Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

[martybegan]

They may not approve of his life, but unlike the democrats, he will not go after what is important in THEIR lives. Democrats offer nothing to Evangelicals except more attacks on their beliefs and lives.

Voting for a thrice-married, twice divorced man known for extramarital affairs, cavorting with Playboy models, vulgar talk, and an itchy Twitter trigger finger — to say nothing of the accusations of racism and sexual harassment or worse against Trump — certainly opens socially conservative Christians up to charges of hypocrisy. It also arguably makes it harder to reach other Americans, including young people, with their religious missions, or work with fellow Christians in communities of color.

But these consequences pale in comparison to voting for a party that stands opposed to the issues nearest to conservative Christians' hearts. As conservative Christian commentator Erick Erickson put it, the Democratic Party "offers me no home and is deeply hostile to people of faith. The president has shown himself to not share my faith convictions any more than the other side, but the president has shown he is willing to defend my faith convictions and is supportive of them."


Erickson didn't vote for Trump in 2016, but announced earlier this month that he plans to do so in 2020. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee was one of the most steadfast "Never Trump" social conservatives. He too has said he will endorse Trump in 2020.

Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

Evangelicals are religious ? Lol....I'm sorry but having Christian's friends from Catholics to Greek orthodox I think those who call themselves evangelicals are the worst (highly likely bigots or racists, supported, slavery, racism, anti immigrants and anti refugees, gave us the most immoral human being as president) they are not religious.

These people who refer to themselves as "Christians" without any further identifier are trying to mold the Christian faith according to their sickness. They are an insult to every other Christian, Catholic, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Orthodox, and all the rest..

I always find it comical that progressives are far more judgemental than the people they are bitching about being judgemental.

Far less forgiving as well.

"Hate the sinner and the sin, and make sure they are ruined for life" The progressive mantra.

People of each and every religion face the challenge of resolving any conflict between their beliefs and their legal obligations. It just seems that this particular group wants a dispensation from the obligations all of us share. This group wants special treatment.

When before has there been so many cases of laws like this being applied to contracted services of non-essential items?

During the Jim Crow period it was point of sale items, and actual public accomodations, not one baker asking not to participate in a given ceremony.

These laws were designed to prevent systemic discrimination, not to give hateful assholes like you a stiffy over watching someone you don't like have their life ruined.

 

[Lysistrata]

thanks for the chuckle.

Of course the problem with that is this:

If you're a male working for Bank of America and are picked to head up the new office in Mobile, you pack up and leave if you want the job. No problemo, take the promotion.

If you're a female working for Bank of American and are picked to head up the new office in Mobile, you have to decide if you want to practice abstinence and take the promotion or pass up on it and maintain your lifestyle. Because if you get pregnant, your career is finished as you are now forced to carry the pregnancy to birth.

Or what if you're living in Alabama and a bunch of legislators decide for you that you are now bound to carry a pregnancy to term.

The you get a new job if it bothers you that much. Just like if someone would get transferred to NY and didn't want to pay the onerous taxes.

And I do think they invented something called birth control....

Also, if you are the office manager in Mobile you could probably afford to go to another State to get your abortion. One thing I do not agree with is a law that would punish someone for doing something out of State that is banned in State. That is a violation of State sovereignty, that covers the land of the State, not the people when they are not in the State.

hell progressive groups could form charities to handle paying for the trips.

Again, this is something that would never be asked of the male gender. For women the specter of a bunch of politicians stating what you can do with your body is a bit more personal. I would ask you to give it some thought but clearly, you’re not much into the whole thinking business.

Considering the male gender doesn't have a "choice" anyway in this situation, I honestly don't care.

There are plenty of pro-life women who understand exactly the point you are making, and they are still pro-life. Why do you have to frame this as a "all-men" vs "all-women" conflict?

Oh, right, because hacks gotta hack.

Being a male and a trump supporter, caring is probably too much to ask of you.

As for the supposed “conflict”, it’s a construct of your imagination. About 90% of catholic women practice contraception which was and likely still is antithetical to Church teachings. Women pretty much know the score when it comes to a bunch of people in state capitols making their healthcare decisions. This is why the contraception is used in the first place.

It’s a pretty easy scenario to understand. I’m sure if you try, you could too.

You equate caring with government overreach, or following progressive matras, typical.

Why did you have to shift to contraception of Catholics? I stated there are plenty of pro-life women, and you saw fit to ignore that?

Dodge, duck dip, dive, and dodge.

The fact that there are "pro-life" women adds nothing. The issue deals only with conditions inside a female' body. Presumably these women exercise autonomy. But plenty of women exist that are not "pro-life" and Big Government is trying to steal their autonomy.

