Choice for Jesus not for thee

[IronWing]

I guess Franklin Graham is back in the fold.

 

[MtnMan]

Since it didn’t get posted on Monday, but vile argument from Alito

Wonder what the look the other justices gave?

These people are the final word regarding what we can and cannot do in this country?

 

[MtnMan]

They don't really tell their flocks how to vote just educate them a bit.

(R) candidate will personally raise every baby ever born

(D) candidate wants to make it legal for child sacrifice parties at satanic festivals (er pride events)

So they aren't telling you who to vote for. It's just voter education.

au contraire, but the do

US pastor expels nine of flock for voting Democrat

AN American pastor is facing demands for his resignation after nine of his flock were expelled for being Democrats.

www.independent.ie

This is a Sunday meeting site of low life's about 25 miles from where I live.

 

[Ken g6]

I do feel like the government should not be compelling creativity, regardless of the reason. Perhaps the line should be drawn at copyright. The government should not require a vendor to create a new work that is eligible for copyright for a client, regardless of their protected class. Derivatives of existing works that are not independently eligible for copyright could be required. Such as an existing wedding cake with two men in suits, or a fill-in-the-blank website.

I'm also surprised this hasn't come up before. Did no one from a protected class ask Benjamin Franklin to print something in his print shop that he didn't want to print? Or are protected classes very recent?

 

[iRONic]

I happened to be watching an NFL stream from somewhere in the midwest and ran into one of these ads already.... fortunately I was quick on the mute button!

These ads run on network channels in prime time here in KY... where there's a church on every corner, and some places 2 or 3 per intersection.

 

[Sunburn74]

I have zero problem with this restaurant taking a stand... in fact I applaud them for doing so on a personal level. Karma is a bitch.

Having said that, my unpopular opinion is that PRIVATE businesses should be allowed to serve (or not) whomever they choose within reason even if feelings are trodden upon.

I disagree. There is no gun to anyone's head to own and operate a US business under US business laws. No one came into your house, held weapon to your head and said "hey you need to start and operate a business today and do it our way". If someone walks into city hall and applies for a business license, they do it of their own free will and fully accept the laws and regulation of business for that county. I give no quarter to arguments that because you're a private business owner you're free to do absolutely anything you want.

As for this case, to me its quite clear. Business activity isn't free speech. Period. Governments can mandate doctors say certain things to patients or mandate manufacturers put certain things on labels. I'm sure the tobacco companies don't like having to put anti-smoking labels on their products. But again again, business activity isn't free speech. I'm not sure why its so hard.

 

[tweaker2]

au contraire, but the do

US pastor expels nine of flock for voting Democrat

AN American pastor is facing demands for his resignation after nine of his flock were expelled for being Democrats.

www.independent.ie

This is a Sunday meeting site of low life's about 25 miles from where I live.

The point being made by the pastor and his personal passel of epistle packing apostle deputies is "You need to be a Republican to be a Christian or STFU and GTFO."

 

[Captante]

Mandating what doctors say to patients is JUST A TAD different then a baker or web-designer following personal religious beliefs and refusing to bake a cake or make a website for a purpose they don't approve of. (misguided as it may be)

In a perfect world neither one would be a thing.

 

[ElFenix]

I do feel like the government should not be compelling creativity, regardless of the reason. Perhaps the line should be drawn at copyright. The government should not require a vendor to create a new work that is eligible for copyright for a client, regardless of their protected class. Derivatives of existing works that are not independently eligible for copyright could be required. Such as an existing wedding cake with two men in suits, or a fill-in-the-blank website.

I'm also surprised this hasn't come up before. Did no one from a protected class ask Benjamin Franklin to print something in his print shop that he didn't want to print? Or are protected classes very recent?

damn near everything is elligible for copyright, including this post, so that's probably an unworkable standard.

