Does America Need Be Saved From Theocracy?

[Cecilie1200]

So, there are no politicians trying to legislate their religious beliefs?

Example. The right wants the ability for businesses to discriminate based on their religious beliefs. They want it to be OK for a Pharmacist to refuse to fill a prescription if that prescription is against his "religion".

Only a dimwit leftist who is cheering for people to be legally forced to adhere to HIS beliefs could rant about how it's "legislating religious beliefs" to leave people alone.

 

[Cecilie1200]

1.I have actually had to endure posts from government school grads along this line of what passes for thinking:
“You religious Bible-thumpers want to ram your superstition down our throats…..this is not a theocracy!!!”

Wow.



There are ‘religion’ groups that do demand control of the society…but the Judeo-Christian view on which this nation was founded is not one. But this nation was created with Judeo-Christian principles in mind:

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams



2. Now about that ‘ramming down disproving throats’ fable.

“Although Christianity in its many varieties was the religion of the original colonies, Christianity does not preach operational dominance over the body politic in America. Tocqueville compared this aspect to Islam: “Mohammed professed to derive from Heaven, and has inserted in the Koran, not only religious doctrines, but political maxims, civil and criminal laws, and theories of science. The Gospel, on the contrary, speaks only of the general relations of men to God and to each other, beyond which it inculcates and imposes no point of faith. This alone, besides a thousand other reasons, would suffice to prove that the former of these religions will never long predominate in a cultivated and democratic age, while the latter is destined to retain its sway at these as at all other periods.” Tocqueville, “Democracy in America,” vol.2, p. 23.



3. Assume arguendo that there is as much reason to have a religious citizenry as there is to have an non-religious one. The solution is that you don’t have to believe, ....but it is in your interest to have others believe.

The most succinct argument in favor of a religious citizenry comes from a famous atheist, Voltaire: "I don't believe in God, but I hope my valet does so he won't steal my spoons."
How Voltaire's Atheism Overthrew Deism

And, Voltaire also famously said "Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer." Mais toute la nature nous crie qu'il existe; qu'il y a une intelligence suprême, un pouvoir immense, un ordre admirable, et tout nous instruit de notre dépendance. "If God did not exist, he would have to be invented."

For the same reason as above....it is society's interest to have more religious folks, than non-religious


BTW…when about to die, Voltaire recanted: “He at once sent for the priest, and wanted to be ‘reconciled with the church.’ The Tragic Death of Voltaire the Atheist | Paw Creek Ministries





Atheism can’t sustain a rights-based, virtue-based system as a God-less ideology. Rousseau, Hegel and Marx took the opposite view, and the result was multiple millions slaughtered.


4. The less educated also claim that the Constitution somehow inveighs against religion and mandates it be separated from government. Another falsity.
The first amendment, formulated by a learned and religious group, simply made certain that no government of America mandated a particular belief. Or, have none at all.




Sooooo......where is the 'threat' of a theocracy?????

This brings to mind a passage from CS Lewis's "Screwtape Letters":

"The use of fashions in thought is to distract men from their real dangers. We direct the fashionable outcry of each generation against those vices of which it is in the least danger, and fix its approval on the virtue that is nearest the vice which we are trying to make endemic. The game is to have them all running around with fire extinguishers whenever there's a flood; and all crowding to that side of the boat which is already nearly gone under."

That's the current left all over, screeching and hollering about the dangers of something that's not even remotely a threat, in order to distract from the REAL danger of their asinine policies.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So, there are no politicians trying to legislate their religious beliefs?

Example. The right wants the ability for businesses to discriminate based on their religious beliefs. They want it to be OK for a Pharmacist to refuse to fill a prescription if that prescription is against his "religion".

a. So you object to enforcing the commandment against murder?

b. You view is that forcing conscientious objectors to bake a cake is more important than liberty?

c. One must admit the consistency you folks stick to going back to your revolution in 1905.
I knew you wouldn't understand that, RealDumb....you're a government school grad.

