• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans Turn God Upside Down with Their Twisted Version of Religious Liberty

Brtblutwo

Banned
Joined
Feb 6, 2016
Messages
64
Reaction score
30
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
.
Casting themselves as victims of religious oppression, conservative Christians and the Republicans are using their convoluted interpretations of the U.S. Constitution and their Bible as justification to pass laws permitting the Christian majority in this nation to discriminate against anyone who fails to practice Christianity in their rigid form.

The article at the following link explains just how un-American these, and other Republican sponsored laws have become. Sadly, the narrow minds of these “righteous” people blind them to this fact.


Republicans Turn God Upside Down with Their Twisted Version of Religious Liberty


.
 
.
Casting themselves as victims of religious oppression, conservative Christians and the Republicans are using their convoluted interpretations of the U.S. Constitution and their Bible as justification to pass laws permitting the Christian majority in this nation to discriminate against anyone who fails to practice Christianity in their rigid form.

The article at the following link explains just how un-American these, and other Republican sponsored laws have become. Sadly, the narrow minds of these “righteous” people blind them to this fact.


Republicans Turn God Upside Down with Their Twisted Version of Religious Liberty


.

From the article

"Thomas Jefferson. He was adamant about maintaining a strong separation between church and state"

However what the left out is that Thomas Jefferson only meant separation from the federal govt. Jefferson himself authored a state law based on religious morals that would castrate males found guilty of the crime of homosexuality.
 
Nobody's perfect.

BTW, source?

My point wasnt ad hominem. I was showing that the founders were perfectly fine with religious based laws at the state and local level while opposing them at the federal level.
 
My point wasnt ad hominem. I was showing that the founders were perfectly fine with religious based laws at the state and local level while opposing them at the federal level.

I know, at least as far as Jefferson goes.

That being said, it's our job to be better.

Separation of church and state must run from top to bottom, federal to local.
 
.
Casting themselves as victims of religious oppression, conservative Christians and the Republicans are using their convoluted interpretations of the U.S. Constitution and their Bible as justification to pass laws permitting the Christian majority in this nation to discriminate against anyone who fails to practice Christianity in their rigid form.

The article at the following link explains just how un-American these, and other Republican sponsored laws have become. Sadly, the narrow minds of these “righteous” people blind them to this fact.


Republicans Turn God Upside Down with Their Twisted Version of Religious Liberty


.

1.) Not all republicans are nutters or christian
2.) Not all Christains are nutters or republicans

Yes are their nutters out there that dont care about rights and freedom and the constitution and want to force their religion on others, infringe on the rights of others and want special rules? Yes, do some of them or even most of them happen to be republicans and christian? maybe but that is a coincidence they are simply whackjobs and do NOT represent christians or republicans.
 
From the article

"Thomas Jefferson. He was adamant about maintaining a strong separation between church and state"

However what the left out is that Thomas Jefferson only meant separation from the federal govt. Jefferson himself authored a state law based on religious morals that would castrate males found guilty of the crime of homosexuality.

Yeah...um, no.

Unless you can produce a quote where the word "homosexual" was actually used you are most likely incorrect.

Sodomy, in "the good old days", was a reference to any kind of sex that was "non-reproductive".
Oral sex between a male and a female for example was sodomy.

Sodomy in Jefferson's day was not defined in the same manner as many use it today.
 
Yeah...um, no.

Unless you can produce a quote where the word "homosexual" was actually used you are most likely incorrect.

Sodomy, in "the good old days", was a reference to any kind of sex that was "non-reproductive".
Oral sex between a male and a female for example was sodomy.

Sodomy in Jefferson's day was not defined in the same manner as many use it today.

Are you under the impression that homosexual sex is reproductive?

You seem to be making a semantical argument while ignoring the point of my post that the founders were perfectly fine with religious based laws at the state and local level while opposing them at the federal level.
 
Lawyers and professional victims form partnerships to prey on citizens. In our city, we had a man in a wheelchair and his lawyer who would find minor violations of the ADA, a handicapped parking space an inch too narrow, and not seek to remedy the problem but immediately file and intent to sue. I reality, they have no intent to sue. What they intend is to force a quick and significant settlement from an insurance company to avoid the risk of going to court. This is happening with every government-approved victim group.

Now, if I went into a bakery and ordered one of these cakes:
3490e9_c34a1e048df4e74b815073ff75c39a26.jpgunnamed.jpg

how would the bakers know whether I was having a ceremony with a woman, a man, or my beagle? They wouldn't. So, the government-approved victims have to make it clear to the bakers. If that doesn't do it, you can proceed with patently offensive decorations on the cake.

I support the Constitution's equal right clause. The government should not discriminate against anyone. Private citizens can even if they have the temerity to try and run a small business.
 
