[ScienceRocks]

Neither is ok but bible verses are really dumb on top of that reality. It is like voodooo!!!

 

[MindWars]

Neither is ok but bible verses are really dumb on top of that reality. It is like voodooo!!!

I just posted a video for you over on someone's post you might like it and droll. LOL

 

[AvgGuyIA]

I see the "I Hate Jesus" crowd is up and at 'em.

 

[Montrovant]

I'm pretty sure MindWars is wigging out about rainbows.
Just based on his previous posts, he's pretty clearly anti-LGBT

Perhaps. Gotta love that Syriusly can come up with no better than a "...so are you!" comeback vis-a-vis "snowflakes". I'm just sick and tired of the hypocrisy of issues like this. My version of "snowflakes" are having a BIG problem dealing with anything they disagree with.

I haven't joined in with some of the recent lingo. I don't usually use the word snowflakes, and I don't have a particular definition for it. Your definition is about what I'd use, though.

There isn't necessarily any hypocrisy between preventing religious scripture being on a police vehicle and allowing an LGBT rainbow or flag or what have you. The constitution has been interpreted to prevent any government promotion of a religion, but the same cannot be said of sexual orientation. From a legal, constitutional standpoint, allowing a rainbow flag but denying a Bible verse is perfectly reasonable.

The moral argument is different, of course.

While there may be some who contend that including "In God We Trust" on a police car would be unconstitutional, that requires a distinction between freedom OF religion vs. freedom FROM religion. The inclusion of a distinct social-political symbol that might be offensive to some in the same way that an expression of religion might be offensive could reasonably be extrapolated and included in a ban on such symbols displayed on public vehicles, etc.

As I said earlier, I agree with keeping political and religious messages off of police cars. I'm just pointing out that the constitution, and the case law and precedent arising from it, have indicated that religious scripture on government vehicles like police cars might be considered a violation, while an LGBT message is not, that I am aware of, something that violates any constitutional protections. It might well violate laws or regulations.

Ok. . But just like that video why is it ok for Christian cake bakers to be sued, because they refuse a cake but a Muslim refuses a cake and not a dam thing is done about it.

It's hypocritical beyond Constitutional anything. What one can do the other should be able to do it to.

If Muslim owners of a cake business refuse to bake a cake for homosexual couple in the same way as the Christian bakers, they should face the same legal results. I haven't heard about Muslim wedding cake bakers refusing homosexuals business, did that happen recently?

 

[Montrovant]

I haven't joined in with some of the recent lingo. I don't usually use the word snowflakes, and I don't have a particular definition for it. Your definition is about what I'd use, though.

There isn't necessarily any hypocrisy between preventing religious scripture being on a police vehicle and allowing an LGBT rainbow or flag or what have you. The constitution has been interpreted to prevent any government promotion of a religion, but the same cannot be said of sexual orientation. From a legal, constitutional standpoint, allowing a rainbow flag but denying a Bible verse is perfectly reasonable.

The moral argument is different, of course.

View attachment 135737

Look, it's a list of words that weren't used in the post you quoted and seem to have nothing to do with the post you quoted. Good job.

Thanks for proving my point. Words that go right over your head. Typical.

Why don't you go ahead and explain? I was having a perfectly nice discussion with gallantwarrior. I don't think we were arguing about anything. I am not a liberal. I think I can say with a good degree of confidence that gallantwarrior isn't a liberal. Neither of us used any of the terms in the picture. How is your picture relevant, exactly?

You always want me to waste my time on things you know dam well you won't believe or listen to anyway. So keep eating your popcorn .

The picture was posted for the hell of it. For you to just see it................end of story.

If the picture was posted "for the hell of it," why did you then say it went over my head and I missed the point? Was there a point, or wasn't there?

 

[OnePercenter]

I'm all for fags and dykes getting married if they want to, but they're pushing their luck with this nonsense.

Is that a threat?

Yes, fags and dykes are threatening support for their agenda.

Equality, because there are those that call them 'fags' and 'dykes?'

 

[OnePercenter]

Poor snowflakes wigging out about rainbows again.....lol

Now, see...that's your problem, and the problem of all those like you, people are not wigging out about rainbows, they are disturbed by the rampant hypocrisy of the double standard of those who demand their LGBTetc rainbows be displayed by public installations but who simultaneously, rabidly demand that all hints of religion be expunged from all public discourse.