 

[martybegan]

The you get a new job if it bothers you that much. Just like if someone would get transferred to NY and didn't want to pay the onerous taxes.

And I do think they invented something called birth control....

Also, if you are the office manager in Mobile you could probably afford to go to another State to get your abortion. One thing I do not agree with is a law that would punish someone for doing something out of State that is banned in State. That is a violation of State sovereignty, that covers the land of the State, not the people when they are not in the State.

hell progressive groups could form charities to handle paying for the trips.

Again, this is something that would never be asked of the male gender. For women the specter of a bunch of politicians stating what you can do with your body is a bit more personal. I would ask you to give it some thought but clearly, you’re not much into the whole thinking business.

Considering the male gender doesn't have a "choice" anyway in this situation, I honestly don't care.

There are plenty of pro-life women who understand exactly the point you are making, and they are still pro-life. Why do you have to frame this as a "all-men" vs "all-women" conflict?

Oh, right, because hacks gotta hack.

Being a male and a trump supporter, caring is probably too much to ask of you.

As for the supposed “conflict”, it’s a construct of your imagination. About 90% of catholic women practice contraception which was and likely still is antithetical to Church teachings. Women pretty much know the score when it comes to a bunch of people in state capitols making their healthcare decisions. This is why the contraception is used in the first place.

It’s a pretty easy scenario to understand. I’m sure if you try, you could too.

You equate caring with government overreach, or following progressive matras, typical.

Why did you have to shift to contraception of Catholics? I stated there are plenty of pro-life women, and you saw fit to ignore that?

Dodge, duck dip, dive, and dodge.

The fact that there are "pro-life" women adds nothing. The issue deals only with conditions inside a female' body. Presumably these women exercise autonomy. But plenty of women exist that are not "pro-life" and Big Government is trying to steal their autonomy.

It subtracts from the whole this is a "men vs. women" motif progressives try to play. Plenty of women are pro-life, particularly in places like Alabama and other Southern/midwestern States.

"Big Government" is really only at the federal level. What States do is more local annoying government, at least as long as they stay within the Constitution.

 

[RealDave]

Wow, what a stupid comment. I understand you want to defend your racism & bigotry but really, you have to do better than that.

Look up black only dorms and learn something for once you little shit.

Really, You are comparing this to the racism of the 50's. Just how fucking stupid are you?

These dorms created a safe place to live away from racist attacks & slurs.

I guess next, you'll feel left out because they wouldn't let you in the women's dorm?

It is segregation dipshit. Do you even how stupid you for supporting that given your supposed position on racism?

What would you say if a white only dorm was made? The fact that black people can pressure campuses into rolling back integration just for them proves that the racism they suffer is nothing. That is privilege beyond privilege.

You racist asshole. The fact that blacks are asking for black only dorms proves that the racism they CONTINUE to suffer, is unbearable, and we have seen examples of it every week, so much so that it was dubbed "living while black".

All of last year we saw black people being reported to the police for waiting in a Starbucks, falling asleep in the common room at Yale, checking out of an AirBnB, BBQing in a public park, and playing golf too slowly. Not one of the people who filed these reports were cited for filing a false report. You know who was charged for filing a false report? Jussie Smollett, a black who filed a false report that he was beaten up by two white guys. But not one white person who false reported black people who hadn't even committed a crime, was charged

No, it proves that they control the culture. White students can’t even get a fucking student union but yet black people can not only bypass integration but actually have their own dorms paid for by mostly white students’ tuition and white donors.

The racism that white people go through every day is not only much greater than the racism that black people go through, but it is completely unimpeded and ever growing.

WOW Just WOW.

You poor whitey.

How are you discriminated against because you are white?

Minorities get to do things like have their own dorm, to have their own clubs, to enable them to group together to help themselves. Places where they are not the minority & face the racial abuse. When the Civil Rights Sct passed in 1964, a huge thumb was started being lifted over minorities. It still has not been totally lifted. You just hsave to look at all the racists that post here (look in the mirror).

Did you expect it to mean all is done & there are no effects? It takes generations to crawl out from that oppression. OMG OMG Affirmative Action!!!! OMG OMG a black dorm. OMG OMG black colleges? In some areas, that oppression still exists. We need to press foorward for true equality.

You rant against black dorms, black organizations, black this or black that. White basically have that everywhere. You are white, you are accepted. You don't get pulled over as often, you don't get eyes following you in the store.

You have white privilege & here you are crying because you can't have a "white dorm"? OMG OMG OMG

White people control the Republican Party. I live in a white dominated area. I was shocked at the racism here.

When you are the majority, you don't get an all white school.

