Freedom Of Religion

[Clementine]

Freedom Of Religion;

Nothing is sadder than watching people think Freedom of Religion means "Freedom to force my Religion onto you".

The concept. "The Constitution gives me the right to force you to think like me"

Christians need to stop trying to CONTROL America....The Bible and the Constitution teach FREE WILL. What are you all thinking?

What are they controlling?

It's government and the courts stopping gay marriage from being legal. Not religion. The religious people can only speak out but they don't make laws.

You spend time bashing Christians for having opinions and exercising freedom of speech. They are pretty vocal about gay marriage and abortion, yet abortion is still legal and gay marriage is legal in some states. For you idiots here, that means that Christians don't force anyone to do anything. They just talk and protest.

Why hasn't Obama waved his magic pen to fix all this? Or isn't he serious about it? He's not worried about the constitution when it comes to his amnesty for illegals, so why would he worry about whether it's legal for him to make gay marriage legal across the country? Maybe he likes illegals more than he likes gays.

Christians voice their opinions and the left can't tolerate that. Get over it. They protest instead of throwing people off rooftops or beheading people, yet they don't get tolerated by the left like those who do murder people.

Just be glad that Christians aren't like Muslims in other countries. They wouldn't merely protest, they'd take the same despicable actions that Muslims do when they don't like something. You sure don't hear any debates in Muslim countries about gay marriage. People know it would carry a death sentence if they supported it.

How many Muslims here come out and support gay marriage, women's rights, freedom of religion (other than their own) or freedom of speech? None. Where are the calls from the left for Muslims to be more tolerant of others? As it is, they have their demands, such as bitching about crosses on the walls of Catholic schools or bacon signs, but lefties think it's fine to give in to them. If Muslims started speaking out against gay marriage, would the left finally criticize them? Of course, radical Muslims are using the left so they won't say a word about their beliefs and piss off their supporters. They won't remain silent forever. It would be hell if they were the majority here and I hope that day never comes.

Christians, like the rest of us, have the right to speak out and the left cannot tolerate anyone who doesn't agree with them. Instead of accusing them of forcing their beliefs on others, just argue with them, but don't force your beliefs on others.

 

[The Rabbi]

Freedom Of Religion;

Nothing is sadder than watching people think Freedom of Religion means "Freedom to force my Religion onto you".

The concept. "The Constitution gives me the right to force you to think like me"

Christians need to stop trying to CONTROL America....The Bible and the Constitution teach FREE WILL. What are you all thinking?

The only ones wanting to force their religoon on others are homosexuals, global warming Nazis, abortion sacramentalists, feminist dykes, Islamonazis, and other loons. It certainly isnt Christians.

You do understand Homosexuality isn't ok only because of Religion..You do understand global warming is proven with facts even though certain people spend millions to fool small brains to believe it's not a fact.

"...christians trying to cram their religion down my throat...."

you have made this personal, can you put names to these "Christians" or are you lying again ?

We can put very bias laws on them. Via~ the point.

You understand what you write is nonsense, right?

 

[The Rabbi]

Freedom Of Religion;

Nothing is sadder than watching people think Freedom of Religion means "Freedom to force my Religion onto you".

The concept. "The Constitution gives me the right to force you to think like me"

Christians need to stop trying to CONTROL America....The Bible and the Constitution teach FREE WILL. What are you all thinking?

Pretty interesting point of view. I would argue that there is plenty of cramming on both sides. Luddy mentioned Hobby Lobby. Hey, it's a private company whose owners have religious views that prohibit the use of contraception. Forcing them to pay for it is secularists forcing their views down theists throats, not the other way around. Liberals have no problem with demonstrations against the 1%, but wen a religious group holds a demonstration they are told to "keep it in church". When there were plans to build a mosque on the grounds of 9/11, liberals screamed about freedom of religion in their support for the mosque. Why don't liberals champion Hobby Lobby's freedoms like they championed it for Muslims? If someone knocks on your door and asks you if you want to hear about Jesus, no is forcing you to do anything. You are free to slam the door in their face and go about your day.

Seriously, what are you whining about? I don't see anyone dragging you to church on Sunday while you kick and scream in opposition.

The Hobby Lobby debacle was very hypocritical.

If you get health care insurance through your job, your employer should not have the right to decide what your coverage will be.

