Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Obama may be accused of ignoring the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which forbids government support of religion. But if so, it's because he has given too much deference to religious freedom rather than too little.
His commitment is also on display in defending churches against municipal governments that would prefer to do without them. Under federal law, houses of worship are assured equitable treatment in land use decisions. But mayors and community groups often tell churches to go to the devil.
When that happens, they often find themselves at odds with the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. Last year, it forced the town of Schodack, N.Y., to retreat after it barred an evangelical church from renting space in a commercial area where nonreligious meetings were allowed.
It filed a brief in support of a Hasidic Jewish congregation's lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles, which had forbidden it to hold services in a private home. A federal court ordered the city to back off.
The administration has also intervened in cases where prisoners are denied religious literature. After a South Carolina sheriff prohibited inmates from getting devotional materials and other publications in the mail, the Justice Department sued. In the end, the county agreed to let inmates receive Bibles, Torahs, Korans and related fare.
...University of Virginia law professor Douglas Laycock criticized the contraceptive mandate and opposed the administration in a Supreme Court case involving a teacher fired by a religious school. But on the faith-based hiring issue, he says, Obama has actually been "kind of heroic."
The president's detractors may continue to portray him as a secular fanatic with, as Rick Santorum claims, an "overt hostility to faith in America." Before they do, though, they might want to remember the Ten Commandments -- especially the one about bearing false witness.
Support religion on a minor issue and oppose it on major issues.
Support religion on a minor issue and oppose it on major issues.
I think you meant: Oppose religion on a minor issue and support it on major issues.
After all, Obama's support of religious organizations being forced to pay for contraception, in the scheme of things, is a relatively minor issue...
IN what major ways do you believe Obama has opposed religious freedom in the U.S.?
Support religion on a minor issue and oppose it on major issues.
I think you meant: Oppose religion on a minor issue and support it on major issues.
After all, Obama's support of religious organizations being forced to pay for contraception, in the scheme of things, is a relatively minor issue...
IN what major ways do you believe Obama has opposed religious freedom in the U.S.?
No. It's oppose religion on large issues.
Religion should NOT be involved with politics nor should it influence laws.
It's not infringing on religious rights. You have the right to practice your religion, but you don't have the right to change the laws in accordance to your religion, bring religion into politics for any influence or to gain religious supporters for religious motives, or to make any governmental decisions to be in accordance with your religion or use religious motives with governmental decisions.
By doing that, you will end up infringing on the rights of other religions and then that would become unconstitutional and may be punished bu the court of law or through a lawsuit. For example: Prop. 8 was ruled unconstitutional because religion influenced the law to be in accordance with their religion/motives, which infringed on the rights of those who are rightfully protected under the constitution.
Another Example:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBBiKkYqljw&list=LLt-GlQHg97QwZoz7T3FIiWQ&index=1&feature=plpp_video]Americans Are Pro-Birth Control: Poll - YouTube[/ame]
Religious folks have kicked, screamed, and cried over this and said it "violates their religious rights". Over 60% (and in other cases, over 75%, which is considered an absolute ass-kicking) disagreed because religion should NOT influence laws!
Their "Religious rights" tried to push for laws in Iowa/Virginia to require ultrasound procedures be done for abortions since their "religious rights" also pushed for the contraception to be ended. How barbaric can you get!? Why would you make someone suffer for their choices if they can NOT care for the child!? And lets not forget how their "religious rights" also pushed for a transvaginal ultrasound procedure to be done for abortions! The procedure would be unconsentual (basically rape), to cause even more pain.
NOW FUCK OFF BECAUSE YOUR RELIGION HAS NO PLACE IN GOVERNMENT!
I think you meant: Oppose religion on a minor issue and support it on major issues.
After all, Obama's support of religious organizations being forced to pay for contraception, in the scheme of things, is a relatively minor issue...
IN what major ways do you believe Obama has opposed religious freedom in the U.S.?
No. It's oppose religion on large issues.
Religion should NOT be involved with politics nor should it influence laws.
