How Religious Freedom Became A Rightwing Assault On The Rule Of Law

[pknopp]

Do you believe it's discrimination if a church refuses to hire someone because they're queer?

It's absolutely discrimination. The question is whether or not it should be legal. While I do not believe it should be illegal because of the 1st, I'd refuse to attend that church.

 

[kyzr]

It is not just a personal decision when it infringes on the rights of others

I'm not infringing on their '"rights", I'm just not associating with them, that is my right, freedom of association.

 

[BS Filter]

I think prog patriot is upset that there are some people that are not with the agenda and actively oppose the perverse generation. I believe he feels they shouldn't have the right to do that.

 

[kyzr]

...heart full of hate.

There is no hate regarding abortion. If anything its love for the unborn child.
Neither scripture nor the Constitution mentions abortion, other than "Thou shalt not kill". So I'm not sure wtf your meme is about. Total bullshit.

 

[toobfreak]

Or fetal rights.

A human fetus is protected under the same rights as any other human being since a fetus is just a stage of human development like infant, toddler, child, teenager, adult and senior.

But then I know you are smart enough and don't need to be told that!

There is no getting to old age with going through all those other stages of development first.

 

[Lastamender]

Bullshit! It depends mostly on the state and most states do not provide protection for gays in employment, or housinng, public accomodation, or financial transactions.

The work part is bullshit. if a private company does not want to hire someone no reason is necessary. The other three are are total bullshit/ You people need to learn how to get in line to get things like that which are available to anyone.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Or fetal rights.

10th Amendment, if you State wants to be known as baby killers there is your disgusting avenue.

 

[bripat9643]

Religious freedom has long been a shield. It is this right that all Americans possess, and the words etched into the edifice of the Supreme Court tell us, "Equal justice under law." This right applies equally to all of us. It was supported by a strong separation of church and state, but not anymore.

There is a well-funded powerful network of Christian nationalist organizations and judges that are working to weaponize the First Amendment, to turn the protection of religious freedom enjoyed by all of us into a weapon of Christian privilege for the few. The crusaders' religious freedom challenges are superficially about things like Christian crosses and veterans or playgrounds or private school vouchers or bakeries and gay weddings, but really they're about religious privilege, often literally about privileging religion over non-religion, Christianity over other religions and the right kind of conservative Christians over other Christians. At its most basic level, they are trying to turn religious freedom into a weapon to reclaim and entrench their lost status as the dominant caste in American society.

As Seidel notes, 150 years ago the Supreme Court warned that weaponized religious freedom would "permit every citizen to become a law unto himself," so there's much more at stake here than "just" the First Amendment.

How 'religious freedom' became a right-wing assault on the rule of law

The Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade sent shockwaves through the American electorate. But as shocking as the destruction of a fundamental right may be, more radical changes may lie ahead, as Andrew Seidel warns in his new book, "American Crusade: How the Supreme Court Is...

www.rawstory.com

"permit every citizen to become a law unto himself"

I guess those "originalists" just conveniently ignored that part of the original intent.

The turd believes the freedom to practice your religion is a "privilege." That shows what a fucking NAZI you are.

 

[bripat9643]

As a devout follower of my messiah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
I believe I should have the 1st A right to discriminate against supporters of fascism...I mean Trump...I mean fascism.

I agree with out. That's why I should have the right to discriminate against you.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Religious freedom has long been a shield. It is this right that all Americans possess, and the words etched into the edifice of the Supreme Court tell us, "Equal justice under law." This right applies equally to all of us. It was supported by a strong separation of church and state, but not anymore.

There is a well-funded powerful network of Christian nationalist organizations and judges that are working to weaponize the First Amendment, to turn the protection of religious freedom enjoyed by all of us into a weapon of Christian privilege for the few. The crusaders' religious freedom challenges are superficially about things like Christian crosses and veterans or playgrounds or private school vouchers or bakeries and gay weddings, but really they're about religious privilege, often literally about privileging religion over non-religion, Christianity over other religions and the right kind of conservative Christians over other Christians. At its most basic level, they are trying to turn religious freedom into a weapon to reclaim and entrench their lost status as the dominant caste in American society.

As Seidel notes, 150 years ago the Supreme Court warned that weaponized religious freedom would "permit every citizen to become a law unto himself," so there's much more at stake here than "just" the First Amendment.