I'm pretty sure MindWars is wigging out about rainbows.
Just based on his previous posts, he's pretty clearly anti-LGBT

MindWars is against anything 'western culture.' He's pro-Putin.

 

[OnePercenter]

Instead of "Protect and Serve", it should just read "OBEY".

Obey laws. What's wrong with that?

 

[OnePercenter]

Poor snowflakes wigging out about rainbows again.....lol

Now, see...that's your problem, and the problem of all those like you, people are not wigging out about rainbows, they are disturbed by the rampant hypocrisy of the double standard of those who demand their LGBTetc rainbows be displayed by public installations but who simultaneously, rabidly demand that all hints of religion be expunged from all public discourse.

I'm pretty sure MindWars is wigging out about rainbows.
Just based on his previous posts, he's pretty clearly anti-LGBT

Perhaps. Gotta love that Syriusly can come up with no better than a "...so are you!" comeback vis-a-vis "snowflakes". I'm just sick and tired of the hypocrisy of issues like this. My version of "snowflakes" are having a BIG problem dealing with anything they disagree with.

I haven't joined in with some of the recent lingo. I don't usually use the word snowflakes, and I don't have a particular definition for it. Your definition is about what I'd use, though.

There isn't necessarily any hypocrisy between preventing religious scripture being on a police vehicle and allowing an LGBT rainbow or flag or what have you. The constitution has been interpreted to prevent any government promotion of a religion, but the same cannot be said of sexual orientation. From a legal, constitutional standpoint, allowing a rainbow flag but denying a Bible verse is perfectly reasonable.

The moral argument is different, of course.

While there may be some who contend that including "In God We Trust" on a police car would be unconstitutional, that requires a distinction between freedom OF religion vs. freedom FROM religion. The inclusion of a distinct social-political symbol that might be offensive to some in the same way that an expression of religion might be offensive could reasonably be extrapolated and included in a ban on such symbols displayed on public vehicles, etc.

Should have remained 'E Pluribus Unum'. But in 1956 McCarthy had to rally the ignorant.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Kershchins, out to put their bumpersticker everywhere because the one they claim to follow, Jesus, can't get asses in the pew. So they have decided they need a self created marketing crew? If you force people to your religion, doesn't that negate it as a religion people would want to follow?

Very bizarre these people that want to spread out and piss a cross on buildings and cars. It is wholly unChristian-like.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Now, see...that's your problem, and the problem of all those like you, people are not wigging out about rainbows, they are disturbed by the rampant hypocrisy of the double standard of those who demand their LGBTetc rainbows be displayed by public installations but who simultaneously, rabidly demand that all hints of religion be expunged from all public discourse.

I'm pretty sure MindWars is wigging out about rainbows.
Just based on his previous posts, he's pretty clearly anti-LGBT

Perhaps. Gotta love that Syriusly can come up with no better than a "...so are you!" comeback vis-a-vis "snowflakes". I'm just sick and tired of the hypocrisy of issues like this. My version of "snowflakes" are having a BIG problem dealing with anything they disagree with.

I haven't joined in with some of the recent lingo. I don't usually use the word snowflakes, and I don't have a particular definition for it. Your definition is about what I'd use, though.

There isn't necessarily any hypocrisy between preventing religious scripture being on a police vehicle and allowing an LGBT rainbow or flag or what have you. The constitution has been interpreted to prevent any government promotion of a religion, but the same cannot be said of sexual orientation. From a legal, constitutional standpoint, allowing a rainbow flag but denying a Bible verse is perfectly reasonable.

The moral argument is different, of course.

While there may be some who contend that including "In God We Trust" on a police car would be unconstitutional, that requires a distinction between freedom OF religion vs. freedom FROM religion. The inclusion of a distinct social-political symbol that might be offensive to some in the same way that an expression of religion might be offensive could reasonably be extrapolated and included in a ban on such symbols displayed on public vehicles, etc.

As I said earlier, I agree with keeping political and religious messages off of police cars. I'm just pointing out that the constitution, and the case law and precedent arising from it, have indicated that religious scripture on government vehicles like police cars might be considered a violation, while an LGBT message is not, that I am aware of, something that violates any constitutional protections. It might well violate laws or regulations.