Really? This is your argument.

Murder is a crime against our fellow man. It is a law outside of religion. TheTen Commandmends did not invent this law.

If you want to be in business, you follow the laws of business.

Baking a cake is just that, baking a cake. It is not like they are joining in same sex orgies. Using religion to discriminate is so anti-Christian.

I'll take my public school education over your home schooling or what ever failed at educating you.

"...TheTen Commandmends (sic)..."


When one is claiming to have the superior education, it behooves the individual to, at least, have the correct spelling.


But....I do love when you post....saves me the trouble of proving what a fool you are.

It's a typo. I am not so anal that I give a shit about spelling. Perhaps you should concentrate more on thinking than spelling & you would not continue to make such stupid posts/

"It's anal to want to do things correctly. I'm much too brilliant to be expected to communicate my thoughts clearly!"

Leftism in a nutshell.

 

[Cecilie1200]

a. So you object to enforcing the commandment against murder?

b. You view is that forcing conscientious objectors to bake a cake is more important than liberty?

c. One must admit the consistency you folks stick to going back to your revolution in 1905.
I knew you wouldn't understand that, RealDumb....you're a government school grad.

A. Restrictions on murder are found in all religions and predates Christianity by hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

B. So you're going to get Title II of the Civil Rights act repealed so bakers don't have to bake for sinful interracial couples?

"B. So you're going to get Title II of the Civil Rights act repealed so bakers don't have to bake"...a cake


I sure hope you're right.....of course, unlike you, I don't believe in slavery.



Any normal person must laugh at the claims of the gay couple who were deprived of their cake:
"The lesbian couple had filed a claim with the state, stating that the Kleins’ refusal to bake them a cake had caused them to suffer from 88 symptoms of mental anguish including “doubt,” “surprise,” “uncertainty,” “worry” and a “dislike of going to work.”


....their case wasn’t even tried by a judge from the Oregon judiciary; it was tried by a bureaucrat from the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, who ruled that the Kleins owed the lesbian couple, Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman, $135,000 in damages.



Although Rachel Cryer could have easily found another cake supplier, the Oregon government deemed it important to make an example of the Kleins.


According to the official catechism of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, a Christian couple’s right to religious freedom takes a backseat to a lesbian couple’s right to a cake."
What Will Happen to Religious Freedom?




Shall we review what 'rights' are in a free country?

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.

Why did you selectively edit the question? Title II of the Civil Rights Act does not require the Klein's bake a cake for gay people, local law does. You know, states rights stuff. Title II of the CRA "forces" people to make cakes for sinful interracial couples. Are you getting that repealed or not?

You ignored the key part of the post.....

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.




Any problem with the above?????

We have laws.

Your rights do not over rule the law.

You may have the right to bear arms but I have the right to ban them on my property.

There is a law that says you can't discriminate as a business, your right to hate gay people does not give you a pass.

Actually, hon, our rights DO overrule the law. That's kinda the point of rights . . . although I wouldn't expect a fascist, government-worshipping leftist drone like you to understand that.

 

[RealDave]

A. Restrictions on murder are found in all religions and predates Christianity by hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

B. So you're going to get Title II of the Civil Rights act repealed so bakers don't have to bake for sinful interracial couples?

"B. So you're going to get Title II of the Civil Rights act repealed so bakers don't have to bake"...a cake


I sure hope you're right.....of course, unlike you, I don't believe in slavery.



Any normal person must laugh at the claims of the gay couple who were deprived of their cake:
"The lesbian couple had filed a claim with the state, stating that the Kleins’ refusal to bake them a cake had caused them to suffer from 88 symptoms of mental anguish including “doubt,” “surprise,” “uncertainty,” “worry” and a “dislike of going to work.”


....their case wasn’t even tried by a judge from the Oregon judiciary; it was tried by a bureaucrat from the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, who ruled that the Kleins owed the lesbian couple, Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman, $135,000 in damages.