How 'religious freedom' became a right-wing assault on the rule of law

The Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade sent shockwaves through the American electorate. But as shocking as the destruction of a fundamental right may be, more radical changes may lie ahead, as Andrew Seidel warns in his new book, "American Crusade: How the Supreme Court Is...

www.rawstory.com

"permit every citizen to become a law unto himself"

I guess those "originalists" just conveniently ignored that part of the original intent.

Isn't it possible that, your average everyday Christian are not really that involved? You have a few radical Christians that want to change things, and left wing media clamps on to these things and puts them in your face every chance they get as a way to portray all Christians like that.

Yes, Christians don't want gay marriage, they think the u.s should be a Christian nation, and they want a few other things too, but most of these people are not going to press the issue. There are a lot out there who simply don't want to be involved, probably more than you realize, but the left wing media wouldn't paint that picture, they want to make it look as though all Christians are this way. I don't think they are.

Its the left who is weaponizing the first ammendment. They want to punish anyone who goes against how they think things should be. Rather than just saying "ok, we disagree" and be done with it, they want to force people into agreement with them.

Separation of church and state means government cannot establish a national religion, and it means it has to be impartial on the subject, but, religious freedom is something that the government must fight to protect.

 

[bripat9643]

They know how to use their supposed religion (wink wink) as a political weapon.

Hell, it's been happening in the Middle East forever.

They don't have religious freedom in the Middles East, you fucking douchebag. That's where they throw homosexuals off the top of buildings. Only a brainwashed prog could possibly claim that refusing to bake cake with a gay couple on it is the same thing.

 

[bripat9643]

They know how to use their supposed religion (wink wink) as a political weapon.

Hell, it's been happening in the Middle East forever.

Only a NAZI douchebag would call a right a weapon.

 

[whitehall]

It's not hard to get beyond a post that claims "freedom became an assault". Think about it.

 

[Lastamender]

Only a NAZI douchebag would call a right a weapon.

Spot on.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Religious freedom has long been a shield. It is this right that all Americans possess, and the words etched into the edifice of the Supreme Court tell us, "Equal justice under law." This right applies equally to all of us. It was supported by a strong separation of church and state, but not anymore.

There is a well-funded powerful network of Christian nationalist organizations and judges that are working to weaponize the First Amendment, to turn the protection of religious freedom enjoyed by all of us into a weapon of Christian privilege for the few. The crusaders' religious freedom challenges are superficially about things like Christian crosses and veterans or playgrounds or private school vouchers or bakeries and gay weddings, but really they're about religious privilege, often literally about privileging religion over non-religion, Christianity over other religions and the right kind of conservative Christians over other Christians. At its most basic level, they are trying to turn religious freedom into a weapon to reclaim and entrench their lost status as the dominant caste in American society.

As Seidel notes, 150 years ago the Supreme Court warned that weaponized religious freedom would "permit every citizen to become a law unto himself," so there's much more at stake here than "just" the First Amendment.

How 'religious freedom' became a right-wing assault on the rule of law

The Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade sent shockwaves through the American electorate. But as shocking as the destruction of a fundamental right may be, more radical changes may lie ahead, as Andrew Seidel warns in his new book, "American Crusade: How the Supreme Court Is...

www.rawstory.com

"permit every citizen to become a law unto himself"

I guess those "originalists" just conveniently ignored that part of the original intent.

Isn't it possible that, your average everyday Christian are not really that involved? You have a few radical Christians that want to change things, and left wing media clamps on to these things and puts them in your face every chance they get as a way to portray all Christians like that.

Yes, Christians don't want gay marriage, they think the u.s should be a Christian nation, and they want a few other things too, but most of these people are not going to press the issue. There are a lot out there who simply don't want to be involved, probably more than you realize, but the left wing media wouldn't paint that picture, they want to make it look as though all Christians are this way. I don't think they are.

Its the left who is weaponizing the first ammendment. They want to punish anyone who goes against how they think things should be. Rather than just saying "ok, we disagree" and be done with it, they want to force people into agreement with them.

Separation of church and state means government cannot establish a national religion, and it means it has to be impartial on the subject, but, religious freedom is something that the government must fight to protect.


Your post does make an excellent example for the case of states rights though. When power changes hands, so does the ideology that goes with that power. When we allow federal government to regulate so many things in our lives, eventually, those in power will try to push something you don't like. It's times like these when we see having decisions made at the state level can help us avoid the federal government from becoming oppressive and enacting things you don't agree with. Doing so at the state level offers a level of control by the people to make change that is more difficult than at the federal level.