It's not infringing on religious rights. You have the right to practice your religion, but you don't have the right to change the laws in accordance to your religion, bring religion into politics for any influence or to gain religious supporters for religious motives, or to make any governmental decisions to be in accordance with your religion or use religious motives with governmental decisions.
By doing that, you will end up infringing on the rights of other religions and then that would become unconstitutional and may be punished bu the court of law or through a lawsuit. For example: Prop. 8 was ruled unconstitutional because religion influenced the law to be in accordance with their religion/motives, which infringed on the rights of those who are rightfully protected under the constitution.
Another Example:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBBiKkYqljw&list=LLt-GlQHg97QwZoz7T3FIiWQ&index=1&feature=plpp_video]Americans Are Pro-Birth Control: Poll - YouTube[/ame]
Religious folks have kicked, screamed, and cried over this and said it "violates their religious rights". Over 60% (and in other cases, over 75%, which is considered an absolute ass-kicking) disagreed because religion should NOT influence laws!
Their "Religious rights" tried to push for laws in Iowa/Virginia to require ultrasound procedures be done for abortions since their "religious rights" also pushed for the contraception to be ended. How barbaric can you get!? Why would you make someone suffer for their choices if they can NOT care for the child!? And lets not forget how their "religious rights" also pushed for a transvaginal ultrasound procedure to be done for abortions! The procedure would be unconsentual (basically rape), to cause even more pain.
NOW FUCK OFF BECAUSE YOUR RELIGION HAS NO PLACE IN GOVERNMENT!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syV2LkGpQB0]lighten up, Francis - YouTube[/ame]
Obama may be accused of ignoring the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which forbids government support of religion. But if so, it's because he has given too much deference to religious freedom rather than too little.
His commitment is also on display in defending churches against municipal governments that would prefer to do without them. Under federal law, houses of worship are assured equitable treatment in land use decisions. But mayors and community groups often tell churches to go to the devil.
When that happens, they often find themselves at odds with the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. Last year, it forced the town of Schodack, N.Y., to retreat after it barred an evangelical church from renting space in a commercial area where nonreligious meetings were allowed.
It filed a brief in support of a Hasidic Jewish congregation's lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles, which had forbidden it to hold services in a private home. A federal court ordered the city to back off.
The administration has also intervened in cases where prisoners are denied religious literature. After a South Carolina sheriff prohibited inmates from getting devotional materials and other publications in the mail, the Justice Department sued. In the end, the county agreed to let inmates receive Bibles, Torahs, Korans and related fare.
...University of Virginia law professor Douglas Laycock criticized the contraceptive mandate and opposed the administration in a Supreme Court case involving a teacher fired by a religious school. But on the faith-based hiring issue, he says, Obama has actually been "kind of heroic."
The president's detractors may continue to portray him as a secular fanatic with, as Rick Santorum claims, an "overt hostility to faith in America." Before they do, though, they might want to remember the Ten Commandments -- especially the one about bearing false witness.
NOW FUCK OFF BECAUSE YOUR RELIGION HAS NO PLACE IN GOVERNMENT!
Support religion on a minor issue and oppose it on major issues.
I think you meant: Oppose religion on a minor issue and support it on major issues.
After all, Obama's support of religious organizations being forced to pay for contraception, in the scheme of things, is a relatively minor issue...
IN what major ways do you believe Obama has opposed religious freedom in the U.S.?
No. It's oppose religion on large issues.
Religion should NOT be involved with politics nor should it influence laws.
It's not infringing on religious rights. You have the right to practice your religion, but you don't have the right to change the laws in accordance to your religion, bring religion into politics for any influence or to gain religious supporters for religious motives, or to make any governmental decisions to be in accordance with your religion or use religious motives with governmental decisions.
By doing that, you will end up infringing on the rights of other religions and then that would become unconstitutional and may be punished bu the court of law or through a lawsuit. For example: Prop. 8 was ruled unconstitutional because religion influenced the law to be in accordance with their religion/motives, which infringed on the rights of those who are rightfully protected under the constitution.