 

[ElFenix]

Mandating what doctors say to patients is JUST A TAD different then a baker or web-designer following personal religious beliefs and refusing to bake a cake or make a website for a purpose they don't approve of. (misguided as it may be)

In a perfect world neither one would be a thing.

why is it 'if you don't like the terms you're free to gtfo' unless you're "christian," in which case it's 'if you don't like the terms then they don't apply to you'?

 

[Captante]

why is it 'if you don't like the terms you're free to gtfo' unless you're "christian," in which case it's 'if you don't like the terms then they don't apply to you'?

Frankly I would just drive down the street and spend my money at a NON-bigoted bakery or web-developer and call it a day.

To be clear I do agree that this kind of BS is wrong in case it wasn't obvious, I just don't really care very much relative to other problems.

 

[IronWing]

why is it 'if you don't like the terms you're free to gtfo' unless you're "christian," in which case it's 'if you don't like the terms then they don't apply to you'?

No one is a Christian. There are many folks who choose to believe in a version of Christian theology but Christian is not a state of being. The reason I’m making this obvious and trivial statement is that Alito has decided that one’s completely optional choice to believe in a particular theology takes precedence over the Constitutional rights and liberties of others.

 

[Captante]

So should Christians (or any other religion for that matter) be allowed to force an atheist-run PRIVATE business to cater to them and thus promote Christian/other beliefs?

I'd say not but hey what the heck do I know?

 

[Vic]

The response from the 'Family Foundation' has to be one of the most ridiculously hypocritical and hyperbolic rants I've ever seen. These people want to make it illegal to be LGBT but they're claiming they're the ones being discriminated against. Wtf
There are real Christians in this world but these people definitely are not.

 

[Vic]

No one is a Christian. There are many folks who choose to believe in a version of Christian theology but Christian is not a state of being. The reason I’m making this obvious and trivial statement is that Alito has decided that one’s completely optional choice to believe in a particular theology takes precedence over the Constitutional rights and liberties of others.

These fanatics have conflated the idea that the 1a means govt cannot infringe upon their religious freedom with their religious freedom means they can infringe upon the rights and liberties of others. And this SCOTUS is going right along with them.

 

[MrSquished]

Just started chatting with someone on bumble who is agnostic and mentions age is allergic to religion. I appreciate her words.

 

[ElFenix]

No one is a Christian. There are many folks who choose to believe in a version of Christian theology but Christian is not a state of being. The reason I’m making this obvious and trivial statement is that Alito has decided that one’s completely optional choice to believe in a particular theology takes precedence over the Constitutional rights and liberties of others.

i'm trying to decide if this is a reply or a retort or just a response

 

[ch33zw1z]

The response from the 'Family Foundation' has to be one of the most ridiculously hypocritical and hyperbolic rants I've ever seen. These people want to make it illegal to be LGBT but they're claiming they're the ones being discriminated against. Wtf
There are real Christians in this world but these people definitely are not.

what’s that saying, when your entitlement & privilege is challenged, it feels like oppression

 

[tweaker2]

I guess some religious folks decided that the trust in their infallible GOD only goes so far and have decided to make some decisions and actions of their own volition about what their omnipotent GOD apparently isn't capable of thus requiring making religious judgements of their very own. Some of these folks just so happen to occupy some seats in the highest court of our nation. The theocratic invasion of America through the far right wing of the Republican party is now in full swing. Hang on to yer lugnuts men, and ladies, hang on to yer ovaries. They're about to be confiscated by the Christian fanatics of the nation so they can feel safe and secure about themselves.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I must have contributed a post to this thread in the last several days.

While it says enough, the distinction between religious "law" and secular law is clear enough, the Founders' intentions were clear enough, and this is beginning to seem like a "globe versus flat-world" view of reality.

What do we DO with "these people"? What they want would be a setback for American democracy and the Human Race. They must be stopped. And to think that "being stopped" is an infringement of their 1st Amendment rights is delusional. But this has been said in various ways already in this thread.