 

[busybee01]

They may not approve of his life, but unlike the democrats, he will not go after what is important in THEIR lives. Democrats offer nothing to Evangelicals except more attacks on their beliefs and lives.

Voting for a thrice-married, twice divorced man known for extramarital affairs, cavorting with Playboy models, vulgar talk, and an itchy Twitter trigger finger — to say nothing of the accusations of racism and sexual harassment or worse against Trump — certainly opens socially conservative Christians up to charges of hypocrisy. It also arguably makes it harder to reach other Americans, including young people, with their religious missions, or work with fellow Christians in communities of color.

But these consequences pale in comparison to voting for a party that stands opposed to the issues nearest to conservative Christians' hearts. As conservative Christian commentator Erick Erickson put it, the Democratic Party "offers me no home and is deeply hostile to people of faith. The president has shown himself to not share my faith convictions any more than the other side, but the president has shown he is willing to defend my faith convictions and is supportive of them."


Erickson didn't vote for Trump in 2016, but announced earlier this month that he plans to do so in 2020. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee was one of the most steadfast "Never Trump" social conservatives. He too has said he will endorse Trump in 2020.

Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

My word for people like this is fake Christians. Being a religious conservative and a Trump supporter is a oxymoron. You cannot be both. Franklin Graham's niece has rebuked Graham for his support of Trump, correctly pointing out you cannot forgive someone who has not admitted to his sins. Morality does not end at abortion. Morality is also compassion for people who are running in fear for their lives. Try remembering the Bible story of the Good Semaritin. Trump has the distinction of being rebuked by Jesus Christ.

And yet the only other alternative to them is the party of "bake that fucking cake, peasant"

And you wonder why they hold their nose and vote from Trump.

The racist Republican Party is no choice. It is a immoral choice. Christians should have compassion for people fleeing in fear of their lives not consorting with white supremacists and neo-nazis.

 

[RealDave]

So, if States have a lot of bigots, they could ban it? How is that "American"?

It's Constitutional. The Constitution is mute on marriage, and thus it is left to the States. You could try the whole 14th amendment route, but SSM is not equal to opposite sex marriage, as SSM is a recent creation of only the last few decades. It is a new concept.

Dumbshit. The 14th Amendment applies to everyone. If you want a heterosexual marriage, nobody is stopping you. Same-sex marriage does not effect you in any way. I don't lose any sleep over how many times that trump or gingrich have been married. How do the marriages of people you don't know effect you? You people who fret about the lives of people you don't know are just kooks.

The 14th amendment's equal protection under the law is not absolute. If it was I would be able to sue NY to allow me to own guns as easy as people can in Texas, or say Arkansas, as the 2nd gives me the RKBA uninfringed.

SSM is a concept from only the past few decades, as such the proper way to deal with it would be to get State legislatures to allow it State by State, and then force all States to recognize them, under full faith and credit, as is done now One doesn't have to meet other requirements, (age, cousin status, etc) is a State you move to if you already have a license from another state that has different ones. SSM in that case, after the license is issued, would be equal, and thus protected.

The issue is forcing States to issue a license that really isn't equal, unlike mixed-race marriages, which have plenty of precedent going back millenia, and were only banned for a relatively short period of time, thus making something that was equal in violation of the 14th.

The issue is not of forcing states to do anything except to recognize the rights belonging to each individual citizen of the state, which are not subject to majority rule.

So NYC should not be allowed to have a law which requires me to wait 3-6 months and pay over $500 in fees just to keep a handgun in my own apartment?

Isn't that infringement of the 2nd amendment, and thus not subject to "majority rule"

I think you're safe now that Republicans passed a law that lets the mentally ill run around with loaded weapons.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The difference between pork and beef isn't the same as the difference between a SSM wedding cake and a traditional wedding cake? The reason for not "stocking" both is because it conflicts with their morality.

It can be seen as an endorsement of acceptance of the ceremony/event, and these people don't want to do that. They are not preventing it from happening, or from the couple going to get another cake from another baker.

The main issue is the abusive use of the State over something as trivial as not getting the wedding cake a couple wants, and the consequence being the ruin of people just following their own moral code based on their religion. That you don't see yourself, by advocating this, as a fascist asshole just shows how much of a hateful twat you are.

Again with the personal insults. The main issue is following laws that apply to everyone regardless of religion, gender, or anything else, a concept that plays a large part in keeping our society from descending into chaos.

You seek to transfer the burdens of discrimination away from the person who chooses to discriminate and onto his or her victims, to drive around and waste their time and energy all because they have been the victims of discrimination and false advertising. This is just plain wrong. People like phillips have to own their actions..

