- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Mississippi wins right to enforce religious exemptions law
Posted on 6/22/17 at 2:55 pm to udtiger
Posted on 6/22/17 at 2:55 pm to udtiger
quote:No. Nor do they for not wanting to bake cakes for gay couples. The exposure to state action comes from your own actions - i.e. smoking pot or not baking the cakes. So, I ask the question again: do you believe the over-arching federal criminalization of substances you choose to put into your adult body represents a grievous assault on "basic personal liberty"?
Do my personal thoughts and beliefs expose me to state action under drug laws?
1
Posted on 6/22/17 at 2:55 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
I wish it wasn't just religion on this one.
Yep.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 2:57 pm to Salmon
quote:
I wish it wasn't just religion on this one. Yep.
Mind you. I fully support the law.
I simply think it should apply to everyone.
Sadly, our idiot courts have told everyone else to pound sand. The only avenue of approach is to use the religious freedom clause.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 2:58 pm to kilo
quote:
You are dying on your hill.
You're trying to pick a fight that isn't there. I've already agreed the bill itself is okay in my opinion, but I take issue with an individual who picks and chooses what part of their religion is or is not important. If baking a cake for a gay marriage is so abhorrent due to your religious beliefs, surely you would proceed with caution to avoid baking a cake for someone engaged in premarital sex.
Again, the law is fine, although I can see a slippery slope argument. Many of the individuals who seek protection under the law are hypocritical. That's my issue.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:00 pm to Salmon
quote:
Well, not really. Ultimately the courts decide.
You're just making that up. Can you cite a legal decision that claimed an individuals religious belief was not sincere?
*Do you realize that your position is advocating against the (non existent) separation of church and state.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:01 pm to slackster
quote:
Again, the law is fine, although I can see a slippery slope argument.
well, in this case, we would slide into a more free society
quote:
Many of the individuals who seek protection under the law are hypocritical. That's my issue.
Well, yeah...that should go without saying
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:01 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
ANYONE should be free to refuse to apply THEIR frickING LABOR to something they don't feel comfortable with.
I honestly can't even believe in a supposedly free country, that's a point of contention.
I ask this sincerely - do you extend that to race as well, or are there certain aspects that should be protected?
That's not a gotcha question, just trying to understand where/if there is a line we cannot cross.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:01 pm to Dale51
quote:
You're just making that up.
quote:
2. Local boards and courts are to decide whether the objector's beliefs are sincerely held and whether they are, in his own scheme of things, religious; they are not to require proof of the religious
Page 380 U. S. 164
doctrines, nor are they to reject beliefs because they are not comprehensible. Pp. 380 U. S. 184-185.
This post was edited on 6/22/17 at 3:02 pm
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:01 pm to Machine
quote:
If the supreme court votes in favor of the state of Mississippi, they're efficiently nullifying equal protection under the 14th amendment.
As usual with you, wrong.
What the frick is it with you big government fricks from both sides?
You want to get "gay married" be my guest, certianly the government shouldn't stop you. and those on the right who say they should, are wrong.
However, if I want to laugh at you and refuse to do business with you, or recognize your "marriage" why in the hell should you be able to force me to do?
As for the 14th idiot, it guarantees equal protection of the law, it doesn't guarantee you equal access to my labor.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:03 pm to Salmon
quote:
Well, yeah...that should go without saying
Look at you standing up for freedom. You might muster up enough nerve to go home and demand that your wife show you the goods.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:04 pm to FooManChoo
quote:were not talking about "terms", were talking about laws. if a law has its basis in religion, it means everyone is legally required to adhere to those tenants of that religion.
Defining terms in light of religion doesn't mean that every person has to believe it.
thats fricked up.
if it were islamic law we were talking about, people like you would lose their minds. just because this one happens to be about the religion you like doesnt make it right.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:05 pm to MrLarson
quote:
Look at you standing up for freedom.
I always stand up for freedom.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:05 pm to MastrShake
quote:
a law has its basis in religion, it means everyone is legally required to adhere to those tenants of that religion.
That's not what we're dealing with here
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:05 pm to slackster
quote:
I ask this sincerely - do you extend that to race as well, or are there certain aspects that should be protected?
Yep.
I know that people will scream "RACISM" over this. But it isn't.
Here's reality. We ALREADY apply this to race. And sex. Oh, I know what the EEOC says. But we have to be honest with ourselves and acknowledge it's a lie.
I mean, they do fricking news stories on businesses with "all black" or "all women" leadership. They do the stories so everyone can praise them. No one gives a shite that achieving that result REQUIRED discrimination based on race. And ya know what? I don't care either.
I ONLY care insofar as the govt has selected out those who ARE free to apply their labor and those who aren't.
quote:Nope. No line.
That's not a gotcha question, just trying to understand where/if there is a line we cannot cross.
Either you're free to apply your labor or not.
Now, note. I'm not talking about you working for WalMart and being able to refuse to serve blacks. You don't OWN WalMart. You WORK FOR them.
You can try it. But, I suspect WalMart will fire you.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:06 pm to MastrShake
quote:
if it were islamic law we were talking about, people like you would lose their minds. just because this one happens to be about the religion you like doesnt make it right.
to be fair, I would think this law protects muslims as well, no?
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:06 pm to MastrShake
quote:Da frick are you talking about?
were not talking about "terms", were talking about laws. if a law has its basis in religion, it means everyone is legally required to adhere to those tenants of that religion.
The law doesn't say that if Sally's religion prevents her from doing a thing, that means Johnny can't do it either.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:07 pm to slackster
quote:
I ask this sincerely - do you extend that to race as well, or are there certain aspects that should be protected?
A persons ethnicity is not a business decision.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:08 pm to MastrShake
quote:You are still wrong. How can you not understand this? No one is legally required to adhere to anything.
if a law has its basis in religion, it means everyone is legally required to adhere to those tenants of that religion.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:09 pm to Salmon
quote:
2. Local boards and courts are to decide whether the objector's beliefs are sincerely held and whether they are, in his own scheme of things, religious; they are not to require proof of the religious Page 380 U. S. 164 doctrines, nor are they to reject beliefs because they are not comprehensible. Pp. 380 U. S. 184-185.
Where has this been applied??
I take it you're against that part?
Posted on 6/22/17 at 3:11 pm to AlxTgr
quote:you either adhere to these religious beliefs or youre subject to open and legally protected discrimination from anyone who chooses to do so.
You are still wrong. How can you not understand this? No one is legally required to adhere to anything.
thats not ok.
Page 6 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News