Although Rachel Cryer could have easily found another cake supplier, the Oregon government deemed it important to make an example of the Kleins.


According to the official catechism of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, a Christian couple’s right to religious freedom takes a backseat to a lesbian couple’s right to a cake."
What Will Happen to Religious Freedom?




Shall we review what 'rights' are in a free country?

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.

Why did you selectively edit the question? Title II of the Civil Rights Act does not require the Klein's bake a cake for gay people, local law does. You know, states rights stuff. Title II of the CRA "forces" people to make cakes for sinful interracial couples. Are you getting that repealed or not?

You ignored the key part of the post.....

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.




Any problem with the above?????

We have laws.

Your rights do not over rule the law.

You may have the right to bear arms but I have the right to ban them on my property.

There is a law that says you can't discriminate as a business, your right to hate gay people does not give you a pass.

Actually, hon, our rights DO overrule the law. That's kinda the point of rights . . . although I wouldn't expect a fascist, government-worshipping leftist drone like you to understand that.

Fuck off bigoted POS.

If you want to run a business, there are laws & regulations.

If you can't followed them, stay the fuck out.

It is that simple.

 

[RealDave]

So, there are no politicians trying to legislate their religious beliefs?

Example. The right wants the ability for businesses to discriminate based on their religious beliefs. They want it to be OK for a Pharmacist to refuse to fill a prescription if that prescription is against his "religion".

Only a dimwit leftist who is cheering for people to be legally forced to adhere to HIS beliefs could rant about how it's "legislating religious beliefs" to leave people alone.

If you can't do that job, find another.

 

[JoeB131]

"Bill Barr’s Point About Religion Is Underscored by His Critics

The backlash against Attorney General William Barr’s call for religious freedom now includes a demand that his remarks on the subject be scrubbed from the Justice Department Web site. The demand, according to Indiana Public Media, is being made by a group that reckons Mr. Barr violated his constitutional oath when he delivered the other day at Notre Dame University a speech on the importance of religion and religious liberty.

We hope that the Justice Department stands its ground. The attorney general’s remarks at Notre Dame are one of the most important statements of support that religious Americans have had at a time when a campaign is underway to cast religion as a cover for bigotry. We are in a time when the left seeks to intimidate those who would cast religion as an inherently good thing for America."

Inquisitions
Crusades
Suppression of Science
Religious Wars
Oppression of religious minorities
Clergy Sex abuse

Yeah, Religion is really good for people.

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, hon, our rights DO overrule the law. That's kinda the point of rights . . . although I wouldn't expect a fascist, government-worshipping leftist drone like you to understand that.

So by your logic,

The Branch Davidians had every right to let David Koresh Molest their kids because that was their religion, and it overrules the law.

The Rastifarians have every right to smoke pot and get wasted, because that's their religion, mon!

The World Church of the Creator has the right to go around killing people of color because that's their religion....

Um. Wow. Just fucking wow.

 

[Erinwltr]

Classic definition of profanity

Hey, I am sure the Nazis honestly thought that they were doing God's work.

The fact is, every Christian Nation in Europe was happy to send volunteers to help the Nazis cleanse the world of the Jews.

Yeah, after the war, everyone felt really bad about it. The Vatican even decided to make sure part of Vatican 2 was to absolve the Jews of Jesus' murder. (even though according the bible, they totally killed the guy for blasphemy)

"every Christian Nation in Europe was happy to send volunteers to help the Nazis cleanse the world of the Jews. "

Where are you going with this, Joe?

 

[beautress]

1.I have actually had to endure posts from government school grads along this line of what passes for thinking:
“You religious Bible-thumpers want to ram your superstition down our throats…..this is not a theocracy!!!”

Wow.

Um. I went to Catholic Schools for 12 years.

You Bible thumpers ARE trying to ram your superstitions down our throats.

Knock it off.

If you think Gay marriage or Abortion are bad... don't have one. This isn't that complicated.

