Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The government is the only entity ALLOWED to initiate force. Others can do it, but they'll be punished by the government. If the average citizen or business forced anyone to do anything against their will, they wouldn't get away with it. The government does. Someone can pressure you, but they can't threaten you with violence.
Most people (those who aren't sociopaths) won't resort to violence to settle disputes, but will use reason - like what we're doing now. If they want to do something that would normally be a violation of their neighbor's rights, they go to the government for societal permission to do it. That's why I always ask how the government has any right to initiate force when no individual on their own has that right.
This thread is about the "Religious Liberties" bill that Indiana passed and the clarifying addendum known as the "fix". This law only exists as an extension of the First Amendment's protections of the free exercise of religion. So all of this talk about hypothetical property rights has nothing to do with this subject.
The other piece of legislation that is relevant to this discussion is the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which the homo-fascists claim as their authoritative source for why the US Constitution does not apply here. Of course this argument is specious.
This is about property rights. "Religious freedom" is just an extension of self ownership and property rights. If we had true property rights in this country this wouldn't be an issue and the Indiana bill would not be necessary. Under true property rights an owner of an establishment could refuse service to anyone, at anytime, for any reason, religious or not. That is freedom, that is freedom of association, and that is a true model of property rights. Without property rights all your other rights are pretty much moot at that point and are merely privileges from which you have to ask the government permission to exercise.
This is about property rights. "Religious freedom" is just an extension of self ownership and property rights. If we had true property rights in this country this wouldn't be an issue and the Indiana bill would not be necessary. Under true property rights an owner of an establishment could refuse service to anyone, at anytime, for any reason, religious or not. That is freedom, that is freedom of association, and that is a true model of property rights. Without property rights all your other rights are pretty much moot at that point and are merely privileges from which you have to ask the government permission to exercise.
You are completely hijacking the thread.
If we had.....
This is where you prove that you are completely off topic, pontificating about theoretical property rights, which is probably a very interesting topic, but it is not the topic of this thread.
Please be considerate to those people who came here to talk about the subject at hand, and by all means feel free to start a thread about property rights, if you want to.
Thank you in advance for your unselfishness and your willingness to be considerate of others.
This is where you prove that you are completely off topic, pontificating about theoretical property rights, which is probably a very interesting topic, but it is not the topic of this thread.
Please be considerate to those people who came here to talk about the subject at hand, and by all means feel free to start a thread about property rights, if you want to.
Thank you in advance for your unselfishness and your willingness to be considerate of others.
This thread is about property rights so I disagree with you entirely. I will continue to post on this thread. If you can't see how property rights and any freedom, be it religious or otherwise, are connected then we definitely need more education on the importance of property rights. Property rights flow naturally from self-owner ship and they are the lynchpin to all other freedoms.
So why the law to protect the bakers who didn't want to sell gay couples wedding cakes?
That is one of the points Jan Brewer made in vetoing AZ's version: there had never been a case in the state where the law would have applied, so what wrong was it supposed to address? These Republican legislators certainly take an aggressive posture in fixing something that is not even broken. That points to their real agenda, bigotry.
I agree with you in all of this with the exception of the statement that homosexuality is stated as as sin in the New Testament. It's not.
Read for yourself.
"26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error." Romans 1:26-27 NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...27&version=NIV
"9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...10&version=NIV
"9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine" 1 Timothy 1:9-10 NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...10&version=NIV
And I disagree, providing good/services in a PUBLIC business is far different than a Church being forced to perform a same sex marriage. When you open a PUBLIC business, you are expected to serve the public regardless of your PERSONAL religious beliefs.
How is a privately owned business considered a public business?
As a non-Christian all of this discussion about religious dogmas is irrelevant to me.
Although I am not a Christian, I am an American citizen. I expect the laws of the US to be divorced from religious dogmas as per the Constitution of the United States.
SCOTUS disagrees with you. They have already ruled on the issues of exercising one's religion, substantial burden, and less-restrictive means:
Quote:
"In a 5-4 decision with a splintered dissent, the Supreme Court held that the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) cannot mandate a closely held corporation to violate the religious beliefs of its owner by providing four abortion-inducing drugs. Specifically, the court held that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 requires the government to accommodate such corporations just as it does not-for-profit corporations because the contraceptive mandate substantially burdens the owners’ religious beliefs and there are less-restrictive means of providing contraception (the government can pay for it directly)."
And what pray tell, in your opinion, is the "proper" role of government if not protecting the rights of ALL citizens? And please do not tell me that religious rights are being trampled. Laws are not being passed to prohibit anyone's practice of their religion within their home or place of worship. As soon as you leave those places and hang out a shingle as a public entity, you need to leave your religious belief and practices out of it or else you are trampling the rights of others.
Wrong. SCOTUS already ruled on that. See my prior post.
So why the law to protect the bakers who didn't want to sell gay couples wedding cakes?
Likely because it aligns with the SCOTUS ruling I just posted.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