The main issue is government force should be used only when there is a compelling reason, and in cases where people have constitutional rights, only when there is an overriding compelling reason, and even then the government is mandated to use the least intrusive method to fix the situation.

Ruining someone over not baking a cake is not a compelling reason, nor is it using the least intrusive method to remedy the situation.

having to spend a hour or so finding and going to another baker is not the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines or mandates to follow the ruling or go out of business. The only reason you feel this is "justice" is your hatred of people who disagree with you.

Actually, I think Conservative Christians should all embrace the party that sanctions infanticide, and gay marriage, promotes sloth, envy, sexual promiscuity, reproductive irresponsibility, and greed, abhors traditional marriage and sexuality, and is openly antagonistic to traditional religious institutions, demanding that they accept their perverted world view or lose their tax-exempt status.

Don't you?

They are embracing the Party of racism and misogyny, which promotes anti-family policies, and the transfer of wealth to the 1% at the expense of the poor and the middle class. A party which increases poverty, and which promotes policies making it impossible for workers to care for their family without government support. I'm sure that Jesus, who said it is more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven, than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, who said that the love of money was the root of all evil, and who said that poor shall inherit the earth, would vote for the party of hate, repression and greed - NOT!

You are pro-abort so when you meet Jesus, what will you tell him?

I'm not "pro-abortion", I'm "pro-choice".

Since God the Father, gave all of us "free will" to make our own choices, I would assume that Jesus would be good with giving other's the right to make their own choices based on their beliefs, as God intended.

Since God the Father created women and gave them the choice to have a baby or end the pregnancy, I'm assuming God knew what he was doing.

The choice of continuing a pregnancy or ending it came from GOD. Not man.

Free will also allows us to murder our fellow man. Your theological basis here is pretty shaky.

As a hasty rationalization, whatever allows you to sleep at night.

It's hardly a "hasty rationalization".

If every sperm were as "sacred" as right wingers would have us believe, why do 1/3 of all pregnancies end in a "spontaneous abortion"? When He created women to give birth, He gave us the option of continuing the pregnancy or ending it. This wasn't an accident. God understood that having a baby was a very big deal, and not to be taken lightly.

In times of famine, of war, during difficult journeys, these are not times to be pregnant. God gave us an out.

The real reason Republicans are so opposed to abortion because nothing speaks to failure of Republican economic policies like the rate of abortion among poor women. Nothing exposes hypocrisy of the party of "Family Values" like the inability of poor families to bear and care for their children. So instead they lie and blame the abortion rate on a lack of morality among women.

Republicans are to blame for abortion. No mandated maternity leave - Republicans oppose it. No universal health care - Republicans oppose it. No mandated vacation time - Republicans oppose it. No national child care policy - Republicans oppose it. No increase in the minimum wage - Republicans oppose it. No overtime pay for minimum wage workers - Republicans and Donald Trump opposed it.

Every policy which would help poor families bear and raise their children, and which would reduce abortion, is opposed by Republicans. Every.Single.One.

*sigh* Let me count the ways you're spouting off and preening yourself based on utter nonsense you're "sure" is true just because it's what you want to believe.

1) We don't believe sperm are sacred. We never have. The whole sperm thing is a left-wing attempt at dodging the issue of abortion by way of left-wing abysmal ignorance of basic reproductive biology. Just because you baby-killing mouthbreathers have spent the last 50 years shouting, "If you think abortion is murder, then you have to think masturbation is too!" does NOT in any way make your stupidity any part of OUR beliefs.

2) The fact that people die on their own is in no way an excuse to make it okay to deliberately kill them. I get that you have slightly less logical capacity than your average pet rock, so I'll take the trouble to explain that that means "spontaneous abortion happens, so that makes abortion okay!" is an equally piss-poor argument for the same reason.

3) There's no number of times that you're going to repeat your brand-new "Oooh, I think this is original and clever" line about God approving of killing because He made a universe where it's possible to kill that is ever going to make it anything but pathetic, even by your mental capacities.

4) Same goes for "God wants us to be able to kill each other in case life gets tough and someone's gotta die".

5) Republicans are not "responsible for abortion", aka "forcing us to kill babies because they refuse to give us everything we demand!" Even your shriveled, atrophied excuse for a soul should be able to figure out that lack of government social programs does not excuse, and certainly does not require, the killing of other human beings. Nor would any amount of governmental spending miraculously make you the moral, decent human being you so manifestly, obviously are not. Own your evil and stop trying to blame it on others forcing you to be a bad person.

 

[busybee01]

The Republicans could not find someone who was not a mass adulterer who lies every time he opens his mouth and defrauds seniors of their retirement nest eggs and worships a KGB thug.