OR

If the employer is given that right, it needs to be applied equally.

If your employer is going to give full coverage to one employee and less coverage to another, that employer should have to compensate the employee who is being cheated out of equal coverage.

In the past, health care coverage, as a benefit, was the same for all. Now it varies from employee to employee.

No employer should have the right to force employees to abide by their religion, punish an employee or have any knowledge of any kind about that employee's medical information. Period.

They are not forcing anyone to abide by their religion or punishing anyone who doesn't. They are just refusing to pay for something that violates their own. If you force them to do that then you are pushing your beliefs upon them. You are damn right it's hypocritical. It's hypocritical of liberals to insist that theists are pushing their religion down atheists throats when atheists are doing the exact same thing. In fact, it's not just hypocritical, it's ******* audacious.

Is there a LAW IN THE BOOKS written to keep gays from getting married? I think you are in the catch-up process. Gays aren't trying to make new law to allow them to get married. They are trying to end OLD LAWS that prevent them from getting married.

There is no law that prevents gays from getting married. That is a myth.

 

[The Rabbi]

Freedom Of Religion;

Nothing is sadder than watching people think Freedom of Religion means "Freedom to force my Religion onto you".

The concept. "The Constitution gives me the right to force you to think like me"

Christians need to stop trying to CONTROL America....The Bible and the Constitution teach FREE WILL. What are you all thinking?

The Constitution safeguards both the right of citizens to engage in religious expression – or to be free from faith altogether – absent unwarranted interference by government (Free Exercise Clause), and the right of citizens to be free from religion, forbidding government from endorsing religion and religious practice by prohibiting citizens from seeking to compel religious conformity through the codification of religious dogma into secular law all must obey (Establishment Clause).

Unfortunately, there are those theists who incorrectly believe that government can accommodate all manner of religious expression as authorized by the 'will of the people,' needless to say nothing could be further from the truth. Also completely wrong is the notion that when the courts correctly and in concert with the First Amendment invalidate laws that violate the Establishment Clause, this somehow manifests as 'interfering' with 'religious liberty,' which again is absolutely untrue.

There are times when religious expression in the context of government is appropriate and times when it is not; it's incumbent upon citizens to understand and accept this fact of law, seeking neither to endorse nor inhibit religious expression through force of law contrary to First Amendment jurisprudence.

Does that even mean anything?
It is pretty simple. Government shall make no law abridging the religious freedoms of people. IN past years this really wasnt an issue. If a law conflicted with a legitiamate religious interest the party involved usually petitioned for a waiver and it was granted. You never even read about it because everyone understood that's how business was done.
Under Obozo he undertook a war on Christianity and his administration refused to grant those same waivers. That is the entire genesis of cases like Hobby Lobby.

 

[Dragonlady]

Hobby Lobby is a corporation and corporations don't have a religion.

 

[The Rabbi]

Hobby Lobby is a corporation and corporations don't have a religion.

But their owners do. And that was part of the court case. The Court decided that the owners' beliefs were transferrable to the corporation.
Deal with it.

 

[BluePhantom]

It's 100% proven that the reason so many fear gays is because of the raptures in the Bible.

Otherwise, the people who hate gays are extremely strange to invest so much time hating a group that don't conform to their own idea's.

The irony is that it simply says there will be a lot of gays and a lot of sin. "Do not Judge or be Judged" is what comes to mind.

There are no raptures in the Bible you tool! The Bible doesn't say a word about the rapture. That was a tradition created in the Middle Ages in an attempt to cram together the eschatological views of Paul, Revelation, and the Gospels which are all different in an of themselves. You are saying that it's 100% proven that something relates to something in the Bible that doesn't even exist.

And for the record, I support gay rights, including the right to marry, so your argument in post #58 is a) directed and the wrong person, and b) doesn't address or acknowledge the many instances of liberals forcing their views on Christians and society as a whole thereby strengthening my point about liberal hypocrisy. You can see what everyone else does, but you completely ignore what you do.

 

[BluePhantom]

Hobby Lobby is a corporation and corporations don't have a religion.

As you are a Canadian, I would not expect you to realize this but the SCOTUS has ruled several times that corporations enjoy the same rights as individual citizens. Look up Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, and Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific. When Mitt Romney said "Corporations are people too..." he was referring to Supreme Court case law that has been around since the late 19th century.