JoeB sez: You Bible thumpers ARE trying to ram your superstitions down our throats.​

George Washington wasn't exactly a Bible thumper, but he quoted scriptures and called on the name of the Lord in almost every one of his letters, speeches, and opening prayers while he was President. He also prayed a lot when he was on the warpath, so that he would be guided under duress that being the Commander of the Colonial Army during the American Revolution.

JoeB, you can thank President George Washington for freedoms exercised by you in the Amazing republic we call the United States of America.

 

[Erinwltr]

So, there are no politicians trying to legislate their religious beliefs?

Example. The right wants the ability for businesses to discriminate based on their religious beliefs. They want it to be OK for a Pharmacist to refuse to fill a prescription if that prescription is against his "religion".

Only a dimwit leftist who is cheering for people to be legally forced to adhere to HIS beliefs could rant about how it's "legislating religious beliefs" to leave people alone.

Oh, there you are cec. Missed your lunatic rants.

 

[dudmuck]

A. Restrictions on murder are found in all religions and predates Christianity by hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

B. So you're going to get Title II of the Civil Rights act repealed so bakers don't have to bake for sinful interracial couples?

"B. So you're going to get Title II of the Civil Rights act repealed so bakers don't have to bake"...a cake


I sure hope you're right.....of course, unlike you, I don't believe in slavery.



Any normal person must laugh at the claims of the gay couple who were deprived of their cake:
"The lesbian couple had filed a claim with the state, stating that the Kleins’ refusal to bake them a cake had caused them to suffer from 88 symptoms of mental anguish including “doubt,” “surprise,” “uncertainty,” “worry” and a “dislike of going to work.”


....their case wasn’t even tried by a judge from the Oregon judiciary; it was tried by a bureaucrat from the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, who ruled that the Kleins owed the lesbian couple, Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman, $135,000 in damages.



Although Rachel Cryer could have easily found another cake supplier, the Oregon government deemed it important to make an example of the Kleins.


According to the official catechism of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, a Christian couple’s right to religious freedom takes a backseat to a lesbian couple’s right to a cake."
What Will Happen to Religious Freedom?




Shall we review what 'rights' are in a free country?

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.

Why did you selectively edit the question? Title II of the Civil Rights Act does not require the Klein's bake a cake for gay people, local law does. You know, states rights stuff. Title II of the CRA "forces" people to make cakes for sinful interracial couples. Are you getting that repealed or not?

You ignored the key part of the post.....

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.




Any problem with the above?????

We have laws.

Your rights do not over rule the law.

You may have the right to bear arms but I have the right to ban them on my property.

There is a law that says you can't discriminate as a business, your right to hate gay people does not give you a pass.

Actually, hon, our rights DO overrule the law. That's kinda the point of rights . . . although I wouldn't expect a fascist, government-worshipping leftist drone like you to understand that.

In this USA the policy regarding laws and rights is from the philosophy of John Locke:
Locke’s claim is that individuals have a duty to respect the rights of others, even in the state of nature. The source of this duty, he says, is natural law.

If somebody puts their own rights above the law, they can take away your rights.

 

[22lcidw]

1.I have actually had to endure posts from government school grads along this line of what passes for thinking:
“You religious Bible-thumpers want to ram your superstition down our throats…..this is not a theocracy!!!”

Wow.

Um. I went to Catholic Schools for 12 years.

You Bible thumpers ARE trying to ram your superstitions down our throats.

Knock it off.

If you think Gay marriage or Abortion are bad... don't have one. This isn't that complicated.

Cut all the taxes in half then Joe. All of them. We will see what is complicated and what is not. And where the resources go.

 

[Erinwltr]

"B. So you're going to get Title II of the Civil Rights act repealed so bakers don't have to bake"...a cake


I sure hope you're right.....of course, unlike you, I don't believe in slavery.