Unless you recognize the whole LGBT(etc) cult for the worship it receives. It might as well be a religion, given the fervor with which its adherents support it.
I think all religious, and politico-religious slogans, symbols, and so forth, should be omitted from display on public premises.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Perhaps. Gotta love that Syriusly can come up with no better than a "...so are you!" comeback vis-a-vis "snowflakes". I'm just sick and tired of the hypocrisy of issues like this. My version of "snowflakes" are having a BIG problem dealing with anything they disagree with.

I haven't joined in with some of the recent lingo. I don't usually use the word snowflakes, and I don't have a particular definition for it. Your definition is about what I'd use, though.

There isn't necessarily any hypocrisy between preventing religious scripture being on a police vehicle and allowing an LGBT rainbow or flag or what have you. The constitution has been interpreted to prevent any government promotion of a religion, but the same cannot be said of sexual orientation. From a legal, constitutional standpoint, allowing a rainbow flag but denying a Bible verse is perfectly reasonable.

The moral argument is different, of course.

While there may be some who contend that including "In God We Trust" on a police car would be unconstitutional, that requires a distinction between freedom OF religion vs. freedom FROM religion. The inclusion of a distinct social-political symbol that might be offensive to some in the same way that an expression of religion might be offensive could reasonably be extrapolated and included in a ban on such symbols displayed on public vehicles, etc.

As I said earlier, I agree with keeping political and religious messages off of police cars. I'm just pointing out that the constitution, and the case law and precedent arising from it, have indicated that religious scripture on government vehicles like police cars might be considered a violation, while an LGBT message is not, that I am aware of, something that violates any constitutional protections. It might well violate laws or regulations.

Ok. . But just like that video why is it ok for Christian cake bakers to be sued, because they refuse a cake but a Muslim refuses a cake and not a dam thing is done about it.

It's hypocritical beyond Constitutional anything. What one can do the other should be able to do it to.

If Muslim owners of a cake business refuse to bake a cake for homosexual couple in the same way as the Christian bakers, they should face the same legal results. I haven't heard about Muslim wedding cake bakers refusing homosexuals business, did that happen recently?

Even if it did, the lame-stream media would neglect to publish that story. In the current liberal/progressive narrative, christian are 'bad' and muslims are 'not bad'.

 

[pwjohn]

Poor snowflakes wigging out about rainbows again.....lol

Now, see...that's your problem, and the problem of all those like you, people are not wigging out about rainbows, they are disturbed by the rampant hypocrisy of the double standard of those who demand their LGBTetc rainbows be displayed by public installations but who simultaneously, rabidly demand that all hints of religion be expunged from all public discourse.

Yup! That makes you a snowflake.

 

[pwjohn]

I haven't joined in with some of the recent lingo. I don't usually use the word snowflakes, and I don't have a particular definition for it. Your definition is about what I'd use, though.

There isn't necessarily any hypocrisy between preventing religious scripture being on a police vehicle and allowing an LGBT rainbow or flag or what have you. The constitution has been interpreted to prevent any government promotion of a religion, but the same cannot be said of sexual orientation. From a legal, constitutional standpoint, allowing a rainbow flag but denying a Bible verse is perfectly reasonable.

The moral argument is different, of course.

While there may be some who contend that including "In God We Trust" on a police car would be unconstitutional, that requires a distinction between freedom OF religion vs. freedom FROM religion. The inclusion of a distinct social-political symbol that might be offensive to some in the same way that an expression of religion might be offensive could reasonably be extrapolated and included in a ban on such symbols displayed on public vehicles, etc.

As I said earlier, I agree with keeping political and religious messages off of police cars. I'm just pointing out that the constitution, and the case law and precedent arising from it, have indicated that religious scripture on government vehicles like police cars might be considered a violation, while an LGBT message is not, that I am aware of, something that violates any constitutional protections. It might well violate laws or regulations.

Ok. . But just like that video why is it ok for Christian cake bakers to be sued, because they refuse a cake but a Muslim refuses a cake and not a dam thing is done about it.

It's hypocritical beyond Constitutional anything. What one can do the other should be able to do it to.

If Muslim owners of a cake business refuse to bake a cake for homosexual couple in the same way as the Christian bakers, they should face the same legal results. I haven't heard about Muslim wedding cake bakers refusing homosexuals business, did that happen recently?

Even if it did, the lame-stream media would neglect to publish that story. In the current liberal/progressive narrative, christian are 'bad' and muslims are 'not bad'.

And yes, you too are a liar.

