• 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!

SCOTUS shoots down Cuomo's bigotry and discrimination

As predicted, SCOTUS going off the rails now. Roberts wanted badly to keep the Court insulated from partisan politics, but he has lost his control.

There is no logical comparison between liquor stores which people visit one at a time, and a Church or synagogue which people visit collectively in large numbers. But the conservative justices are not moved by logic, only by ideology.

Only in the fevered mind of liberals is freedom seen as "going off the rails".
 
Then the deaths of those people who get infected with be on SCOTUS' hands

Wrong. It's on the hands of those who get infected as a result of their own personal choices. Why do you hate freedom?
 
You know those Christians like Cuomo. You never can trust them. Thank God we have a Supreme Court to enforce the supremacy of religion over health. Otherwise those Christian governors would run rampant over the rights of decent American church goers.

People having freedom isn't supremacy. This factoid was pro bono.
 
Come on, is your argument seriously that people attend liquor stores and bike stores in the same fashion they do churches? The fact that Churches are attended by 20, 30, 40, 100, 500 people at once distinguishes them from liquor stores. That you don't acknowledge this is completely on trend for you. That a justice of the Supreme Court does not acknowledge it is a new phenomenon and shameful.

If Cuomo had singled out churches but not secular weddings you might have a point, but those aren't the facts, so you don't.

Did he stop protests?
 
What we have here is Barrett's dedication to religion trumping the duty of the state to protect its citizens in emergency situations.

What's next? The SC declaring a fire evacuation order unconstitutional because a church objects?

The SC badly needs reforms.

I know! Let's super protect everyone from making their own decisions by locking everyone up in solitary confinement. It's for their protection, after all.
 
Wrong. It's on the hands of those who get infected as a result of their own personal choices. Why do you hate freedom?
Wrong. This has nothing to do with freedom and everything to do with safety. Why do you hate other people?
 
So it's the religious rule then? America has a secular government last I checked. Are we now headed toward a middle east style government where religion plays a key part in our government decisions? It's becoming clear what the motives for Trump's SC justices are. It looks like he's fulfilled some promises to the hardcore Christians of this country. Seems Guiliani is also wanting to bring Trump's election disputes to the SC. I think we know why. They have favors to pay off.

I think we've made a big mistake. This is a safety issue, and even with all these prayers, church staff and members are currently dying from Coronavirus. They need to be protected, just like the general population.

You obviously read something you didn't understand and then went of on some hyperbolic far-leftist fanfic of reality. Equal protection under the law =/= religious rule. His reference was merely highlighting the obvious attempts at forced secularization of people in their own personal lives. These are not public sectors we're talking about so you don't need to bitch and moan about "religious rule". You don't want to go to a church or synagogue? Then don't go.
 
Wrong. This has nothing to do with freedom and everything to do with safety. Why do you hate other people?

Of course it's about freedom. You want to limit people's freedom because you hate it. I prefer people to have the right to make their own choices. You are free to keep yourself locked in your home and not attend any church, synagogue, temple, or mosque.
 
Unless it's a Trump (Rally) Protest? Or are those equally a no, like other protests are a no?

I'm thinking during a pandemic, all would be a NO.

If we can lock up Japanese Americans, regardless of their constitutional rights because of a war with Japan then we can all wear masks and not gather during a war on a virus.

Did you just try to justify your position by using the internment of Japanese Americans as backup? Wow.
 

The as SCOTUS finally upheld the constitution and shot down Cuomo's religious bigotry and discrimination.

As we have seen before Roberts betrays his duty as a judge to uphold the constitution of the US.

Gorsuch put the nail in the coffin of Roberts and Cuomo.

It is a sad day when the court is split on upholding a constitutional right against discrimination and bigotry.
Religious super spreader events....yippee!
 
Well, I think I was pretty clear.
The document, as written and specifically the first 10 amendments absolutely did not apply to the states. No debate on that issue.
He apparently wanted a literal application, so there you go. It says "congress" shall not... it doesn't say the states.
And there has never been an amendment that said the first 10 amendments do apply to the states.
But in practical terms, following the adoption of 13, 14, 15th amendments, the court has determined several of the first 10 amendments need to be incorporated to apply to the states- the absence of which the protections of 13-15 could be rendered largely meaningless.

So there are 2 options: argue for a literal word for word application, or accept that via 200 years of jurisprudence, it is understood that the document cannot or should not be applied literally, word for word. If the latter, then quoting the first to imply no law can ever be passed restricting religious activities is false.

Option 3: Congresses exist at the the state level too, as they are also the ones that make legislation.
 
Of course it's about freedom. You want to limit people's freedom because you hate it. I prefer people to have the right to make their own choices. You are free to keep yourself locked in your home and not attend any church, synagogue, temple, or mosque.
Do you actually have an argument or just wild accusations against some enemy that only exists in your mind?
 
Only in the fevered mind of liberals is freedom seen as "going off the rails".
By that logic nothing should change because of the coronavirus. Nothing shoud be locked down and we should just let nature run its course. Is that what you want?
 
Then the deaths of those people who get infected with be on SCOTUS' hands
Only if the deaths of the people who get infected while going to any of the non-essential businesses that had no limit on occupancy where the churches were limited to 25 regardless of their actual capacity are on Cuomo's hands.
 