They could not find an honest, decent man who is also against abortion anywhere in the whoooooooooooooole party!

They had a primary, he won the primary.

Only the Democrats feel the need to rig their primary, but I have a feeling the RINO's and Never Trumpers wish they had rigged the Republican one.

Describe, in detail, how the Democratic primary was “rigged”.

Superdelegates.

Name 1 election where superdelegates have changed the nominating process. In theory they could but in actual practice they never have.

2016
Primary vote
Clinton 54%
Sanders 42%

Delegate count from state primaries
Clinton 2205 54.4%
Sanders 1845 45.4%

Hillary Clinton had enough delegates to win without the superdelegates. In 2008, the superdelegates leaned heavily towards Clinton but Obama peeled them away as he won state after state. The process is not rigged.

Got links to the data presented?

Democratic Convention 2016

 

[Lysistrata]

Again, this is something that would never be asked of the male gender. For women the specter of a bunch of politicians stating what you can do with your body is a bit more personal. I would ask you to give it some thought but clearly, you’re not much into the whole thinking business.

Considering the male gender doesn't have a "choice" anyway in this situation, I honestly don't care.

There are plenty of pro-life women who understand exactly the point you are making, and they are still pro-life. Why do you have to frame this as a "all-men" vs "all-women" conflict?

Oh, right, because hacks gotta hack.

Being a male and a trump supporter, caring is probably too much to ask of you.

As for the supposed “conflict”, it’s a construct of your imagination. About 90% of catholic women practice contraception which was and likely still is antithetical to Church teachings. Women pretty much know the score when it comes to a bunch of people in state capitols making their healthcare decisions. This is why the contraception is used in the first place.

It’s a pretty easy scenario to understand. I’m sure if you try, you could too.

You equate caring with government overreach, or following progressive matras, typical.

Why did you have to shift to contraception of Catholics? I stated there are plenty of pro-life women, and you saw fit to ignore that?

Dodge, duck dip, dive, and dodge.

The fact that there are "pro-life" women adds nothing. The issue deals only with conditions inside a female' body. Presumably these women exercise autonomy. But plenty of women exist that are not "pro-life" and Big Government is trying to steal their autonomy.

It subtracts from the whole this is a "men vs. women" motif progressives try to play. Plenty of women are pro-life, particularly in places like Alabama and other Southern/midwestern States.

"Big Government" is really only at the federal level. What States do is more local annoying government, at least as long as they stay within the Constitution.

Big Government exists at every level. As I said, "pro-life" women are immaterial to any discussion of the rights of other women to personal autonomy, and also to freedom to choose their beliefs. "Pro-life" women are clearly exercising these very rights.

 

[Cecilie1200]

They may not approve of his life, but unlike the democrats, he will not go after what is important in THEIR lives. Democrats offer nothing to Evangelicals except more attacks on their beliefs and lives.

Religious conservatives will never abandon Trump

Sums up perfectly why I left organized religion years ago. The one thing that supposedly cannot be compromised is religious principles yet here they are, believing in a figure who doesn’t embody any of their beliefs.

But to your point, like the GOP now…they won’t abandon Mara-Lard-Ass, they have nowhere else to go.

What do the Dems offer them besides persecution?

Sorry, the party of "Bake that cake, peasant" isn't going to win over these people.

No, I don’t expect it would. I wouldn’t expect them as a group to endorse the Democrats.

However if your loyalty is to God (make me laugh harder), your loyalty is to her/him (or just “him” in their case). You don’t compromise that and give your loyalty to someone who doesn’t share your values.

As for the Politics of the situation, lets say Joe Biden is the nominee. You’re stating—correctly—that the Christian Conservatives will support someone who has had multiple affairs over Biden who TTBOOK, never had any.

Biden supports policies harmful to their interests.

You are confusing supporting someone politically with endorsing their behavior.

Trump may violate the rules they live by, but to them his soul is his issue,and thus they know God will judge him as he sees fit.

But what he doesn't do it try to ruin them for their belief structure.

Ok.

Just a quick question…

If it comes out that Mara-Lard-Ass paid for some abortions when he was spilling his baby batter, should that change anything as far as Christian Conservatives go?

Just a quick question: Do you actually think you just asked a legitimate, serious question that should be answered seriously?

Instead of wasting time trying to dictate to people whose beliefs you don't share how purist you think they ought to be in practicing their beliefs - which you don't share - and just exactly what Donald Trump would have to do to finally become more objectionable than literally every single Democrat politician currently breathing, it might be more profitable for you to spend some time questioning why it is that every Democrat in the country is such an amoral, disgusting pile of crap that they make Donald Trump look good in comparison.