Another Example:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBBiKkYqljw&list=LLt-GlQHg97QwZoz7T3FIiWQ&index=1&feature=plpp_video"]Americans Are Pro-Birth Control: Poll - YouTube[/ame]
Religious folks have kicked, screamed, and cried over this and said it "violates their religious rights". Over 60% (and in other cases, over 75%, which is considered an absolute ass-kicking) disagreed because religion should NOT influence laws!
Their "Religious rights" tried to push for laws in Iowa/Virginia to require ultrasound procedures be done for abortions since their "religious rights" also pushed for the contraception to be ended. How barbaric can you get!? Why would you make someone suffer for their choices if they can NOT care for the child!? And lets not forget how their "religious rights" also pushed for a transvaginal ultrasound procedure to be done for abortions! The procedure would be unconsentual (basically rape), to cause even more pain.
NOW FUCK OFF BECAUSE YOUR RELIGION HAS NO PLACE IN GOVERNMENT!
NOW FUCK OFF BECAUSE YOUR RELIGION HAS NO PLACE IN GOVERNMENT!
How about you "fuck off" because your government has no place in religion.
You liberals are such hypocrits, you claim to believe in "separation of church and state" yet don't hesitate to pass laws that force religious instutions to do things that are against their beliefs.
NOW FUCK OFF BECAUSE YOUR RELIGION HAS NO PLACE IN GOVERNMENT!
How about you "fuck off" because your government has no place in religion.
You liberals are such hypocrits, you claim to believe in "separation of church and state" yet don't hesitate to pass laws that force religious instutions to do things that are against their beliefs.
Religion has the privilege to be here. And since there can be such diversity, we have to establish a neutral set a laws for the country that don't adhere to any religion.
For example, if this was a muslim country, then any follower of any other religion can be murdered and the murdered can get away with that.
Here, the muslim murderer will be held for their crimes and vice versa for any other religious person who murders the muslim.
Now for laws such as marriage, Christianity is what influenced to make gay marriage illegal. That takes the rights away from others.
There should be NO law on marriage and it should be up to any religious group to perform those. If it's a christian church performing gay weddings, it should NOT be illegal because they are willing to do so. People should not take other's rights away.
You can follow your religion all you want , but you HAVE to follow OUR RULES. Otherwise, go somewhere else if you don't want to.
Like Mitt Romney/Rick Santorum: They want to have Christianity lead the country and have it influence OUR WARS! GTFO OUT OF HERE! Like we need another worldwide holy war that only serves the purpose to take lives over a fairytale.
Equal rights for all.
How about you "fuck off" because your government has no place in religion.
You liberals are such hypocrits, you claim to believe in "separation of church and state" yet don't hesitate to pass laws that force religious instutions to do things that are against their beliefs.
Religion has the privilege to be here. And since there can be such diversity, we have to establish a neutral set a laws for the country that don't adhere to any religion.
For example, if this was a muslim country, then any follower of any other religion can be murdered and the murdered can get away with that.
Here, the muslim murderer will be held for their crimes and vice versa for any other religious person who murders the muslim.
Now for laws such as marriage, Christianity is what influenced to make gay marriage illegal. That takes the rights away from others.
There should be NO law on marriage and it should be up to any religious group to perform those. If it's a christian church performing gay weddings, it should NOT be illegal because they are willing to do so. People should not take other's rights away.
You can follow your religion all you want , but you HAVE to follow OUR RULES. Otherwise, go somewhere else if you don't want to.
Like Mitt Romney/Rick Santorum: They want to have Christianity lead the country and have it influence OUR WARS! GTFO OUT OF HERE! Like we need another worldwide holy war that only serves the purpose to take lives over a fairytale.
Equal rights for all.
It is NOT illegal for a church to marry gays if they want. Can you point out one instance where someone was arrested for performing a gay marriage or being in a gay marriage? No, you can't. So stop believing in the lie that gay marriage is "banned" or "illegal" anywhere in the US because it simply isn't true.
Big difference between gay marriage being "illegal" and a state or federal government simply choosing to not recognize it as a marriage.
How about you "fuck off" because your government has no place in religion.
You liberals are such hypocrits, you claim to believe in "separation of church and state" yet don't hesitate to pass laws that force religious instutions to do things that are against their beliefs.