Any normal person must laugh at the claims of the gay couple who were deprived of their cake:
"The lesbian couple had filed a claim with the state, stating that the Kleins’ refusal to bake them a cake had caused them to suffer from 88 symptoms of mental anguish including “doubt,” “surprise,” “uncertainty,” “worry” and a “dislike of going to work.”


....their case wasn’t even tried by a judge from the Oregon judiciary; it was tried by a bureaucrat from the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, who ruled that the Kleins owed the lesbian couple, Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman, $135,000 in damages.



Although Rachel Cryer could have easily found another cake supplier, the Oregon government deemed it important to make an example of the Kleins.


According to the official catechism of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, a Christian couple’s right to religious freedom takes a backseat to a lesbian couple’s right to a cake."
What Will Happen to Religious Freedom?




Shall we review what 'rights' are in a free country?

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.

Why did you selectively edit the question? Title II of the Civil Rights Act does not require the Klein's bake a cake for gay people, local law does. You know, states rights stuff. Title II of the CRA "forces" people to make cakes for sinful interracial couples. Are you getting that repealed or not?

You ignored the key part of the post.....

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.




Any problem with the above?????

We have laws.

Your rights do not over rule the law.

You may have the right to bear arms but I have the right to ban them on my property.

There is a law that says you can't discriminate as a business, your right to hate gay people does not give you a pass.

Actually, hon, our rights DO overrule the law. That's kinda the point of rights . . . although I wouldn't expect a fascist, government-worshipping leftist drone like you to understand that.

In this USA the policy regarding laws and rights is from the philosophy of John Locke:
Locke’s claim is that individuals have a duty to respect the rights of others, even in the state of nature. The source of this duty, he says, is natural law.

If somebody puts their own rights above the law, they can take away your rights.

Good stuff. Thank you for reminding me.

 

[JoeB131]

"every Christian Nation in Europe was happy to send volunteers to help the Nazis cleanse the world of the Jews. "

Where are you going with this, Joe?

I'm not going anywhere, just stating a fact. The Mail Order Bride from Hell keeps insisting that genocide is an atheist thing...The reality is, Christians happily put on their "Gott Mit Uns" belt buckles and did Hitler's bidding, and in every country they invaded, they found Christians who were happy to help.

The ironic thing is that most of the "Nazis" we catch nowadays are non-Germans who joined the SS. Germany granted all their citizens immunity from war crimes in the 1960's.

 

[JoeB131]

Cut all the taxes in half then Joe. All of them. We will see what is complicated and what is not. And where the resources go.

Wow, this is off topic, but this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

We've Cut taxes, and spending didn't go down, IT WENT UP. Politicians found it was easier to borrow money than to squeeze it out of the citizens. This has happened three times - Under Reagan, under Bush-43 and under Trump. And in all three cases, the deficit ballooned.

Hey, you really, really, really want to shrink the size of government. NO DEFICITS. Taxes will be as high as they need to be to pay for all services, AND pay down the previous debt. That's how you get out of debt. You increase revenues and you decrease spending.

 

[JoeB131]

George Washington wasn't exactly a Bible thumper, but he quoted scriptures and called on the name of the Lord in almost every one of his letters, speeches, and opening prayers while he was President. He also prayed a lot when he was on the warpath, so that he would be guided under duress that being the Commander of the Colonial Army during the American Revolution.

JoeB, you can thank President George Washington for freedoms exercised by you in the Amazing republic we call the United States of America.

George Washington was a slave-raping piece of shit.

I would have all the same freedoms if the British had won the war. George Washington saved us from the horrors of being Canadians.

You mean we'd have ended slavery without a civil war AND got universal health care? Man, thank God George saved us from that!

 

[Erinwltr]

"every Christian Nation in Europe was happy to send volunteers to help the Nazis cleanse the world of the Jews. "

Where are you going with this, Joe?

I'm not going anywhere, just stating a fact. The Mail Order Bride from Hell keeps insisting that genocide is an atheist thing...The reality is, Christians happily put on their "Gott Mit Uns" belt buckles and did Hitler's bidding, and in every country they invaded, they found Christians who were happy to help.