Maybe the problem isn't that conservatives don't understand who and what Trump is; maybe the problem is that we DO understand who DEMOCRATS are.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What do the Dems offer them besides persecution?

Sorry, the party of "Bake that cake, peasant" isn't going to win over these people.

No, I don’t expect it would. I wouldn’t expect them as a group to endorse the Democrats.

However if your loyalty is to God (make me laugh harder), your loyalty is to her/him (or just “him” in their case). You don’t compromise that and give your loyalty to someone who doesn’t share your values.

As for the Politics of the situation, lets say Joe Biden is the nominee. You’re stating—correctly—that the Christian Conservatives will support someone who has had multiple affairs over Biden who TTBOOK, never had any.

Biden supports policies harmful to their interests.

You are confusing supporting someone politically with endorsing their behavior.

Trump may violate the rules they live by, but to them his soul is his issue,and thus they know God will judge him as he sees fit.

But what he doesn't do it try to ruin them for their belief structure.

Ok.

Just a quick question…

If it comes out that Mara-Lard-Ass paid for some abortions when he was spilling his baby batter, should that change anything as far as Christian Conservatives go?

Theoretically it might.

But again, where would the Evangelicals go in 2020 when its Trump against some Dem who supports abortion outright, and would support federal legislation similar to the law passed in New York.

Is the strategy here to win over Evangelicals, or make them stay home in November 2020?

wow.


So, theoretically if a doctor who performed abortions on a thousand women were to be the GOP nominee one day, the Christian Conservatives would support that doctor over a Democrat based on the Party platforms?

WOW.
‘

As for where Evangelicals should go….you can always with hold your support instead of feeling obligated to give it to someone who isn’t worthy.

We can. We can also feel that letting evil pieces of shit win by default because of absolutism is far worse than voting for someone who isn't perfect . . . as none of us are.

Again, stop wasting time making up tortured hypotheticals about how bad the GOP candidate has to become to FINALLY be worse than any Democrat at all, and start spending time figuring out how to stop running evil, amoral, insane slimeballs who make Donald Trump look like Billy frigging Graham.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you actually read some of the cases involving bakers, most of them also don't do halloween cakes, or other things that go against their morals. And it is only recently that they have been forced to do so, because of the SSM thing. You can't bitch about it being the issue when it is what is creating the issue in the first place.

You just can't tolerate others who believe differently than you, and you need to use government force to get your way, like the mewling little coward-twat you are.

You don't get to decide how they follow their religion, and government doesn't either until there there is some compelling, overriding interest.

Human sacrifice would be that, having to go to another baker is not.

Bullshit. If the baker is refusing to bake Halloween cakes, one presumes they wouldn't bake ANY Halloween cakes. The baker is baking wedding cakes for some people and not for others that he deems to be sinners. But he doesn't exclude other sinners either - like adulterers. So if some sinners are OK, why not others? You see how this isn't about religion at all.

Evangelicals are really, really quick to claim that THEIR rights are violated, when in fact it is the evangelicals who are the ones who are violating the rights of others. It is positively amazing how many of the basic tenets of the Christian faith that evangelicals are prepared to violate in order to assert their Constitutional right to hate gays.

Read the case. He doesn't. This is all about religion, but more importantly it's about horrible people like you who need to force others to be like you, think like you, and act like you OR ELSE.

Where in the Constitution does it say a person has a right to a specific cake from a specific baker?

Where it says "all men are created equal, with certain inalienable rights".

Even the Bible says that Christian should obey the laws of the land. These bigots don't have a leg to stand on - not Constitutionally, and certainly not according to the word in the Bible.

Guess what, foreign "expert": that phrase doesn't appear in our Constitution, which you would know, if it wasn't OUR Constitution, not yours.

And thank you for demonstrating just one of the reasons why nothing you have to say about how the US runs itself has any value whatsoever.

"These bigot don't have a leg to stand on . . . except for laws I can't cite, a culture I know nothing about, and a history that's utterly foreign to me. But damn it, I just KNOW that this is how your country is supposed to work, because I want it to!"

The only reason you're still running your toothless gums is that you have even less shame than you do brains.

Jesus said it. That should be enough.

Remind me to get busy on worrying about what "Reverend Assfuck" is preaching about the Bible about two seconds after I worry about what "Professor Dragontwat" thinks is intelligent and logical.

Jesus said it. You misunderstood it. I ignored you for being an idiot. End of story.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Bullshit. If the baker is refusing to bake Halloween cakes, one presumes they wouldn't bake ANY Halloween cakes. The baker is baking wedding cakes for some people and not for others that he deems to be sinners. But he doesn't exclude other sinners either - like adulterers. So if some sinners are OK, why not others? You see how this isn't about religion at all.

