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.
Jeff refuses to understand valid points, and has even backed away from his admission that Davis might be in the wrong if she had options to personally avoid helping LGBT customers while passing the interaction to others.
Everybody else agrees that Davis is a scofflaw.
I think that the bottom line is that Jeff refuses to acknowledge that anything might have more authority than his specific view of the bible, under any circumstances. He will use arguments based upon law, the constitution, morality, etc if convenient for him, but those are not his true thoughts, they are simply arguments to be used, and discarded if they become inconvenient.
Jeff doesn't value civil laws at all. He only values his specific concept of the bible.
Jefffreebase never spoke out against homosexuality until the LGBT community demanded EQUALITY.
Equality should never come at the expense of sacrificing the 1st amendment. Check it out, even Ben Carson agrees, and I would certainly say he is an intelligent man.
TroutDude is not a atheist. Yes, many people believe as he does. Try to get your facts straight.
How can I get my facts straight when no one will offer the courtesy of stating their beliefs to me before jumping in the fray? He has been consistently anti-Christian so it is a logical conclusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ella Parr
What do the rest of the Christians believe in?
They apparently just make up whatever sounds good to them.
Equality should never come at the expense of sacrificing the 1st amendment.
So Christians should be allowed to kill witches? People can't expect equal protection under the law if it gets in the way of what some old book says, right?
Come on, stop pretending that freedom to believe is a blank check to do whatever you want.
I'm under no obligation to convince you that homosexuality is immoral. I know there is really nothing that would sway your opinion. OTOH, it's your side who has demanded that we change our beliefs that have been traditional for many generations. I never spoke out against homosexuality until they started trending on religious freedom.
Me being free to live as I choose, and have the same legal protections as all other citizens, has nothing to do with your religious freedoms.
If you have issues with anti-discrimination laws, I suggest you work on getting those repealed.
Equality should never come at the expense of sacrificing the 1st amendment. Check it out, even Ben Carson agrees, and I would certainly say he is an intelligent man.
And Scalia doesn't think that personal religious beliefs trump the law or doing your job.
Quote:
[i]n my view the choice for the judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted, constitutional laws and sabotaging death penalty cases. He has, after all, taken an oath to apply the laws and has been given no power to supplant them with rules of his own. Of course if he feels strongly enough he can go beyond mere resignation and lead a political campaign to abolish the death penalty” and if that fails, lead a revolution. But rewrite the laws he cannot do.
Equality should never come at the expense of sacrificing the 1st amendment. Check it out, even Ben Carson agrees, and I would certainly say he is an intelligent man.
So Christians should be allowed to kill witches? People can't expect equal protection under the law if it gets in the way of what some old book says, right?
Come on, stop pretending that freedom to believe is a blank check to do whatever you want.
Why does it always have to be all encompassing or nothing with people like you? Certainly exceptions can be made if someone's religious beliefs causes harm to others. Kim Davis is not causing harm. She is causing an inconvenience at most.
Why does it always have to be all encompassing or nothing with people like you? Certainly exceptions can be made if someone's religious beliefs causes harm to others. Kim Davis is not causing harm. She is causing an inconvenience at most.
And Kim Davis was the one that refused exemptions when the judge offered them. She is the one that decided that her religious beliefs would be law for everyone in that county.
If she can't do her job, she should resign. Why should residents tax dollars go to pay someones salary when they are being refused government services?
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.