Religion has the privilege to be here. And since there can be such diversity, we have to establish a neutral set a laws for the country that don't adhere to any religion.
For example, if this was a muslim country, then any follower of any other religion can be murdered and the murdered can get away with that.
Here, the muslim murderer will be held for their crimes and vice versa for any other religious person who murders the muslim.
Now for laws such as marriage, Christianity is what influenced to make gay marriage illegal. That takes the rights away from others.
There should be NO law on marriage and it should be up to any religious group to perform those. If it's a christian church performing gay weddings, it should NOT be illegal because they are willing to do so. People should not take other's rights away.
You can follow your religion all you want , but you HAVE to follow OUR RULES. Otherwise, go somewhere else if you don't want to.
Like Mitt Romney/Rick Santorum: They want to have Christianity lead the country and have it influence OUR WARS! GTFO OUT OF HERE! Like we need another worldwide holy war that only serves the purpose to take lives over a fairytale.
Equal rights for all.
It is NOT illegal for a church to marry gays if they want. Can you point out one instance where someone was arrested for performing a gay marriage or being in a gay marriage? No, you can't. So stop believing in the lie that gay marriage is "banned" or "illegal" anywhere in the US because it simply isn't true.
Big difference between gay marriage being "illegal" and a state or federal government simply choosing to not recognize it as a marriage.
Religion has the privilege to be here. And since there can be such diversity, we have to establish a neutral set a laws for the country that don't adhere to any religion.
For example, if this was a muslim country, then any follower of any other religion can be murdered and the murdered can get away with that.
Here, the muslim murderer will be held for their crimes and vice versa for any other religious person who murders the muslim.
Now for laws such as marriage, Christianity is what influenced to make gay marriage illegal. That takes the rights away from others.
There should be NO law on marriage and it should be up to any religious group to perform those. If it's a christian church performing gay weddings, it should NOT be illegal because they are willing to do so. People should not take other's rights away.
You can follow your religion all you want , but you HAVE to follow OUR RULES. Otherwise, go somewhere else if you don't want to.
Like Mitt Romney/Rick Santorum: They want to have Christianity lead the country and have it influence OUR WARS! GTFO OUT OF HERE! Like we need another worldwide holy war that only serves the purpose to take lives over a fairytale.
Equal rights for all.
It is NOT illegal for a church to marry gays if they want. Can you point out one instance where someone was arrested for performing a gay marriage or being in a gay marriage? No, you can't. So stop believing in the lie that gay marriage is "banned" or "illegal" anywhere in the US because it simply isn't true.
Big difference between gay marriage being "illegal" and a state or federal government simply choosing to not recognize it as a marriage.
Then why aren't gays getting married in states that don't allow it and there is a huge effort to have those laws overturned?
Religion has the privilege to be here. And since there can be such diversity, we have to establish a neutral set a laws for the country that don't adhere to any religion.
For example, if this was a muslim country, then any follower of any other religion can be murdered and the murdered can get away with that.
Here, the muslim murderer will be held for their crimes and vice versa for any other religious person who murders the muslim.
Now for laws such as marriage, Christianity is what influenced to make gay marriage illegal. That takes the rights away from others.
There should be NO law on marriage and it should be up to any religious group to perform those. If it's a christian church performing gay weddings, it should NOT be illegal because they are willing to do so. People should not take other's rights away.
You can follow your religion all you want , but you HAVE to follow OUR RULES. Otherwise, go somewhere else if you don't want to.
Like Mitt Romney/Rick Santorum: They want to have Christianity lead the country and have it influence OUR WARS! GTFO OUT OF HERE! Like we need another worldwide holy war that only serves the purpose to take lives over a fairytale.
Equal rights for all.
It is NOT illegal for a church to marry gays if they want. Can you point out one instance where someone was arrested for performing a gay marriage or being in a gay marriage? No, you can't. So stop believing in the lie that gay marriage is "banned" or "illegal" anywhere in the US because it simply isn't true.
Big difference between gay marriage being "illegal" and a state or federal government simply choosing to not recognize it as a marriage.
Then why aren't gays getting married in states that don't allow it and there is a huge effort to have those laws overturned?