 

[The Rabbi]

Hobby Lobby is a corporation and corporations don't have a religion.

As you are a Canadian, I would not expect you to realize this but the SCOTUS has ruled several times that corporations enjoy the same rights as individual citizens. Look up Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, and Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific. When Mitt Romney said "Corporations are people too..." he was referring to Supreme Court case law that has been around since the late 19th century.

Facts are irrelevant to liberals.

 

[there4eyeM]

Corporations are not 'people', they are legal persons.

 

[The Rabbi]

Corporations are not 'people', they are legal persons.

They are both.

 

[BluePhantom]

It's 100% proven that the reason so many fear gays is because of the raptures in the Bible.

Otherwise, the people who hate gays are extremely strange to invest so much time hating a group that don't conform to their own idea's.

The irony is that it simply says there will be a lot of gays and a lot of sin. "Do not Judge or be Judged" is what comes to mind.

BTW, I might also refer you to Oregon Ballot Measure 36 and Michigan Proposal 04-2, both of which were votes in ultra-liberal states that banned same-sex marriage. Now I did a breakdown of the voting here Why are the Left okay with criticizing Christianity but not Islam Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum. While it was directed at a Democrat v. Republican point of view, I can assure you, as I live in Oregon, that there is not a huge religious community here. This is especially true in the urban areas such as Portland, Eugene, etc which make up well over half of the Oregon population. Thus we can expect the number of religiously motivated votes to be roughly the same as Republican votes.

But I will highlight. Out of the 1,028,546 votes to ban gay marriage in Oregon (56.63% of the vote), only about 450,000 of them can conceivably be projected as coming from Republicans and that's only if you got every single registered Republican in the state that participated in that election to vote in favor of the ban. The remaining 570,000 or so votes in favor of banning came from registered Democrats or Independents.

So take your 100% Biblical fact and liberal propaganda and stuff it in your snowy, hypocritical, Canadian ass, because you clearly have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

 

[there4eyeM]

People are natural persons. A corporation is a legal person.
A human knows the difference.

 

[Dragonlady]

Hobby Lobby is a corporation and corporations don't have a religion.

But their owners do. And that was part of the court case. The Court decided that the owners' beliefs were transferrable to the corporation.
Deal with it.

I am well aware of the SC rulings. A corporation cannot attend church or hold religious principles. A corporation is an entity which limits liability to debts incurred by the corporation, and protects shareholders' personal assets in the event of insolvency or sale.

Although a corporation can own property, it has no gender, no religion and no morality. It is a thing, not a person. While the Supreme Court may have ruled that the religious beliefs of the owners of a corporation can be deemed to be those of the corporation, this is false and such decisions should be overturned, or legislation should be enacted to render them invalid.

It's a matter of the rights of employees. No employer should have the right to decide restrictions on their employees' policies.

 

[there4eyeM]

Legal persons also cannot vote, so it seems somewhat incongruous that they can contribute in a disproportionate way to candidates.

 

[The Rabbi]

Hobby Lobby is a corporation and corporations don't have a religion.

But their owners do. And that was part of the court case. The Court decided that the owners' beliefs were transferrable to the corporation.
Deal with it.

I am well aware of the SC rulings. A corporation cannot attend church or hold religious principles. A corporation is an entity which limits liability to debts incurred by the corporation, and protects shareholders' personal assets in the event of insolvency or sale.

Although a corporation can own property, it has no gender, no religion and no morality. It is a thing, not a person. While the Supreme Court may have ruled that the religious beliefs of the owners of a corporation can be deemed to be those of the corporation, this is false and such decisions should be overturned, or legislation should be enacted to render them invalid.

It's a matter of the rights of employees. No employer should have the right to decide restrictions on their employees' policies.

Sorry if our Supreme Court offends your sensibilities.
Deal wth it.

 

[there4eyeM]

An amendment could deal with it, and re-establish sanity.

 

[The Rabbi]

Legal persons also cannot vote, so it seems somewhat incongruous that they can contribute in a disproportionate way to candidates.

Corporations are barred from campaign contributions.

 

[The Rabbi]

An amendment could deal with it, and re-establish sanity.

Good luck with that.

 

[Dragonlady]

I don't have to deal with it. You do.

My country isn't a corporatist's wet dream. Our government is still controlled by the voters, and we have a history of punishing political parties who forget who they work for.