Here's another ancillary observation. I've been trying to educate my cousin, and we are still on good terms. But the other night on the phone, he was whining about "George Soros and his Globalist ideas", and that Soros had donated to the campaigns of several "pro-BLM" public prosecutor campaigns in local elections around the country. Of course, it's my view that Soros is just a philanthropist who helps worthwhile causes which might suffer a financial disadvantage otherwise. And the word "globalist" has now become a conspiracy dog-whistle.

I'm about ready to give up. I told him early in that particular conversation to "change the topic". I do not even want to try anymore.

If he's racist, if he ignores the facts and doesn't temper his information-intake with reading that exists outside his MAGA bubble -- he's still a "good kid". That is, he's a good kid in most ways, given that he's my cousin. I just give up on leading him to the water, because he's not going to drink it . . .

And what is wrong with "BLM"? A bunch of folks who protested people of color being shot in the back or even murdered in public.

Also, I'm still looking for an organizational web-site for ANTIFA so I can pay my dues and join -- but there ain't any. See -- I know this, but the MAGA folks apparently don't -- and they won't. They refuse to know it.

 

[Moonbeam]

My cousin is gay on my stepmother’s side. My stepmother was an official in our local Republican Woman’s Club. My Mom did not support the anti gay agenda. Family was more important.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

My cousin is gay on my stepmother’s side. My stepmother was an official in our local Republican Woman’s Club. My Mom did not support the anti gay agenda. Family was more important.

I came late to that realization. It's a script-line in "The Accountant": "Family is more important than anything."

But I still don't understand how people can think of Facebook, Twitter, Tik-Tok and other choice media as reliable.

As for their getting their panties in a twist about BLM -- how is it that thousands of people turn out to demonstrate about police killing innocent black men or even just showing unreasonable use of force, and that the demonstrations were world-wide, but the Rightie critics can't see that something must be wrong? Instead, it's "those black people" causing trouble. "Them" -- "those Other".

They'll try and present an argument that blacks commit more crimes, so you can expect a greater incidence of "police mistakes".

You could say that I'm "depressed" this evening. After that documentary "Loan Wolves" on MSNBC, I feel devastated with the sorry state of affairs. I actually feel nauseated.

 

[Moonbeam]

I came late to that realization. It's a script-line in "The Accountant": "Family is more important than anything."

But I still don't understand how people can think of Facebook, Twitter, Tik-Tok and other choice media as reliable.

As for their getting their panties in a twist about BLM -- how is it that thousands of people turn out to demonstrate about police killing innocent black men or even just showing unreasonable use of force, and that the demonstrations were world-wide, but the Rightie critics can't see that something must be wrong? Instead, it's "those black people" causing trouble. "Them" -- "those Other".

They'll try and present an argument that blacks commit more crimes, so you can expect a greater incidence of "police mistakes".

You could say that I'm "depressed" this evening. After that documentary "Loan Wolves" on MSNBC, I feel devastated with the sorry state of affairs. I actually feel nauseated.

Forgive me for saying the following but the feelings you express affect me deeply and rip at my heart. Twice now I have sought to keep my cat from sleeping on my are to keep from being hampered from typing this out one handed but after telling her not now I have given up. Haha, she just moved from my arm to the end of my desk. Loving my cat and feeling for you, life is a big mess.

I remember collapsing in tears one day out of the blue when driving. On the radio someone said that Anne Frank would have been so many years old today. I believe I know what it is to feel what you feel. But I do not suffer as I once did. I died knowing I could never ever be happy. I surrendered and collapsed. I gave up and everything changed in a single instant. The feelings you evoke in me make me wish I could share that. So, once again, please, I do not want to add to your stress:

Everything you suffer is because of a longing at your core for a beauty you actually know is there but cannot find, and why, because it is the last place you would ever think it would be. You are so so beautiful and you do not see why. Something within you senses the divine and suffers in its absence, something within you wants it to manifest in the consciousness of others. You being seeks heaven on earth. What kind of a being wishes to see love harmony and beauty in the world? Where from does your suffering arise?

