Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They hear code words and dog whistles.
A new report by the United States Commission on Civil Rights supports the majority on the federal commission, who say that efforts to protect religious liberty and freedom are really a way for individuals and entities to discriminate against people who don’t share their beliefs.
“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance,” Martin Castro, chairman of the commission, said in a statement included in the 296-page report.
Civil Rights Commission: ‘Religious Liberty,’ ‘Religious Freedom’ Code Words for Intolerance, Homophobia, and ‘Christian Supremacy’
They hear code words and dog whistles.
A new report by the United States Commission on Civil Rights supports the majority on the federal commission, who say that efforts to protect religious liberty and freedom are really a way for individuals and entities to discriminate against people who don’t share their beliefs.
“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance,” Martin Castro, chairman of the commission, said in a statement included in the 296-page report.
Civil Rights Commission: ‘Religious Liberty,’ ‘Religious Freedom’ Code Words for Intolerance, Homophobia, and ‘Christian Supremacy’
You may be right that a lot of people may really find homosexuality completely immoral and it is just an argument to justify their rejection of it BUT SO FUCKING WHAT! Don't people in a free country have a right to be however they fucking want to be? The left has really found a convincing argument to impose their will onto others which is their position is moral and the opponents position is immoral and that justifies them stripping them of their rights because the average person doesn't mind it then. Why would the average person care what some prejudicial fool's rights are? And this is the argument that is used to justify the greatest removal of indidual freedom in this country by the left.
We told you guys that they would come for the 2nd Amendment first...but the 1st Amendment is next......every part of the first Amendment....religion, speech, political speech....the left does not regard individual liberty as a serious concept......the power of the state must control every aspect of life....and the 1st and 2nd amendment prevent the accumulation of power in the central government....
See page 122 on the remarks of Chairman Castro that were quoted in the OP. Not all the committee agrees with Castro, happily. Thanks for the silly remark on the news source that links the actual report. The report itself is a tedious read, but you might enjoy the Peaceful Coexistence Reports at the end of each segment.All religions are included. Or they were, the Commission is attempting to exclude Christians by claiming they are phobics. You are OK with one group of people being picked out and vilified ?Yeah, you guys are all about freedom of religion, as long as the religion is christianity.
The Civil Rights Commission wants all religions to be included.
Also, they don't want any religion controlling the running of the country or interfering with anyone's Constitutional/legal rights.
Too much of a concept for some of you.
Did you read the report or did you only read what your silly right wing news source told you the report said?
Can you cite the page from this two hundred plus page report that "vilifies" or "excludes" Christians?
Frankly, it's near time Christians stood up and said "fuck you". These progressive assholes have no Constitutional standing.
Ya fought for it once, remember?
It isn't a constitutional issue. If you don't want to bake a cake for gay people, your solution is to close down your bakery. You have a religion, your business does not.
This shit was resolved legally 50 years ago when some racist cracker decided Jesus hated black people as much as they did (without any biblical foundation) and tried to use that as an excuse not to serve them.
The courts slapped them down hard like they are slapping them down hard now.
Not to worry, in another 20 years, all the churches are going to treat their stance on gays the way they treat their stance on racism, slavery and witch burning. Something they will claim was a "misunderstanding' of the bible.
85% of Americans know that the old angry white men are dying out over the next 15 to 20 years, and they are not being replaced by the younger generations. So, Grizz, roar! Go right ahead.Whoa, another angry old black man.Frankly, it's near time Christians stood up and said "fuck you". These progressive assholes have no Constitutional standing.
Ya fought for it once, remember?
It isn't a constitutional issue. If you don't want to bake a cake for gay people, your solution is to close down your bakery. You have a religion, your business does not.
This shit was resolved legally 50 years ago when some racist cracker decided Jesus hated black people as much as they did (without any biblical foundation) and tried to use that as an excuse not to serve them.
The courts slapped them down hard like they are slapping them down hard now.
Not to worry, in another 20 years, all the churches are going to treat their stance on gays the way they treat their stance on racism, slavery and witch burning. Something they will claim was a "misunderstanding' of the bible.
They hear code words and dog whistles.
A new report by the United States Commission on Civil Rights supports the majority on the federal commission, who say that efforts to protect religious liberty and freedom are really a way for individuals and entities to discriminate against people who don’t share their beliefs...
We can't have a logical discussion with you not following the rules, Billy. I will always get you when you take a cheap shot without addressing the OP. SCOTUS will decide in the end what is appropriate discrimination in the public square. I will join you in opposing any public suppression of discrimination is personal association.Reporting for slicing my comment out of context and for false punctuation, a rules violation.No one is saying you can't be intolerantI reserve my right to be as intolerant as I see fit, and I will combat you right back. I have no tolerance for Democrats.
And yet you choose to combat my intolerance with your own.
Yes, run tell the teacher. It's your way when at a loss for words.
Out of context? I posted and responded to the pertinent part of your comment.
Here is the full comment, "No one is saying you can't be intolerant, but your actions in public forums are governed by public laws with public consequences. Go ahead and be intolerant."
Yes, you can be intolerant, but if you do it in public association then there may be consequences.
