Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-26-2013, 05:00 AM
 
520 posts, read 782,186 times
Reputation: 493

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimuelojones View Post
OP is a Politics and Other Controversies forum participant, as am I. Sensational Head lines/tags are needed to get threads noticed...
There is a difference between sensational and patently false. Unless, you would like to explain how someone can reach the conclusion that Section 2-552, the Section quoted from by the blog post bans Christians from serving on City Council? Despite the fact that it is specifically about appointments made by City Council and has nothing to do with office eligibility.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-27-2013, 04:51 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
4,422 posts, read 6,260,506 times
Reputation: 5429
I agree with the ordinance. No one should be discriminated against for being gay. The city does not want a lawsuit due to some idiot on the city council publicly making a hate speech. Religion should always be kept out of public forums.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2013, 10:34 PM
 
12,918 posts, read 16,867,959 times
Reputation: 5434
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenewtexan View Post
I agree with the ordinance. No one should be discriminated against for being gay. The city does not want a lawsuit due to some idiot on the city council publicly making a hate speech. Religion should always be kept out of public forums.
I think the only "religion" some people want out of the public forum is Christianity.

For many centuries many people have devoted their entire lives trying to suppress or destroy the Bible. It will never be accomplished.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2013, 10:41 PM
 
1,203 posts, read 1,242,624 times
Reputation: 853
I have read the proposed text. It is poorly written and as it is, is currently written too broad. "...or demonstrated a bias" can mean virtually anything, including protected speech of any group. If it passes, it is ripe for a successful court challenge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2013, 11:32 PM
 
7,005 posts, read 12,478,778 times
Reputation: 5480
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules View Post
I think the only "religion" some people want out of the public forum is Christianity.

For many centuries many people have devoted their entire lives trying to suppress or destroy the Bible. It will never be accomplished.
Christianity is not the only and definitely was not the first religion to believe that homosexual acts are sinful. So, I don't know why people are being sensational in implying that this ordinance bans Christians and only Christians. However, this ordinance is not banning any religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2013, 11:49 PM
 
1,203 posts, read 1,242,624 times
Reputation: 853
Quote:
Originally Posted by L210 View Post
Christianity is not the only and definitely was not the first religion to believe that homosexual acts are sinful. So, I don't know why people are being sensational in implying that this ordinance bans Christians and only Christians. However, this ordinance is not banning any religion.
It opens up anyone (not just Christians) for being discriminated against for having expressed an [undefined] bias [opinion] about anything.
  • Post a blond joke on Facebook? You could be discriminated against.
  • Cite scripture that references homosexual acts? You could be discriminated against.
  • Post a link to an article about another religion, that someone might perceive as "offensive?" You could be discriminated against.
All the above examples are protected speech.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2013, 12:44 AM
 
Location: San Antonio
4,422 posts, read 6,260,506 times
Reputation: 5429
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules View Post
I think the only "religion" some people want out of the public forum is Christianity.

For many centuries many people have devoted their entire lives trying to suppress or destroy the Bible. It will never be accomplished.
So, you're ok with Sharia law, apparently? No? That's what I thought. Try again, pal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2013, 01:12 PM
 
12,918 posts, read 16,867,959 times
Reputation: 5434
Quote:
Originally Posted by L210 View Post
Christianity is not the only and definitely was not the first religion to believe that homosexual acts are sinful. So, I don't know why people are being sensational in implying that this ordinance bans Christians and only Christians. However, this ordinance is not banning any religion.
Honestly, this has nothing to do with homosexual rights. It's all about anti-Christianity.

If the same attitude towards homosexual marriage were done by a Muslim or any other clearly non-Christian, it would be perfectly acceptable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2013, 01:46 PM
 
7,005 posts, read 12,478,778 times
Reputation: 5480
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules View Post
Honestly, this has nothing to do with homosexual rights. It's all about anti-Christianity.

If the same attitude towards homosexual marriage were done by a Muslim or any other clearly non-Christian, it would be perfectly acceptable.
The ordinance doesn't say anything about Christianity and you're just making assumptions about how other religions would be treated. This is a paranoid, "everyone is out to get me" mentality. It's especially hard to understand this way of thinking when it comes from the majority that's in power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2013, 02:02 PM
 
1,203 posts, read 1,242,624 times
Reputation: 853
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules View Post
Honestly, this has nothing to do with homosexual rights. It's all about anti-Christianity.

If the same attitude towards homosexual marriage were done by a Muslim or any other clearly non-Christian, it would be perfectly acceptable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by L210 View Post
The ordinance doesn't say anything about Christianity and you're just making assumptions about how other religions would be treated. This is a paranoid, "everyone is out to get me" mentality. It's especially hard to understand this way of thinking when it comes from the majority that's in power.
Whatever. At the end of the day, it won't hold up in court if challenged. It's too broad and violates protected speech.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:13 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top