Here's some 'Religious Freedom' for ya....

[Agit8r]

Umm, I guess progs consider "satanists" to be a legitimate mainstream religious sect.

It's not for you, me, the government or anyone else to say what is and isn't a legitimate religious sect.

Really? THINK AGAIN!

So government CAN decide what is or isn't a legitimate belief? Maybe think about it before answering.

 

[Moonglow]

Wrong! IT IS MOST DEFINITELY A SATANIC HOLIDAY. WIKIPEDIA IS A JOKE.

You're a joke. Wikipedia may not be perfect, but it is a good starting point for research What cite do you have for your contention?

Right here:

REALLY?!?! You dis Wikipedia and give us youtube?

Yes. And here is another for ya! A MUST SEE!

Freemasonry.....

Personally, I smell a scam. I think all you lefties should send them a bunch of money.

Confederate money okay?

 

[Moonglow]

I love how they cry Religious Freedom and want to deny it to others....just like the Puritans did.

Cut from the same rug....

 

[Missourian]

I gotta say, the right wingers on this thread are disappointing the shit out of me. Personally, I'm all for religious freedom and constitutional rights going unviolated.

I don't believe Hobby Lobby should be forced to offer compensation specifically in the form of birth control if it violates their moral beliefs.

I don't believe a Christian cake maker should be forced to craft a cake depicting a homosexual marriage if they feel it violates their moral beliefs.

I also believe that, given the fact that the first amendment specifically restricts Congress from establishing any particular religion, the entire idea is that everyone (including Satanists, Pagans, Neo Davidians, Hailbob worshippers, Voodoo practitioners, etc) should be allowed to follow their own moral beliefs unmolested so long as practice of those values doesn't infringe on the constitutional rights of someone else (Satanists aren't legally allowed to sacrifice others any more than Muslims are allowed to put apostates to death any more than Christians are allowed to torture heretics any more than Hailbob worshippers are allowed to force anyone else to drink their Koolaid).

In debates regarding Hobby Lobby and birth control, I'm constantly defending Christians (which I am not) against this ridiculous argument that the ones opposed to the Obamacare mandate requiring businesses to offer health plans including birth control simply aren't interpreting their religion correctly, and therefore their refrain based on religious liberty is invalid.

This argument is ridiculous because the religious freedom guaranteed by our constitution is guaranteed to the -individual- and is specifically written the way it is so that each person can interpret their -own- moral code, free of authoritarians telling them what religious views are valid and which aren't. If I can be told my religion is invalid, there -is- no religious freedom.

So, you Christians arguing that Satanism isn't covered by the constitution, you're not only hypocritical, you're treading on dangerous ground. Once we start deciding which religious views are valid and which aren't, what keeps your religion safe from government persecution? We're either all free to choose our morals, or none of us are. There is literally no middle ground.

Because this is a lark.


No one is forcing the satanist to do, or not do anything. She is free to decide to have an abortion or not have one. Does she have a strongly held religious belief against scheduling?

 

[danielpalos]

Only the Right believes in Taxing other Peoples' morals but not other Peoples' monies.

 

[OKTexas]

You're a joke. Wikipedia may not be perfect, but it is a good starting point for research What cite do you have for your contention?

Right here:

REALLY?!?! You dis Wikipedia and give us youtube?

Yes. And here is another for ya! A MUST SEE!

Freemasonry.....

Personally, I smell a scam. I think all you lefties should send them a bunch of money.

Confederate money okay?

I'm sure they will be happy with what ever you got.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

I gotta say, the right wingers on this thread are disappointing the shit out of me. Personally, I'm all for religious freedom and constitutional rights going unviolated.

I don't believe Hobby Lobby should be forced to offer compensation specifically in the form of birth control if it violates their moral beliefs.

I don't believe a Christian cake maker should be forced to craft a cake depicting a homosexual marriage if they feel it violates their moral beliefs.

I also believe that, given the fact that the first amendment specifically restricts Congress from establishing any particular religion, the entire idea is that everyone (including Satanists, Pagans, Neo Davidians, Hailbob worshippers, Voodoo practitioners, etc) should be allowed to follow their own moral beliefs unmolested so long as practice of those values doesn't infringe on the constitutional rights of someone else (Satanists aren't legally allowed to sacrifice others any more than Muslims are allowed to put apostates to death any more than Christians are allowed to torture heretics any more than Hailbob worshippers are allowed to force anyone else to drink their Koolaid).