The ironic thing is that most of the "Nazis" we catch nowadays are non-Germans who joined the SS. Germany granted all their citizens immunity from war crimes in the 1960's.

A lot to take in. Just, askin'. My Friend.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"B. So you're going to get Title II of the Civil Rights act repealed so bakers don't have to bake"...a cake


I sure hope you're right.....of course, unlike you, I don't believe in slavery.



Any normal person must laugh at the claims of the gay couple who were deprived of their cake:
"The lesbian couple had filed a claim with the state, stating that the Kleins’ refusal to bake them a cake had caused them to suffer from 88 symptoms of mental anguish including “doubt,” “surprise,” “uncertainty,” “worry” and a “dislike of going to work.”


....their case wasn’t even tried by a judge from the Oregon judiciary; it was tried by a bureaucrat from the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, who ruled that the Kleins owed the lesbian couple, Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman, $135,000 in damages.



Although Rachel Cryer could have easily found another cake supplier, the Oregon government deemed it important to make an example of the Kleins.


According to the official catechism of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, a Christian couple’s right to religious freedom takes a backseat to a lesbian couple’s right to a cake."
What Will Happen to Religious Freedom?




Shall we review what 'rights' are in a free country?

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.

Why did you selectively edit the question? Title II of the Civil Rights Act does not require the Klein's bake a cake for gay people, local law does. You know, states rights stuff. Title II of the CRA "forces" people to make cakes for sinful interracial couples. Are you getting that repealed or not?

You ignored the key part of the post.....

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.




Any problem with the above?????

We have laws.

Your rights do not over rule the law.

You may have the right to bear arms but I have the right to ban them on my property.

There is a law that says you can't discriminate as a business, your right to hate gay people does not give you a pass.

Actually, hon, our rights DO overrule the law. That's kinda the point of rights . . . although I wouldn't expect a fascist, government-worshipping leftist drone like you to understand that.

Fuck off bigoted POS.

If you want to run a business, there are laws & regulations.

If you can't followed them, stay the fuck out.

It is that simple.

Keep working on overcoming that 'Voluntary Tourette's that you suffer from.

 

[RealDave]

Why did you selectively edit the question? Title II of the Civil Rights Act does not require the Klein's bake a cake for gay people, local law does. You know, states rights stuff. Title II of the CRA "forces" people to make cakes for sinful interracial couples. Are you getting that repealed or not?

You ignored the key part of the post.....

Here is what ‘rights’ are.

1. A right is something an individual has by virtue of being human.
   1. Human beings are the only entities that have rights.
2. Rights belong to each human individually.
3. Rights are exercised by individuals, and are not given nor ascribed by any person of group, especially governments.
4. Rights are voluntary, in that individuals may choose whether to either exercise them or to ignore them.
5. Individual cannot have a right that infringes upon or diminishes the rights of others.

6. To be clear, ‘benefits’ such as education, shelter, or a job require resources from somewhere else, and therefore, cannot be given or protected without restricting another’s right to the property of his hands or mind.




Any problem with the above?????

We have laws.

Your rights do not over rule the law.

You may have the right to bear arms but I have the right to ban them on my property.

There is a law that says you can't discriminate as a business, your right to hate gay people does not give you a pass.

Actually, hon, our rights DO overrule the law. That's kinda the point of rights . . . although I wouldn't expect a fascist, government-worshipping leftist drone like you to understand that.

Fuck off bigoted POS.

If you want to run a business, there are laws & regulations.

If you can't followed them, stay the fuck out.

It is that simple.

Keep working on overcoming that 'Voluntary Tourette's that you suffer from.

As you defend bigots, racists. liars, accused women assaulters, accused child rapists, and other deplorables. But OMG MG OMNG donl;t say a bad word. You voted for Trump, is there a bad word he has not said?