Evangelicals are really, really quick to claim that THEIR rights are violated, when in fact it is the evangelicals who are the ones who are violating the rights of others. It is positively amazing how many of the basic tenets of the Christian faith that evangelicals are prepared to violate in order to assert their Constitutional right to hate gays.

Read the case. He doesn't. This is all about religion, but more importantly it's about horrible people like you who need to force others to be like you, think like you, and act like you OR ELSE.

Where in the Constitution does it say a person has a right to a specific cake from a specific baker?

Where it says "all men are created equal, with certain inalienable rights".

Even the Bible says that Christian should obey the laws of the land. These bigots don't have a leg to stand on - not Constitutionally, and certainly not according to the word in the Bible.

Guess what, foreign "expert": that phrase doesn't appear in our Constitution, which you would know, if it wasn't OUR Constitution, not yours.

And thank you for demonstrating just one of the reasons why nothing you have to say about how the US runs itself has any value whatsoever.

"These bigot don't have a leg to stand on . . . except for laws I can't cite, a culture I know nothing about, and a history that's utterly foreign to me. But damn it, I just KNOW that this is how your country is supposed to work, because I want it to!"

The only reason you're still running your toothless gums is that you have even less shame than you do brains.

Jesus said it. That should be enough.

it is kind of cute how you think they care what Jesus says.

It is not at all cute how you think dimwits like you and "Assfuck Dave" have anything to tell anyone about what Jesus says.

We care what He said. We care not in the slightest what you and "Assfuck Dave" think about it.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Read the case. He doesn't. This is all about religion, but more importantly it's about horrible people like you who need to force others to be like you, think like you, and act like you OR ELSE.

Where in the Constitution does it say a person has a right to a specific cake from a specific baker?

Where it says "all men are created equal, with certain inalienable rights".

Even the Bible says that Christian should obey the laws of the land. These bigots don't have a leg to stand on - not Constitutionally, and certainly not according to the word in the Bible.

Guess what, foreign "expert": that phrase doesn't appear in our Constitution, which you would know, if it wasn't OUR Constitution, not yours.

And thank you for demonstrating just one of the reasons why nothing you have to say about how the US runs itself has any value whatsoever.

"These bigot don't have a leg to stand on . . . except for laws I can't cite, a culture I know nothing about, and a history that's utterly foreign to me. But damn it, I just KNOW that this is how your country is supposed to work, because I want it to!"

The only reason you're still running your toothless gums is that you have even less shame than you do brains.

Jesus said it. That should be enough.

it is kind of cute how you think they care what Jesus says.

It is not at all cute how you think dimwits like you and "Assfuck Dave" have anything to tell anyone about what Jesus says.

We care what He said. We care not in the slightest what you and "Assfuck Dave" think about it.

but it is damn cute how someone that claims to follow Jesus is calling someone "assfuck dave".

I do not recall Jesus using that term!

 

[impuretrash]

Where it says "all men are created equal, with certain inalienable rights".

Even the Bible says that Christian should obey the laws of the land. These bigots don't have a leg to stand on - not Constitutionally, and certainly not according to the word in the Bible.

Guess what, foreign "expert": that phrase doesn't appear in our Constitution, which you would know, if it wasn't OUR Constitution, not yours.

And thank you for demonstrating just one of the reasons why nothing you have to say about how the US runs itself has any value whatsoever.

"These bigot don't have a leg to stand on . . . except for laws I can't cite, a culture I know nothing about, and a history that's utterly foreign to me. But damn it, I just KNOW that this is how your country is supposed to work, because I want it to!"

The only reason you're still running your toothless gums is that you have even less shame than you do brains.

Jesus said it. That should be enough.

it is kind of cute how you think they care what Jesus says.

It is not at all cute how you think dimwits like you and "Assfuck Dave" have anything to tell anyone about what Jesus says.

We care what He said. We care not in the slightest what you and "Assfuck Dave" think about it.

but it is damn cute how someone that claims to follow Jesus is calling someone "assfuck dave".

I do not recall Jesus using that term!

"If you call yourself a christian then you should turn the other cheek while I fuck you in the ass!"

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Guess what, foreign "expert": that phrase doesn't appear in our Constitution, which you would know, if it wasn't OUR Constitution, not yours.

And thank you for demonstrating just one of the reasons why nothing you have to say about how the US runs itself has any value whatsoever.

"These bigot don't have a leg to stand on . . . except for laws I can't cite, a culture I know nothing about, and a history that's utterly foreign to me. But damn it, I just KNOW that this is how your country is supposed to work, because I want it to!"

The only reason you're still running your toothless gums is that you have even less shame than you do brains.