In debates regarding Hobby Lobby and birth control, I'm constantly defending Christians (which I am not) against this ridiculous argument that the ones opposed to the Obamacare mandate requiring businesses to offer health plans including birth control simply aren't interpreting their religion correctly, and therefore their refrain based on religious liberty is invalid.

This argument is ridiculous because the religious freedom guaranteed by our constitution is guaranteed to the -individual- and is specifically written the way it is so that each person can interpret their -own- moral code, free of authoritarians telling them what religious views are valid and which aren't. If I can be told my religion is invalid, there -is- no religious freedom.

So, you Christians arguing that Satanism isn't covered by the constitution, you're not only hypocritical, you're treading on dangerous ground. Once we start deciding which religious views are valid and which aren't, what keeps your religion safe from government persecution? We're either all free to choose our morals, or none of us are. There is literally no middle ground.

Because this is a lark.


No one is forcing the satanist to do, or not do anything. She is free to decide to have an abortion or not have one. Does she have a strongly held religious belief against scheduling?

I disagree. As long as abortion is legally considered to be a woman having a medical procedure performed on her own body, it's her right to have the abortion, and I consider a mandatory waiting period on exercising a right to be an infringement on that right, both in medical procedures and in gun purchasing.

The only reason I can sign off on this being a lark on some level is that the religious argument is superfluous. I'm guessing the argument is being posed as it is as a spiteful response to other recent freedom of religion exemption cases. That said, and this coming from a firm believer in states rights, once something is legally considered a constitutional right, allowing states to pass laws inhibiting to -any- small degree those rights to which they morally object endangers the entire Bill of Rights. I am uniformly opposed to allowing this.

Edit: Then again, they might have used the religious argument to prove standing. Wouldn't surprise me if, without a better reason than simply not wanting to wait like a would-be handgun owner, having to endure a 3 day waiting period might not be something any judge considered a legitimate grievance. Just a thought.

 

[Missourian]

I gotta say, the right wingers on this thread are disappointing the shit out of me. Personally, I'm all for religious freedom and constitutional rights going unviolated.

I don't believe Hobby Lobby should be forced to offer compensation specifically in the form of birth control if it violates their moral beliefs.

I don't believe a Christian cake maker should be forced to craft a cake depicting a homosexual marriage if they feel it violates their moral beliefs.

I also believe that, given the fact that the first amendment specifically restricts Congress from establishing any particular religion, the entire idea is that everyone (including Satanists, Pagans, Neo Davidians, Hailbob worshippers, Voodoo practitioners, etc) should be allowed to follow their own moral beliefs unmolested so long as practice of those values doesn't infringe on the constitutional rights of someone else (Satanists aren't legally allowed to sacrifice others any more than Muslims are allowed to put apostates to death any more than Christians are allowed to torture heretics any more than Hailbob worshippers are allowed to force anyone else to drink their Koolaid).

In debates regarding Hobby Lobby and birth control, I'm constantly defending Christians (which I am not) against this ridiculous argument that the ones opposed to the Obamacare mandate requiring businesses to offer health plans including birth control simply aren't interpreting their religion correctly, and therefore their refrain based on religious liberty is invalid.

This argument is ridiculous because the religious freedom guaranteed by our constitution is guaranteed to the -individual- and is specifically written the way it is so that each person can interpret their -own- moral code, free of authoritarians telling them what religious views are valid and which aren't. If I can be told my religion is invalid, there -is- no religious freedom.

So, you Christians arguing that Satanism isn't covered by the constitution, you're not only hypocritical, you're treading on dangerous ground. Once we start deciding which religious views are valid and which aren't, what keeps your religion safe from government persecution? We're either all free to choose our morals, or none of us are. There is literally no middle ground.

Because this is a lark.


No one is forcing the satanist to do, or not do anything. She is free to decide to have an abortion or not have one. Does she have a strongly held religious belief against scheduling?

I disagree. As long as abortion is legally considered to be a woman having a medical procedure performed on her own body, it's her right to have the abortion, and I consider a mandatory waiting period on exercising a right to be an infringement on that right, both in medical procedures and in gun purchasing.

The only reason I can sign off on this being a lark on some level is that the religious argument is superfluous. I'm guessing the argument is being posed as it is as a spiteful response to other recent freedom of religion exemption cases. That said, and this coming from a firm believer in states rights, once something is legally considered a constitutional right, allowing states to pass laws inhibiting to -any- small degree those rights to which they morally object endangers the entire Bill of Rights. I am uniformly opposed to allowing this.