Obama spent hundreds of billions killing Muslims just as fast as our military could get the job done.

 

[Preacher]

View attachment 135445


It’s permissible in the United States to decorate police cars with rainbow flags to celebrate gay pride, but it’s not permissible to decorate police cars with Bible verses honoring law enforcement officers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for the smartasses who don't know why this is being said, a few months ago maybe a year ago a few police cars across the country had some sort of God, or emblem, sticker etc on their police car. Well the Anti American fake liberal pricks took a fit crying like big babies and forced them to remove it.

You pricks will get it back in spades, because Karma always finds it ways back to immoral selfish assholes.

Neither one belong on ANY government vehicle. I actually filed a complaint with the Freedom from Religion foundation about my counties sheriff cars having "in god we trust" on them. Hoping we can sue them to get that shit removed.

 

[MindWars]

View attachment 135445


It’s permissible in the United States to decorate police cars with rainbow flags to celebrate gay pride, but it’s not permissible to decorate police cars with Bible verses honoring law enforcement officers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for the smartasses who don't know why this is being said, a few months ago maybe a year ago a few police cars across the country had some sort of God, or emblem, sticker etc on their police car. Well the Anti American fake liberal pricks took a fit crying like big babies and forced them to remove it.

You pricks will get it back in spades, because Karma always finds it ways back to immoral selfish assholes.

Neither one belong on ANY government vehicle. I actually filed a complaint with the Freedom from Religion foundation about my counties sheriff cars having "in god we trust" on them. Hoping we can sue them to get that shit removed.

Well hopefully ppl sue for the rainbows next.

 

[Montrovant]

View attachment 135445


It’s permissible in the United States to decorate police cars with rainbow flags to celebrate gay pride, but it’s not permissible to decorate police cars with Bible verses honoring law enforcement officers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for the smartasses who don't know why this is being said, a few months ago maybe a year ago a few police cars across the country had some sort of God, or emblem, sticker etc on their police car. Well the Anti American fake liberal pricks took a fit crying like big babies and forced them to remove it.

You pricks will get it back in spades, because Karma always finds it ways back to immoral selfish assholes.

Neither one belong on ANY government vehicle. I actually filed a complaint with the Freedom from Religion foundation about my counties sheriff cars having "in god we trust" on them. Hoping we can sue them to get that shit removed.

I think that may have been tried and failed before, although I don't think it was on police vehicles. I am pretty sure I've read of at least one case where someone tried to sue to have "In God We Trust" removed from something governmental.......but it could have just been from money.

 

[Preacher]

View attachment 135445


It’s permissible in the United States to decorate police cars with rainbow flags to celebrate gay pride, but it’s not permissible to decorate police cars with Bible verses honoring law enforcement officers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And for the smartasses who don't know why this is being said, a few months ago maybe a year ago a few police cars across the country had some sort of God, or emblem, sticker etc on their police car. Well the Anti American fake liberal pricks took a fit crying like big babies and forced them to remove it.

You pricks will get it back in spades, because Karma always finds it ways back to immoral selfish assholes.

Neither one belong on ANY government vehicle. I actually filed a complaint with the Freedom from Religion foundation about my counties sheriff cars having "in god we trust" on them. Hoping we can sue them to get that shit removed.

I think that may have been tried and failed before, although I don't think it was on police vehicles. I am pretty sure I've read of at least one case where someone tried to sue to have "In God We Trust" removed from something governmental.......but it could have just been from money.

Yes it was from money and it failed. Getting them removed from police cars has happened and we got them removed. Waiting to see if we can get something done here.

 

[skookerasbil]

rainbow flags are gay

 

[koshergrl]

"To Serve and Protect", that is a police motto I can support. I covers everybody. Fag-flags, religious quotes, and any other political motto, symbol, or decoration should be removed. Period.

I think "fag-flags" sounds like a derogatory description, but I agree with the sentiment that it's better for police vehicles to serve and protect, not promote any sort of political or religious agenda.

Considering how often questionable arrests and police shootings circulate in the media and social media nowadays, I wonder how much of this is police forces trying to shore up their images? A hostile public is a legitimate concern for law enforcement.

Interesting enough, the term "fag flag" was first revealed to me by a LGBT acquaintance of mine. It falls into the same category as the word "nigga". If used by another homosexual, it's cute, if used by a "straight", it will be used a brick bat to beat them into submission because they are obviously

Figures.