Jesus said it. That should be enough.

it is kind of cute how you think they care what Jesus says.

It is not at all cute how you think dimwits like you and "Assfuck Dave" have anything to tell anyone about what Jesus says.

We care what He said. We care not in the slightest what you and "Assfuck Dave" think about it.

but it is damn cute how someone that claims to follow Jesus is calling someone "assfuck dave".

I do not recall Jesus using that term!

"If you call yourself a christian then you should turn the other cheek while I fuck you in the ass!"

I do not recall Jesus saying that either.

I am guessing you have never read a bible in your life.

 

[DOTR]

Christians will always support Trump. Anti-Christians will always oppose him.

 

[impuretrash]

Jesus said it. That should be enough.

it is kind of cute how you think they care what Jesus says.

It is not at all cute how you think dimwits like you and "Assfuck Dave" have anything to tell anyone about what Jesus says.

We care what He said. We care not in the slightest what you and "Assfuck Dave" think about it.

but it is damn cute how someone that claims to follow Jesus is calling someone "assfuck dave".

I do not recall Jesus using that term!

"If you call yourself a christian then you should turn the other cheek while I fuck you in the ass!"

I do not recall Jesus saying that either.

I am guessing you have never read a bible in your life.

I've never turned water to wine or risen from the dead either, what's your point?

 

[ptbw forever]

Where it says "all men are created equal, with certain inalienable rights".

Even the Bible says that Christian should obey the laws of the land. These bigots don't have a leg to stand on - not Constitutionally, and certainly not according to the word in the Bible.

Guess what, foreign "expert": that phrase doesn't appear in our Constitution, which you would know, if it wasn't OUR Constitution, not yours.

And thank you for demonstrating just one of the reasons why nothing you have to say about how the US runs itself has any value whatsoever.

"These bigot don't have a leg to stand on . . . except for laws I can't cite, a culture I know nothing about, and a history that's utterly foreign to me. But damn it, I just KNOW that this is how your country is supposed to work, because I want it to!"

The only reason you're still running your toothless gums is that you have even less shame than you do brains.

Jesus said it. That should be enough.

it is kind of cute how you think they care what Jesus says.

It is not at all cute how you think dimwits like you and "Assfuck Dave" have anything to tell anyone about what Jesus says.

We care what He said. We care not in the slightest what you and "Assfuck Dave" think about it.

but it is damn cute how someone that claims to follow Jesus is calling someone "assfuck dave".

I do not recall Jesus using that term!

There are plenty of people who aren’t Christian and hate you little shits.

 

[Seawytch]

Actually, I think Conservative Christians should all embrace the party that sanctions infanticide, and gay marriage, promotes sloth, envy, sexual promiscuity, reproductive irresponsibility, and greed, abhors traditional marriage and sexuality, and is openly antagonistic to traditional religious institutions, demanding that they accept their perverted world view or lose their tax-exempt status.

Don't you?

They are embracing the Party of racism and misogyny, which promotes anti-family policies, and the transfer of wealth to the 1% at the expense of the poor and the middle class. A party which increases poverty, and which promotes policies making it impossible for workers to care for their family without government support. I'm sure that Jesus, who said it is more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven, than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, who said that the love of money was the root of all evil, and who said that poor shall inherit the earth, would vote for the party of hate, repression and greed - NOT!

So they should support a party that shits on their religious beliefs, forces them to not just tolerate, but accept lifestyles they do not approve of, and enforces an open hositlity to their religion in schools and the public square?

And can it with the ist/ic/ism bullshit. You are just as bigoted as the most virulent KKK asshole, but because you are bigoted against "approved" groups, you think you get a pass.

As long as Democrats are the party of "BAKE THAT FUCKING CAKE, PEASANT" they will not have the support of the most Religious people in this country.

They also lose people like me, who while not religious, don't have the deep hatred of the religious you have.

I'm sorry...come again with who is "shitting on religious beliefs"?

Supreme Court is ‘unspeakably cruel’ for denying Muslim death row inmate’s request for imam, ex-Obama official says

Did you even bother to read your own link?

You are such a hypocrite, Seabiscuit. If the guy had been a Christian and wanting his own personal pastor there, you'd have been screeching about "Have to follow the rules!" and "No special treatment!" and "Separation of church and state!" at the top of your lungs.

No matter how much you and Justice Kagan try to pretend otherwise, your link had nothing to do with "shitting on religion", or with the inmate's religion at all, and everything to do with rules and proper procedure.

No, actually I would not. If he were Christian and the prison only offered an Imam be in the room, I'd respond the same way I am now, with outrage. The difference is that if that were the case, you'd be outraged and you aren't now.