In the case of roe, it's simply not the job of the federal government to force states into allowing medical procedures. These belong at the state level. You were happy and agreed that the supreme court had the power to grant these "rights" but then were unhappy when the Supreme court took them away.

Again, giving that power to the federal government means that at some point, it's going to be used in a way you don't like.

It's best if we just stuck to cotus and not let the states do what they are supposed to do, and the federal gov to do what it's supposed to do.

 

[ThisIsMe]

As a devout follower of my messiah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
I believe I should have the 1st A right to discriminate against supporters of fascism...I mean Trump...I mean fascism.

You already do discriminate against Trump supporters...

 

[pknopp]

Isn't it possible that, your average everyday Christian are not really that involved? You have a few radical Christians that want to change things, and left wing media clamps on to these things and puts them in your face every chance they get as a way to portray all Christians like that.

Yes, Christians don't want gay marriage,

I'm a Christian. It's not my business who someone wants to marry.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Two meanings of religious freedom/liberty:
1. Freedom of belief, speech, practice.
2. Freedom to restrict services, hate, denigrate, or oppress others.


1. The historical meaning of religious freedom:

This term relates to the personal freedom:
•Of religious belief,
•Of religious speech,
•Of religious assembly with fellow believers,
•Of religious proselytizing and recruitment, and
•To change one's religion from one faith group to another -- or to decide to have no religious affiliation -- or vice-versa.


The individual believer has often been the target of oppression for thinking or speaking unorthodox thoughts, for assembling with and recruiting others, and for changing their religious affiliation. Typically, the aggressors have been large religious groups and governments. Freedom from such oppression is the meaning that we generally use on this web site to refer to any of the four terms: religious freedom, religious liberty, freedom of worship and freedom to worship.

2. A rapidly emerging new meaning of religious freedom: the freedom to discriminate and denigrate:

In recent years, religious freedom is taking on a new meaning: the freedom and liberty of a believer apply their religious beliefs in order to hate, oppress, deny service to, denigrate, discriminate against, and/or reduce the human rights of minorities.

Now, the direction of the oppression has reversed. It is now the believer who is the oppressor -- typically fundamentalist and evangelical Christians and other religious conservatives. Others -- typically some women, as well as sexual, and other minorities -- are the targets. This new meaning is becoming increasingly common. It appears that this change is begin driven by a number of factors:

•The increasing public acceptance of women's use of birth control/contraceptives. This is a practice regarded as a personal decision by most faith groups, but is actively opposed by the Roman Catholic and a few other conservative faith groups.

•The increasing public acceptance of equal rights for sexual minorities including Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals, Transgender persons and transsexuals -- the LGBT community (); and

•The increasing percentage of NOTAs in North America. These are individuals who are NOT Affiliated with an organized faith group. Some identify themselves as Agnostics, Atheists secularists, Humanists, free thinkers, etc. Others say that they are spiritual, but not religious.


One interesting feature of this "religious freedom to discriminate" is that it generally has people treating others as they would not wish to be treated themselves. It seems to be little noticed among those who practice or advocate "religious freedom to discriminate" that this way of treating people is a direct contradiction to the Golden Rule, which Jesus required all his followers to practice. See Matthew 7:12, Luke 6:31, and the Gospel of Thomas, 6.

Source: Religious freedom & the freedom to discriminate

I disagree. I think the discrimination is happening on those attacking the religious businesses. If you are a gay person and you go to a business, like a bakery, who you know can't participate in your wedding, due to religious reasons, you have the right to respect their views and go to another bakery. If you then push the issue, and take them to court to force them into providing you services, you are now infringing on their religious freedoms and rights.

Believe it or not, but just because someone says they can't be involved with an activity doesn't mean they hate that person.

You're against a religious business exercising their rights to choose how they operate, but you are all for someone being able to force their lifestyle on that business

If you agree in separation of church and state then the government can't force someone to go against their religious freedoms.

 

[ThisIsMe]

I'm a Christian. It's not my business who someone wants to marry.

And that's exactly what I was saying. Most Christians are simply not wanting to be involved. It's just those fringe groups that left wing media likes to throw in your face all the time.

You cut off the rest of my statement which said that there are Christians who don't want gay marriage, but the majority of them are not going to push that issue.

 

[pknopp]

And that's exactly what I was saying. Most Christians are simply not wanting to be involved. It's just those fringe groups that left wing media likes to throw in your face all the time.

You cut off the rest of my statement which said that there are Christians who don't want gay marriage, but the majority of them are not going to push that issue.

I'm absolutely fine with it.