That's fair. But a waiting period has been ruled constitutional. I understand that you disagree with that. And that is your right.

I believe that in a few short years, the whole argument will be moot. Technology and advances in medicine will make the unwanted pregnancy obsolete.

 

[BULLDOG]

Umm, I guess progs consider "satanists" to be a legitimate mainstream religious sect. It's not surprising that a satanist would consider the immediate murder of her unborn child to be a religious "right" guaranteed by the Constitution but that's the way the argument seems to be headed these days.

When laws that pander to religious nuts go into effect, this is what you end up with. Unless you want the government to decide which religions are valid and which ones aren't, they all get the same advantages.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

I gotta say, the right wingers on this thread are disappointing the shit out of me. Personally, I'm all for religious freedom and constitutional rights going unviolated.

I don't believe Hobby Lobby should be forced to offer compensation specifically in the form of birth control if it violates their moral beliefs.

I don't believe a Christian cake maker should be forced to craft a cake depicting a homosexual marriage if they feel it violates their moral beliefs.

I also believe that, given the fact that the first amendment specifically restricts Congress from establishing any particular religion, the entire idea is that everyone (including Satanists, Pagans, Neo Davidians, Hailbob worshippers, Voodoo practitioners, etc) should be allowed to follow their own moral beliefs unmolested so long as practice of those values doesn't infringe on the constitutional rights of someone else (Satanists aren't legally allowed to sacrifice others any more than Muslims are allowed to put apostates to death any more than Christians are allowed to torture heretics any more than Hailbob worshippers are allowed to force anyone else to drink their Koolaid).

In debates regarding Hobby Lobby and birth control, I'm constantly defending Christians (which I am not) against this ridiculous argument that the ones opposed to the Obamacare mandate requiring businesses to offer health plans including birth control simply aren't interpreting their religion correctly, and therefore their refrain based on religious liberty is invalid.

This argument is ridiculous because the religious freedom guaranteed by our constitution is guaranteed to the -individual- and is specifically written the way it is so that each person can interpret their -own- moral code, free of authoritarians telling them what religious views are valid and which aren't. If I can be told my religion is invalid, there -is- no religious freedom.

So, you Christians arguing that Satanism isn't covered by the constitution, you're not only hypocritical, you're treading on dangerous ground. Once we start deciding which religious views are valid and which aren't, what keeps your religion safe from government persecution? We're either all free to choose our morals, or none of us are. There is literally no middle ground.

Because this is a lark.


No one is forcing the satanist to do, or not do anything. She is free to decide to have an abortion or not have one. Does she have a strongly held religious belief against scheduling?

I disagree. As long as abortion is legally considered to be a woman having a medical procedure performed on her own body, it's her right to have the abortion, and I consider a mandatory waiting period on exercising a right to be an infringement on that right, both in medical procedures and in gun purchasing.

The only reason I can sign off on this being a lark on some level is that the religious argument is superfluous. I'm guessing the argument is being posed as it is as a spiteful response to other recent freedom of religion exemption cases. That said, and this coming from a firm believer in states rights, once something is legally considered a constitutional right, allowing states to pass laws inhibiting to -any- small degree those rights to which they morally object endangers the entire Bill of Rights. I am uniformly opposed to allowing this.

That's fair. But a waiting period has been ruled constitutional. I understand that you disagree with that. And that is your right.

I believe that in a few short years, the whole argument will be moot. Technology and advances in medicine will make the unwanted pregnancy obsolete.

You got me there. The waiting period is as legally valid as the abortion, which in its own poetic way is funny as shit. The left's anti-gun measures have opened up the door to their abortion rights being compromised. If these compromises didn't endanger all our rights, I'd find it all highly amusing.

Eh, who am I kidding, I -do- find it highly amusing.

I hope you're right on that last bit. I'm not a fan of abortion -or- whoops kids growing up in fucked up situations.

 

[Kosh]

Umm, I guess progs consider "satanists" to be a legitimate mainstream religious sect. It's not surprising that a satanist would consider the immediate murder of her unborn child to be a religious "right" guaranteed by the Constitution but that's the way the argument seems to be headed these days.

When laws that pander to religious nuts go into effect, this is what you end up with. Unless you want the government to decide which religions are valid and which ones aren't, they all get the same advantages.

Says the irony impaired far left drone running on the far left religious dogma programming.