You obviously read something you didn't understand and then went of on some hyperbolic far-leftist fanfic of reality. Equal protection under the law =/= religious rule. His reference was merely highlighting the obvious attempts at forced secularization of people in their own personal lives. These are not public sectors we're talking about so you don't need to bitch and moan about "religious rule". You don't want to go to a church or synagogue? Then don't go.
So, you can slap theist gathering place on a building and health protocols during a pandemic don't apply?
Can school at home, but cant worship at home?
Hypocrite.

Churches shouldn't be above the governor's pandemic protocol. Period.

The rest of your post is just angry Trumper syndrome.
 
Do you actually have an argument or just wild accusations against some enemy that only exists in your mind?

There is no wild accusation. There is just observable fact. You don't have to go to a church, temple, synagogue, mosque, or any similar thing. What other people do with their freedom is their prerogative.
 
By that logic nothing should change because of the coronavirus. Nothing shoud be locked down and we should just let nature run its course. Is that what you want?

I think the government has the right to regulate what happens in public spaces, not private ones.
 
So, you can slap theist gathering place on a building and health protocols during a pandemic don't apply?
Can school at home, but cant worship at home?
Hypocrite.

Churches shouldn't be above the governor's pandemic protocol. Period.

The rest of your post is just angry Trumper syndrome.

You again read something you didn't understand. It's about equal protection under the law. You want to single out places of worship for targeting, just like Cuomo, for closing down. It's not about giving these places an extra privilege, but the same privilege that other places get.
 
There is no wild accusation. There is just observable fact. You don't have to go to a church, temple, synagogue, mosque, or any similar thing. What other people do with their freedom is their prerogative.
I go to church (online right now) every Sunday.

So what we learned about the facts you have observed so far is that you have failed to observe that I go to church (which is a good thing, because you knowing that would be a bit creepy). I also believe that Jesus Christ is my lord and savior and do my best to follow him the best way I know how.

So that brings me back to my original question, Do you actually have an argument or just wild accusations against some enemy that only exists in your mind?

I would say at this point given that you have gotten key details wrong, evidence leads to that you are fighting a figment of your mind.
 
I go to church (online right now) every Sunday.

So what we learned about the facts you have observed so far is that you have failed to observe that I go to church (which is a good thing, because you knowing that would be a bit creepy). I also believe that Jesus Christ is my lord and savior and do my best to follow him the best way I know how.

So that brings me back to my original question, Do you actually have an argument or just wild accusations against some enemy that only exists in your mind?

I would say at this point given that you have gotten key details wrong, evidence leads to that you are fighting a figment of your mind.

Like I said, if you don't want to go (in person) then don't go. Nice attempt at trying to move the goal post. Virtual isn't the same as in-person. I see that easily with how my kids performed and learned when they were all virtual vs how they are doing now that classes have started again. No one is forcing you to go. You want to do virtual, that's fine. Others don't. Worry about yourself.
 
Like I said, if you don't want to go (in person) then don't go. Nice attempt at trying to move the goal post. Virtual isn't the same as in-person. I see that easily with how my kids performed and learned when they were all virtual vs how they are doing now that classes have started again. No one is forcing you to go. You want to do virtual, that's fine. Others don't. Worry about yourself.
Nobody is forcing me to go sure, but that also has nothing to do with the point either. The point is that we have a pandemic and people are getting killed. Those who go to church or other large gatherings will infect others who did not make that choice and that is the part that matters.

Sure one could try to be a hermit or whatever, but unless one has a pretty decent income, that isn't a realistic option, no matter your whining about freedom and ignoring people's freedom to not be infected by people who are being irresponsible and antisocial. Which makes you a hypocrite for only preferring freedoms that you personally like.
 
Nobody is forcing me to go sure, but that also has nothing to do with the point either. The point is that we have a pandemic and people are getting killed. Those who go to church or other large gatherings will infect others who did not make that choice and that is the part that matters.

That's the risk they are taking for themselves. You don't have to do the same. This isn't difficult to understand.

Sure one could try to be a hermit or whatever, but unless one has a pretty decent income, that isn't a realistic option, no matter your whining about freedom and ignoring people's freedom to not be infected by people who are being irresponsible and antisocial. Which makes you a hypocrite for only preferring freedoms that you personally like.

Then take proper safety measures for yourself. If you do, you have a very, very, low risk of contracting the virus. I was in a fairly small room for hours with someone that tested positive later that night, meaning he was contagious then, and I didn't get it. You're not going to get it from limited interactions, wearing a mask, washing your hands, sterilizing what you touch, ect.
 
That's the risk they are taking for themselves. You don't have to do the same. This isn't difficult to understand.



Then take proper safety measures for yourself. If you do, you have a very, very, low risk of contracting the virus. I was in a fairly small room for hours with someone that tested positive later that night, meaning he was contagious then, and I didn't get it. You're not going to get it from limited interactions, wearing a mask, washing your hands, sterilizing what you touch, ect.
At some point people will have go to to the grocery store, get gas, pay a bill, etc and interact with the public. The more people going to large gatherings affects all of those things people have to do that has nothing to do with church. Right now any large gathering is just contributing to the problem and that right now is the biggest consideration.

People can stay home and many do, but nobody can realistically stay home 100% of the time or avoid interactions with others completely, so your point is unrealistic in the real world and is not worth considering.
 
At some point people will have go to to the grocery store, get gas, pay a bill, etc and interact with the public.

Yup...and if you take proper safety measures you're not going to get it doing any of those things.
 
“Everyone follows the same rules” is somehow bigotry and discrimination in the world of right wingers. They truly do believe they are just above everyone else.
 
Back
Top Bottom