.
Casting themselves as victims of religious oppression, conservative Christians and the Republicans are using their convoluted interpretations of the U.S. Constitution and their Bible as justification to pass laws permitting the Christian majority in this nation to discriminate against anyone who fails to practice Christianity in their rigid form.

The article at the following link explains just how un-American these, and other Republican sponsored laws have become. Sadly, the narrow minds of these “righteous” people blind them to this fact.


Republicans Turn God Upside Down with Their Twisted Version of Religious Liberty


.

No, the article is wrong. Religious liberty applies to majorities as well as minorities. (And religious people here are not the majority, anyway. They are opposing the State.)

The article appears to take the position that only the rights of "oppressed" minorities should count. But everyone has rights, even the white Christian majority.

It's somewhat ridiculous that these people have to be reminded of that.

To characterize the beliefs of Christians as "rigid" is bigotry and nothing more.
 
Last edited:
From the article

"Thomas Jefferson. He was adamant about maintaining a strong separation between church and state"

However what the left out is that Thomas Jefferson only meant separation from the federal govt. Jefferson himself authored a state law based on religious morals that would castrate males found guilty of the crime of homosexuality.

Based on religious morals? Homosexuality was a dirty taboo in those days and even non-religious people had strong biases against them. If you want to claim that Jefferson make this law based on religious morals then you need to show where the bible calls out castration for homosexuality and where Jefferson referenced god or his religion for the basis of the law. You can't just claim it was religion.
 
No, the article is wrong.
The article makes a great point right here, and it's one which so many who seek to push their Christian beliefs onto others need to remember:

And Christians are hardly under attack here. No one is taking away their rights. No one is seeking to force them to be gay themselves, or to force birth control upon them. No. They are perfectly free to hold their own religious beliefs and live their lives accordingly.


For religious liberty to work, of course, it must be a two-way street and apply to everyone equally. If Christians are permitted to freely hold their beliefs, then Christians must reciprocate and allow non-Christians to freely hold their own beliefs.



If someone believes that being gay is fine under their own religion, then let them hold these beliefs. If someone else believes that birth control is fine under their own religion, let them hold these beliefs as well. There is no justification for discriminating against people who happen to hold differing beliefs by not serving them as customers.
No one is keeping us from being practicing Christians. No one is telling us we HAVE to take birth control or we have to sleep with members of the same sex or that we cannot say Merry Christmas or that we have to abort our unborn. No one is saying that. What people are saying is that we have to allow others the same freedom to live the way they wish, just as we Christians want to live the way we wish. If your religious beliefs have no problem with taking birth control, then no one should be able to stop you. If your conscience dictates you understand that not everyone celebrates Christmas, then you should feel free to say Happy Holidays. If you have no problem with homosexuality, then be a homosexual, if that's who you are.

Christians are getting offended that they are no longer allowed to dictate to others how they should live and that makes them feel persecuted. And that's wrong. Granting everyone equal opportunity to operate under their faith/lack of faith is most definitely what it means to have freedom of religion. And the article is not wrong about that.
 
Based on religious morals? Homosexuality was a dirty taboo in those days and even non-religious people had strong biases against them. If you want to claim that Jefferson make this law based on religious morals then you need to show where the bible calls out castration for homosexuality and where Jefferson referenced god or his religion for the basis of the law. You can't just claim it was religion.

All attempts to delude the people, or to abuse their understanding by exercise of the pretended arts of witchcraft, conjuration, inchantment, or sorcery or by pretended prophecies, shall be punished by ducking and whipping at the discretion of a jury, not exceeding 15. stripes.

Amendment VIII: Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for Proportioning Crimes and Punishments
 
The article makes a great point right here, and it's one which so many who seek to push their Christian beliefs onto others

How exactly are Christians pushing their beliefs onto others? By refusing to bake a cake? Really? Are gays not forcing their beliefs on Christians by forcing them to do things that they don't want to do, by participating in ceremonies they don't want to be involved in?

The gay perspective seems pretty twisted to me. "Only my rights are to be respected, only my concerns are to be addressed. Christian rights and concerns don't count," is what I'm hearing here. Seems like chauvinism and bigotry, frankly.
 
How exactly are Christians pushing their beliefs onto others?
Gay marriage bans, Planned Parenthood funding withdrawals, denying contraception coverage, the state of Tennessee legislature passing legislation making the Bible the official state book, etc. In fact, John Kasich, the last man to stand up to Donald Trump, wanted to create a federal agency to push Christianity to other parts of the world, and the other candidate, Ted Cruz, explicitly said he puts his God before his country. And that's before we even get into the whole "religious freedom" laws, which are thinly veiled attempts to allow discrimination based on religion. And all of that is just within the last couple of years, if I go back a couple of decades I would have SO much material to post.

Are you really trying to say Christians aren't trying to push their beliefs onto others? Because, as a Christian myself, I would just have to laugh at anyone who says otherwise, especially since Christianity trying to expand its influence has long been a doctrine of the religion.