 

[-S-]

Umm, I guess progs consider "satanists" to be a legitimate mainstream religious sect. It's not surprising that a satanist would consider the immediate murder of her unborn child to be a religious "right" guaranteed by the Constitution but that's the way the argument seems to be headed these days.

When laws that pander to religious nuts go into effect, this is what you end up with. Unless you want the government to decide which religions are valid and which ones aren't, they all get the same advantages.

Says the irony impaired far left drone running on the far left religious dogma programming.

Just looked at your recent post history, Kosh..

I must say, it's a rare treat to see a post that is longer than one line and doesn't contain the word "religious" or the phrase "far left drone".

It explains why only a measly 1/10th of your posts are rated.

Maybe more people would appreciate your input if you actually supplied some input, and quit copy/pasting the same message in all of your posts.

Just some constructive criticism. Take it or leave it.

(though I guarantee you'll leave it, and probably use the keywords I pointed out above in your response..)

 

[BULLDOG]

Wrong! IT IS MOST DEFINITELY A SATANIC HOLIDAY. WIKIPEDIA IS A JOKE.

You're a joke. Wikipedia may not be perfect, but it is a good starting point for research What cite do you have for your contention?

Right here:

REALLY?!?! You dis Wikipedia and give us youtube?

Yes. And here is another for ya! A MUST SEE!

It's worse than you think.

 

[BULLDOG]

Personally, I smell a scam. I think all you lefties should send them a bunch of money.

You want us to do the same dumb crap you do? Dream on.

 

[Kosh]

Personally, I smell a scam. I think all you lefties should send them a bunch of money.

You want us to do the same dumb crap you do? Dream on.

Well if you want people to be as dumb as you far left drones they will need to have their brains removed..

 

[Kosh]

Umm, I guess progs consider "satanists" to be a legitimate mainstream religious sect. It's not surprising that a satanist would consider the immediate murder of her unborn child to be a religious "right" guaranteed by the Constitution but that's the way the argument seems to be headed these days.

When laws that pander to religious nuts go into effect, this is what you end up with. Unless you want the government to decide which religions are valid and which ones aren't, they all get the same advantages.

Says the irony impaired far left drone running on the far left religious dogma programming.

Just looked at your recent post history, Kosh..

I must say, it's a rare treat to see a post that is longer than one line and doesn't contain the word "religious" or the phrase "far left drone".

It explains why only a measly 1/10th of your posts are rated.

Maybe more people would appreciate your input if you actually supplied some input, and quit copy/pasting the same message in all of your posts.

Just some constructive criticism. Take it or leave it.

(though I guarantee you'll leave it, and probably use the keywords I pointed out above in your response..)

This coming from a far left drone pushing the far left religious narrative without question or hesitation.

The far left drones do not care about "discussion" or facts, they only care about pushing their religious narrative.

As you keep proving!

If you want to have a discussion using facts and not far left religious dogma fine lets do it, but I know you drones can not..

It is about the far left agenda and religion.

 

[BULLDOG]

Personally, I smell a scam. I think all you lefties should send them a bunch of money.

You want us to do the same dumb crap you do? Dream on.

Well if you want people to be as dumb as you far left drones they will need to have their brains removed..

I'm not sure what you are ranting about this time, but I asked you what you see as the difference between a liberal and a far left. You still can't answer, but went on a silly unintelligible rant. I guess you are still on that rant.

 

[Kosh]

Personally, I smell a scam. I think all you lefties should send them a bunch of money.

You want us to do the same dumb crap you do? Dream on.

Well if you want people to be as dumb as you far left drones they will need to have their brains removed..

I'm not sure what you are ranting about this time, but I asked you what you see as the difference between a liberal and a far left. You still can't answer, but went on a silly unintelligible rant. I guess you are still on that rant.

Yes you got caught the fist time this happened showing that you were a far left drone.

You keep bringing this up pretending that did not happen, that is on you!

However if you are going to run off about religious nuts, you need to understand the irony of your posts considering that you are a far left religious nut!

But the far left is often irony impaired.

 

[OKTexas]

Personally, I smell a scam. I think all you lefties should send them a bunch of money.

You want us to do the same dumb crap you do? Dream on.

I've never sent money to any go fund me site, but you folks already do a lot of dumb shit I wouldn't think of doing.

 

[BULLDOG]

Personally, I smell a scam. I think all you lefties should send them a bunch of money.

You want us to do the same dumb crap you do? Dream on.

I've never sent money to any go fund me site, but you folks already do a lot of dumb shit I wouldn't think of doing.

Somebody turned the pizza bigots into very rich people.