Are you like a fish that seeks to know what water is but can't find anything he has heard that matches the description? What if you yourself are everything you seek.

One can't seek a good as you do without that good being real. It is not the good vs evil that can be argued or proven. It is the good that is when the perfect present is real.

You know, someone asked me in an other post the other day if I knew any, oh I don't remember, lets just say enlightened beings, so I looked up on a search engine for a list of enlightened beings and ran across this guy:

Perhaps something he says might interest you.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Frankly I would just drive down the street and spend my money at a NON-bigoted bakery or web-developer and call it a day.

Sure, if you are lucky enough to live somewhere where that is an option. Undermine the public accommodation laws enough and there will be many places in America where that it not. The goal of public accommodation laws is not to force businesses to serve people they don't like, it is to make sure that communities can't freeze out minorities by simply refusing to service them.

Before public accommodation laws there were areas that organized official boycotts of any business that would serve certain minorities. That sort of thing still happens, only now the businesses can't give in to the demand of the few vocal customers because it would be illegal. It mutes the effect by a large amount. After SCOTUS finishes demolishing public accommodation laws this will hold sway once again, and we will again see signs that say 'No Blacks Allowed.'

 

[Ajay]

No one is a Christian. There are many folks who choose to believe in a version of Christian theology but Christian is not a state of being**. The reason I’m making this obvious and trivial statement is that Alito has decided that one’s completely optional choice to believe in a particular theology takes precedence over the Constitutional rights and liberties of others.

Now, I know you don't believe in any of this religious stuff. But this is our philosophy and you have a different one. In the case of debates in the public square, we have different philosophies which underpin our world view. The fact that Alito's philosophy is derived from a belief in God and thus has a theological basis, doesn't make it, ipso facto, at odds with determining what is a Constitutional right or not. We would look at some of your preference vis-a-vis the constitution with the same surprise and/or shock with which you view those of christians. The constitutions doesn't ban christians, or atheists, or Buddhists or even idiots from congress, the presidency or the supreme court.

Fundamentally, since the constitution isn't 100,000 pages long, we constantly have to decide what such unenumerated rights are and there have been many disagreements over our shared history in this country.

FWIW, I am no fan of Alito.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you care to read...

** Well, that's not the Catholic view. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC):

An indelible spiritual mark . . .

1272 Incorporated into Christ by Baptism, the person baptized is configured to Christ. Baptism seals the Christian with the indelible spiritual mark (character) of his belonging to Christ. No sin can erase this mark, even if sin prevents Baptism from bearing the fruits of salvation.82 Given once for all, Baptism cannot be repeated.

1273 Incorporated into the Church by Baptism, the faithful have received the sacramental character that consecrates them for Christian religious worship.83 The baptismal seal enables and commits Christians to serve God by a vital participation in the holy liturgy of the Church and to exercise their baptismal priesthood by the witness of holy lives and practical charity.84

1274 The Holy Spirit has marked us with the seal of the Lord ("Dominicus character") "for the day of redemption."85 "Baptism indeed is the seal of eternal life."86 The faithful Christian who has "kept the seal" until the end, remaining faithful to the demands of his Baptism, will be able to depart this life "marked with the sign of faith,"87 with his baptismal faith, in expectation of the blessed vision of God - the consummation of faith - and in the hope of resurrection.

Since we consider ourselves to be beings of body and spirit (in the image of Christ) - baptism causes our spirit to be sealed with an indelible mark for all time. Our essential character is, in fact, transformed. Even if we chose at some point in life to ignore that - the fact remains. I can see the confusion, unlike Angels, humans are subject to whims, and vacillations of the emotions and intellectual preferences. Hence, there is, at a minimum, a progression in the life of the christian towards what we call holiness. No wonder everyone who's not a christian thinks we are hypocrites - we are on a journey towards becoming like Christ, as our baptism calls us to be. We don't arrive there instantly at the end point. We don't get close to that until decades of prayer, study, service and participation in the sacraments.