There may be, but that does not mean the laws insistent upon consequences for expressing one's rights pass Constitutional muster.
The existence of a law is not dependent upon its legality.
85% of Americans know that the old angry white men are dying out over the next 15 to 20 years, and they are not being replaced by the younger generations. So, Grizz, roar! Go right ahead.Whoa, another angry old black man.Frankly, it's near time Christians stood up and said "fuck you". These progressive assholes have no Constitutional standing.
Ya fought for it once, remember?
It isn't a constitutional issue. If you don't want to bake a cake for gay people, your solution is to close down your bakery. You have a religion, your business does not.
This shit was resolved legally 50 years ago when some racist cracker decided Jesus hated black people as much as they did (without any biblical foundation) and tried to use that as an excuse not to serve them.
The courts slapped them down hard like they are slapping them down hard now.
Not to worry, in another 20 years, all the churches are going to treat their stance on gays the way they treat their stance on racism, slavery and witch burning. Something they will claim was a "misunderstanding' of the bible.
We told you guys that they would come for the 2nd Amendment first...but the 1st Amendment is next......every part of the first Amendment....religion, speech, political speech....the left does not regard individual liberty as a serious concept......the power of the state must control every aspect of life....and the 1st and 2nd amendment prevent the accumulation of power in the central government....
NOt really. Neither amendment has ever been an absolute.
It's why you can't own that machine gun you've had your eye on
I asked CClaytonJones for examples. Since he declared something to be fact, it was a reasonable request.Compost, go study the commission's report for examples. It's up to you to disprove them.How about some actual examples of these violations that you consider fact beyond dispute?The Commission is correct to identify the fact that many on the religious right, and social conservatives in general, are hostile to settled, accepted Establishment Clause jurisprudence.They hear code words and dog whistles.
A new report by the United States Commission on Civil Rights supports the majority on the federal commission, who say that efforts to protect religious liberty and freedom are really a way for individuals and entities to discriminate against people who don’t share their beliefs.
“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance,” Martin Castro, chairman of the commission, said in a statement included in the 296-page report.
Civil Rights Commission: ‘Religious Liberty,’ ‘Religious Freedom’ Code Words for Intolerance, Homophobia, and ‘Christian Supremacy’
It is a fact beyond dispute that far too many religious fundamentalists and social conservatives seek to codify Christian dogma in secular law in violation of the Framers’ mandate that church and state remain separate.
It is a fact beyond dispute that far too many religious fundamentalists and social conservatives seek to disadvantage religious minorities in violation of the First Amendment, Muslim Americans in particular.
And it is a fact beyond dispute that far too many religious fundamentalists and social conservatives advocate violating just, proper, and Constitutional laws – such as public accommodations laws – predicated on the lie that those measures ‘prohibit religious liberty,’ when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
My remark was regarding code words. That was part of Chairman Castro's remarks, was it not?See page 122 on the remarks of Chairman Castro that were quoted in the OP. Not all the committee agrees with Castro, happily. Thanks for the silly remark on the news source that links the actual report. The report itself is a tedious read, but you might enjoy the Peaceful Coexistence Reports at the end of each segment.All religions are included. Or they were, the Commission is attempting to exclude Christians by claiming they are phobics. You are OK with one group of people being picked out and vilified ?Yeah, you guys are all about freedom of religion, as long as the religion is christianity.
The Civil Rights Commission wants all religions to be included.
Also, they don't want any religion controlling the running of the country or interfering with anyone's Constitutional/legal rights.
Too much of a concept for some of you.
Did you read the report or did you only read what your silly right wing news source told you the report said?
Can you cite the page from this two hundred plus page report that "vilifies" or "excludes" Christians?
Page 122 does not support your contention that the report "excludes" or "vilifies" Christians. Where is the page of the REPORT that does what you claim.
Grizz and Billly yammer on. Grizz you have learned to be on OP with me, and that's good. Billy, you are right in that every one who wants to buy a gun, whether a 22 or a machine gun, should be required to purchase and keep updated a federal firearms license. Make it mandatory for any and every purchase.
Grizz and Billly yammer on. Grizz you have learned to be on OP with me, and that's good. Billy, you are right in that every one who wants to buy a gun, whether a 22 or a machine gun, should be required to purchase and keep updated a federal firearms license. Make it mandatory for any and every purchase.
It's cute how you think that claiming victory makes it so. You are the easiest guy on the board to make fun of pop.
If that makes you feel better when you look in the mirror, go for it.
JakeStarkey said, "If what the Commissioner is true (and we have plenty of posters who here do just this with code words), then "discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance" must be combatted.My remarks need no explaining to anyone. If a person has doubts, go back and read them. If you have trouble with the Commission, compost, I don't care.
They hear code words and dog whistles.
A new report by the United States Commission on Civil Rights supports the majority on the federal commission, who say that efforts to protect religious liberty and freedom are really a way for individuals and entities to discriminate against people who don’t share their beliefs.
“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance,” Martin Castro, chairman of the commission, said in a statement included in the 296-page report.
Civil Rights Commission: ‘Religious Liberty,’ ‘Religious Freedom’ Code Words for Intolerance, Homophobia, and ‘Christian Supremacy’
