Texas Governor Defends Religious Liberties, Game On!!!

[Borillar]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, Texas just gave a big FU to SCOTUS

Texas Governor Defends Religious Liberties

There is one state (and if you have read my articles before, you know which one I’m talking about) that is already leading the way, in essence combating SCOTUS and their disastrous decision. Of course, I’m talking about the Lone Star State.

In a directive issued in the last few hours, Texas Governor Gregg Abbott has informed all those agencies that they are to comply with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, Article I of the Texas Constitution, and the Texas Religious Freedom Act. In other words, he just shut down same-sex marriage in Texas and ordered everyone to preserve the religious liberties and First Amendment rights of all Texans.

Read it here:

“Texans of all faiths must be absolutely secure in the knowledge that their religious freedom is beyond the reach of government,” Governor Abbott wrote in the memorandum obtained by Breitbart Texas. “Renewing and reinforcing that promise is all the more important in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. The government must never pressure a person to abandon or violate his or her sincerely held religious beliefs regarding a topic such as marriage. That sort of religious coercion will never be a ‘compelling governmental interest,’ and it will never be ‘the least restrictive means of furthering that interest.’”

“With these obligations in mind,” Abbott continued, “I expect all agencies under my direction to prioritize compliance with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article I of the Texas Constitution, and the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act. All state agency heads should ensure that no one acting on behalf of their agency takes any adverse action against any person, as defined in Chapter 311 of the Texas Government Code, on account of the person’s act or refusal to act that is substantially motivated by sincere religious belief. This order applies to any agency decision, including but not limited to granting or denying benefits, managing agency employees, entering or enforcing agency contracts, licensing and permitting decisions, or enforcing state laws and regulations.”

Governor of Texas Just Said What He s Doing After Gay Marriage Ruling It s HARDCORE

So you can do anything you want as long as it's a religious belief, and that's OK in Texas? The Rastafarians can go smoke dope everywhere because it's a religious belief? You could sacrifice your children to Baal because it's a religious belief? You can torture and burn heretics at the stake because it's a religious belief? You can go about murdering people in the name of Kali? Will Muslims be able to enact Sharia law? Or is this just a narrow order to allow for the religious persecution of gays?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

EMILYNGHIEM SAID:

'Do liberals understand that "separation of church and state"
should apply to keeping their secular beliefs out of public policy also?'

'Liberals' correctly understand that today's ruling has nothing to do with the First Amendment, it has nothing to do with 'religious liberty,' and it has absolutely nothing to do with private persons and organizations who are completely unaffected by today's ruling.

The actual question is do conservatives understand the right to due process and equal protection of the law as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.

 

[Skylar]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, Texas just gave a big FU to SCOTUS

Texas Governor Defends Religious Liberties

There is one state (and if you have read my articles before, you know which one I’m talking about) that is already leading the way, in essence combating SCOTUS and their disastrous decision. Of course, I’m talking about the Lone Star State.

In a directive issued in the last few hours, Texas Governor Gregg Abbott has informed all those agencies that they are to comply with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, Article I of the Texas Constitution, and the Texas Religious Freedom Act. In other words, he just shut down same-sex marriage in Texas and ordered everyone to preserve the religious liberties and First Amendment rights of all Texans.

Read it here:

“Texans of all faiths must be absolutely secure in the knowledge that their religious freedom is beyond the reach of government,” Governor Abbott wrote in the memorandum obtained by Breitbart Texas. “Renewing and reinforcing that promise is all the more important in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. The government must never pressure a person to abandon or violate his or her sincerely held religious beliefs regarding a topic such as marriage. That sort of religious coercion will never be a ‘compelling governmental interest,’ and it will never be ‘the least restrictive means of furthering that interest.’”

“With these obligations in mind,” Abbott continued, “I expect all agencies under my direction to prioritize compliance with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article I of the Texas Constitution, and the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act. All state agency heads should ensure that no one acting on behalf of their agency takes any adverse action against any person, as defined in Chapter 311 of the Texas Government Code, on account of the person’s act or refusal to act that is substantially motivated by sincere religious belief. This order applies to any agency decision, including but not limited to granting or denying benefits, managing agency employees, entering or enforcing agency contracts, licensing and permitting decisions, or enforcing state laws and regulations.”

Governor of Texas Just Said What He s Doing After Gay Marriage Ruling It s HARDCORE

So you can do anything you want as long as it's a religious belief, and that's OK in Texas? The Rastafarians can go smoke dope everywhere because it's a religious belief? You could sacrifice your children to Baal because it's a religious belief? You can torture and burn heretics at the stake because it's a religious belief? You can go about murdering people in the name of Kali? Will Muslims be able to enact Sharia law? Or is this just a narrow order to allow for the religious persecution of gays?