By refusing to bake a cake? Really?
I didn't say anything about a cake. :shrug:

Hello, strawman, good to see you again.

Are gays not forcing their beliefs on Christians by forcing them to do things that they don't want to do
No. Gay people aren't saying Christians have to be gay or abide by homosexual doctrine (which doesn't even exist). So, no, gay people are not forcing their beliefs on anyone else, gay people are just wanting to be seen as equal citizens.

The gay perspective seems pretty twisted to me.
It usually does to those who mistake equality under the law with persecution.

"Only my rights are to be respected, only my concerns are to be addressed. Christian rights and concerns don't count," is what I'm hearing here.
Yes, I'm well aware many Christians have a severe persecution complex. Much like any other mental health deficiency, all us who spend time in reality can do is try to assure you no one is coming for your rights, we just want you to understand your rights don't get to trample on the rights of others.

religious-freedom-cartoon.jpg

This is how I imagine you feel right now.
 
Last edited:
Why exactly would you need to ban which craft and prophecys if not for religious reasons

It didn't ban witchcraft. Read it. This is about not allowing people to purposefully misinform or "Delude" or "abuse their understanding" through these means. Also, there are plenty of people that believe in psychic prophecies that aren't religious. Lots of them actually.

And btw, you can have a law that has to do with religion that doesn't violate the 1st amendment. It just can't promote or give preference to a religion or one over another.
 
Gay marriage bans, Planned Parenthood funding withdrawals, denying contraception coverage, the state of Tennessee legislature passing legislation making the Bible the official state book, etc. In fact, John Kasich, the last man to stand up to Donald Trump, wanted to create a federal agency to push Christianity to other parts of the world, and the other candidate, Ted Cruz, explicitly said he puts his God before his country. And that's before we even get into the whole "religious freedom" laws, which are thinly veiled attempts to allow discrimination based on religion. And all of that is just within the last couple of years, if I go back a couple of decades I would have SO much material to post.

Efforts to keep traditional values as part of our society are not exclusively Christian. It's not just Christians who want a gay marriage ban, for example. Your problem is with the American people, not just Christians. Why don't you take on American Muslims on this point? I'll wait.

I didn't say anything about a cake. :shrug:

Hello, strawman, good to see you again.

Nice try, but you're still on the hook for being in favor of dismissing Christian concerns out of hand, dismissing religious rights and freedoms.

No. Gay people aren't saying Christians have to be ... abide by homosexual doctrine.

Yes, they are. It's the only set of concerns they think should count.
 
.
Casting themselves as victims of religious oppression, conservative Christians and the Republicans are using their convoluted interpretations of the U.S. Constitution and their Bible as justification to pass laws permitting the Christian majority in this nation to discriminate against anyone who fails to practice Christianity in their rigid form.

The article at the following link explains just how un-American these, and other Republican sponsored laws have become. Sadly, the narrow minds of these “righteous” people blind them to this fact.


Republicans Turn God Upside Down with Their Twisted Version of Religious Liberty


.

The reality of the matter is there is nothing unconstitutional about private citizens and businesses discriminating for any reason. The Civil Rights Act itself is what is unconstitutional. It's unfortunate that our society suffers so much from racism and bigotry to such a level that brought about the need for the CRA to address the problems that existed on a governmental level. Of course, no one will actually even try to overturn the CRA because it would never happen and it would be political suicide to do so.

I'll give anyone a chance though. What part of the Constitution does it say that you lose your right to free speech, association, and private property rights if you open a business?
 
I know, at least as far as Jefferson goes.

That being said, it's our job to be better.

Separation of church and state must run from top to bottom, federal to local.

Separation of church and state never meant that people couldn't be elected on platforms that included their religion or that various laws could be pass on their beliefs (e.g. dry counties). It was meant mostly to keep the government out of meddling in churches. So people have actually flipped the entire concept in the opposite direction.
 
The article makes a great point right here, and it's one which so many who seek to push their Christian beliefs onto others need to remember:

No one is keeping us from being practicing Christians. No one is telling us we HAVE to take birth control or we have to sleep with members of the same sex or that we cannot say Merry Christmas or that we have to abort our unborn. No one is saying that. What people are saying is that we have to allow others the same freedom to live the way they wish, just as we Christians want to live the way we wish. If your religious beliefs have no problem with taking birth control, then no one should be able to stop you. If your conscience dictates you understand that not everyone celebrates Christmas, then you should feel free to say Happy Holidays. If you have no problem with homosexuality, then be a homosexual, if that's who you are.

Christians are getting offended that they are no longer allowed to dictate to others how they should live and that makes them feel persecuted. And that's wrong. Granting everyone equal opportunity to operate under their faith/lack of faith is most definitely what it means to have freedom of religion. And the article is not wrong about that.

If you have a law that prohibits people from conducting their private business as they see fit then, yes, there are rights being infringed upon.
 
Back
Top Bottom