Oh, fuck no. This is a Christian only sort of thing. And only as it pertains to gays.

This is a new veneer on the same old bullshit. Texas is nothing if not predictable. And are a source of glorious clarification from the USSC, giving us example after example of what a State CAN'T do.......while demonstrating all the heinous, horrible shit that conservatives wish they could.

 

[DarkFury]

Its not a country now. Its part of the United States. And its laws are subject to constitutional guarantees.

Texas is fighting to deny its citizens fundamental civil rights. And that's a battle they will lose morally, historically, and legally. And should. As its pretty loathsome.

Mark my words. In our lifetime, Texas will issue an apology for the shit they're doing right now.

You drip, Texas apologizes to nobody

They arent adult enough. Yet. Someday they will be, and the apology will be forthcoming

Exactly. Eventually even the most petulant child matures and grows enough to acknowledge when their wrong. I am fully confident that Texas has the same potential.

You have a freaking Panda for an avatar and you're talking maturity?

A Kung-Fu panda, thankyouverymuch.

Looks more like a Dung-Fu Panda.

 

[Pogo]

You don't know the difference between O'bama and the Supreme Court?

Education is a lost art.

 

[DarkFury]

Yeah, but the folks in the Alamo didn't fight so they could deny someone else fundamental civil rights.

In order for YOU to understand what Texans were fighting for YOU need to read the laws of the REPUBLIC of TEXAS. It was it's own country moron with it's OWN laws AND government.

Its not a country now. Its part of the United States. And its laws are subject to constitutional guarantees.

Texas is fighting to deny its citizens fundamental civil rights. And that's a battle they will lose morally, historically, and legally. And should. As its pretty loathsome.

Mark my words. In our lifetime, Texas will issue an apology for the shit they're doing right now.

You drip, Texas apologizes to nobody

They arent adult enough. Yet. Someday they will be, and the apology will be forthcoming

Exactly. Eventually even the most petulant child matures and grows enough to acknowledge when their wrong. I am fully confident that Texas has the same potential.

But do you? I guess not as loud and mouthy on the subject as you are while KNOWING full well that you are NOT even slightly aware of what you say.

 

[emilynghiem]

You realize he's just trying to force a court battle that will eventually be lost by texas

As a prochoice Democrat, I would support separating party policies similar to religions.
And not abuse govt to impose or establish one over any other, but give all citizens equal access to
the options of their free choice.

Not all views are equally valid constitutionally. Your argument ignores this. The law doesn't.

Hi Skylar give me an example. My intent is to ADDRESS what is constitution or unconstitutional about each belief.

so it depends on the situation. Instead of just repeating your statement over and over,
give me examples, and I can explain in each one, where I would say X Y Z is unconstitutional but A B C are consistent with the constitution.

Can you list several key examples of beliefs you are referring to?
And I have NO PROBLEM pointing out where these can be abused to be unconstitutional,
and where these can be addressed to allow for separate but equal religious freedom and practice.

List any examples, and I can explain what I mean and so can you! Thanks!

 

[DarkFury]

You don't know the difference between O'bama and the Supreme Court?

Education is a lost art.

The Supreme court ALL have single digit IQ's but Obama is the only one that is ONE.

 

[J.E.D]

If nothing else Texas has the left loons frothing at the mouth

If you mean the beer I spit out while pissing myself with laughter, then yeah, I'm frothing. Frothing indeed.

FakeIrishSkank

 

[Skylar]

In order for YOU to understand what Texans were fighting for YOU need to read the laws of the REPUBLIC of TEXAS. It was it's own country moron with it's OWN laws AND government.

Its not a country now. Its part of the United States. And its laws are subject to constitutional guarantees.

Texas is fighting to deny its citizens fundamental civil rights. And that's a battle they will lose morally, historically, and legally. And should. As its pretty loathsome.

Mark my words. In our lifetime, Texas will issue an apology for the shit they're doing right now.

You drip, Texas apologizes to nobody

They arent adult enough. Yet. Someday they will be, and the apology will be forthcoming

Exactly. Eventually even the most petulant child matures and grows enough to acknowledge when their wrong. I am fully confident that Texas has the same potential.

But do you? I guess not as loud and mouthy on the subject as you are while KNOWING full well that you are NOT even slightly aware of what you say.

Me? Sure I do. I used to be an opponent of same sex marriage. And just got exhausted filling in hole after hole in the argument. And then one day it dawned on me......if it is that hard to defend, maybe its not a very good argument. So I took a long, hard look at it and came to the conclusion that it was essentially crap. And that the pro-gay marriage argument was much, much stronger.

So I admitted I was wrong, apologized and adopted the more logical, factual and rational position.

I'd much rather be right than consistent.

 

[cnm]

guno you cannot legislate changes to people's beliefs by a court ruling.
People will still believe as they do, and defend that by natural laws
in the First and Fourteenth Amendment protecting beliefs EQUALLY.

People's beliefs are not legislated.

 

[eagle1462010]

Fuck same sex marriage..................

Next up they will want to marry their favorite goat..........

 

[DarkFury]

If nothing else Texas has the left loons frothing at the mouth

If you mean the beer I spit out while pissing myself with laughter, then yeah, I'm frothing. Frothing indeed.

FakeIrishSkank

YOU piss yourself? And are PROUD of it? Democrat!

 

[Pogo]

Fuck same sex marriage..................

Next up they will want to marry their favorite goat..........

Right, because humans and goats are the same thing.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What does he plan to do with the Texans who are authorized to perform marriages that don't hold 'religious' beliefs against same sex marriages?

 

[Skylar]

You realize he's just trying to force a court battle that will eventually be lost by texas

As a prochoice Democrat, I would support separating party policies similar to religions.
And not abuse govt to impose or establish one over any other, but give all citizens equal access to
the options of their free choice.

Not all views are equally valid constitutionally. Your argument ignores this. The law doesn't.

Hi Skylar give me an example. My intent is to ADDRESS what is constitution or unconstitutional about each belief.

The problem is that you start from a baseline that each belief has equally constitutional validity. And that's necessarily true. SOmetimes its a contest between an unconstitutional position and a very constitutional one.

And as an example, lets take gay marriage. Gays want to get married. Opponents of gay marriage don't want it to happen, insisting that the state should deny them this recognition.

Get specific in how we can acknowledge the validity of both sides.

 

[Skylar]

What does he plan to do with the Texans who are authorized to perform marriages that don't hold 'religious' beliefs against same sex marriages?

Cage match with Chuck Norris?

 

[emilynghiem]

You don't know the difference between O'bama and the Supreme Court?

Education is a lost art.

I find more liberals and Obama supporters who don't know the
difference between federal laws through Congress and state laws through local legislatures.

I find more liberals who don't get that if you want to change the Constitution
and role of govt as defined therein, a Constitutional amendment is required first.

If we were to require Constitutional education for all citizens to exercise voting rights;
and also require the same oath and training as police and military in order to be authorized to
use weapons to enforce the laws; and require citizens to sign legal contracts agreeing to pay damages debts and prosecution costs for any crime duly convicted of in order to invoke privileges of citizenship, maybe we'd see a more educated and responsible citizenry on all sides.

if we don't require people to learn the laws, or to pay for costs incurred if they commit crimes or abuses,
but if we keep waiting until AFTER people commit crimes to "read them their rights" how can we expect anyone to follow the laws, if they don't even know what they are?

Look what happens in schools if students are not given the rules in writing and required to sign agreements to follow them. The kids who bullied Phoebe Prince until she killed herself had no idea that throwing soda cans at her constituted assault. Only after they were charged with crimes were they informed this was unlawful and criminal.

As long as taxpayers pay the bill for crimes, and politicians and contractor make a living off crime and the fear of it, where is the motivation to teach people the laws and how to follow "due process" to avoid violating rights?

 

[emilynghiem]

You realize he's just trying to force a court battle that will eventually be lost by texas

As a prochoice Democrat, I would support separating party policies similar to religions.
And not abuse govt to impose or establish one over any other, but give all citizens equal access to
the options of their free choice.

Not all views are equally valid constitutionally. Your argument ignores this. The law doesn't.

Hi Skylar give me an example. My intent is to ADDRESS what is constitution or unconstitutional about each belief.

The problem is that you start from a baseline that each belief has equally constitutional validity. And that's necessarily true. SOmetimes its a contest between an unconstitutional position and a very constitutional one.

And as an example, lets take gay marriage. Gays want to get married. Opponents of gay marriage don't want it to happen, insisting that the state should deny them this recognition.

Get specific in how we can acknowledge the validity of both sides.

Give me a specific example,
and I will explain what is constitutional and unconstitutional about.

For example, Christian beliefs. It is constitutional to practice that, but unconstitutional to force other people
through govt to pay for your beliefs or follow it.

So you cannot just say "Christianity" is constitutional or not, but how is it practiced, what policy
are you talking about specifically?

 

[eagle1462010]

It doesn't matter what SCOTUS says..................It doesn't change the fundamental principle or beliefs in this country............

The Majority doesn't agree.............and believe it's immoral............that didn't change after the finally of JUDICIAL ACTIVISM.........

If you were to take a vote in the entire country today...........With the definition of marriage being between a man and a woman...................the movement would lose the vote in probably every state.