Equality Act – a 'wrecking ball' on religious liberty

  
Via:  make-america-great-again  •  3 weeks ago  •  159 comments

Equality Act – a 'wrecking ball' on religious liberty
Dr. James Dobson … Alliance Defending Freedom … Dr. Michael L. Brown … National Religious Broadcasters … American Family Association … Family Research Council – they've all clearly voiced their strong opposition to the legislation introduced on March 13 by Representative David N. Cicilline (D-Rhode Island). Those individuals and groups warn of its chilling effect on religious liberty, describe it as a "coercive sexual orientation and gender identity law," and say it would force public schools...

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


The Equality Act continues to draw strong criticism and warnings from advocates of traditional and biblical values – and voters are being encouraged to get hold of their representatives on Capitol Hill and urge them to vigorously oppose it should it come to a vote.

Dr. James DobsonAlliance Defending FreedomDr. Michael L. BrownNational Religious BroadcastersAmerican Family AssociationFamily Research Council – they've all clearly voiced their strong opposition to the legislation introduced on March 13 by Representative David N. Cicilline (D-Rhode Island). Those individuals and groups warn of its chilling effect on religious liberty, describe it as a "coercive sexual orientation and gender identity law," and say it would force public schools to conform to the LGBTQ agenda.

Cicilline, an open homosexual, introduced The Equality Act (H.R.5) with 239 co-sponsors, all but two of them Democrats. "It is past time for the Equality Act to be written into law," the lawmaker said earlier this year. "No American should ever be treated as less than equal in the eyes of the law. I'm looking forward to getting this bill through the House this spring. Senator McConnell should take it up without delay."

AFA Action, a Mississippi-based public advocacy group, sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) asking him not to take up the bipartisan legislation should it be approved in the House.

AFA Action's Rob Chambers argues that H.R.5 brings anything but equality.


rchambers_1_mug.jpgChambers

"The Equality Act is going to impact every person in the United States of America," Chambers tells OneNewsNow. "Second of all, the Equality Act will serve as a wrecking ball against the religious liberty of all Americans in the country."

Chambers continues: "Say someone believes that marriage is between one man and one woman, for example – or even if someone believes that biology is established at birth and

is not changeable or is immutable. Then those people would be at odds with this law. So, for example if they own a business, they would have to allow men who think they're women into the women's restrooms."

Representatives Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pennsylvania) and John Katko (R-New York) also co-sponsor the Equality Act of 2019, and Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) has introduced the bill in the U.S. Senate.

AFA Action is encouraging those who oppose The Equality Act to contact their member of Congress. "… Ask your representative where they stand on this particular issue," Chambers urges. "Don't just settle for I'm just looking at this and I'll get back with you."

After being introduced, the measure was referred to five House committees. The Senate version (S.788) has been referred to the Judiciary Committee.

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Find text within the comments Find 
 
XXJefferson#51
1  seeder  XXJefferson#51    3 weeks ago

“"The Equality Act is going to impact every person in the United States of America," Chambers tells OneNewsNow. "Second of all, the Equality Act will serve as a wrecking ball against the religious liberty of all Americans in the country."

Chambers continues: "Say someone believes that marriage is between one man and one woman, for example – or even if someone believes that biology is established at birth and

is not changeable or is immutable. Then those people would be at odds with this law. So, for example if they own a business, they would have to allow men who think they're women into the women's restrooms."

Representatives Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pennsylvania) and John Katko (R-New York) also co-sponsor the Equality Act of 2019, and Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) has introduced the bill in the U.S. Senate.

AFA Action is encouraging those who oppose The Equality Act to contact their member of Congress. "… Ask your representative where they stand on this particular issue," Chambers urges. "Don't just settle for I'm just looking at this and I'll get back with you."”

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    3 weeks ago
"Second of all, the Equality Act will serve as a wrecking ball against the religious liberty of all Americans in the country."

Utter bullshit. There are hundreds of millions of Americans for whom the Equality act will have NO effect on there religious liberty. 

Y'all need to start listening to the young people in this country. They are walking away from your ideology. 

Here is a good example:

https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/04/methodist-church-lgbtq-policy-middle-school-protest.html

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.1  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dulay @1.1    3 weeks ago
Y'all need to start listening to the young people in this country.

although it is true the young will change the world...

it is not true that they will be young when they do it.

when they are much older, they get to change the world all they like. not until then.

cheers :)

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.1.2  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Dulay @1.1    3 weeks ago

There are still millions upon millions of Americans that some aspect of the illegitimately named so called equality act that will lose their religious liberty to it as it will trample upon their free exercise there of of their religious beliefs rights.  The Alliance Defending Freedom, American Family Association, And Family Research Council are all great and upstanding mainstream conservative Christian organizations that I am proud to personally belong to and freely associate myself with are all correct in opposing this heinous proposed desecration of our constitution.  

 
 
 
epistte
1.1.3  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.2    3 weeks ago
There are still millions upon millions of Americans that some aspect of the illegitimately named so called equality act that will lose their religious liberty to it as it will trample upon their free exercise there of of their religious beliefs rights.  The Alliance Defending Freedom, American Family Association, And Family Research Council are all great and upstanding mainstream conservative Christian organizations that I am proud to personally belong to and freely associate myself with are all correct in opposing this heinous proposed desecration of our constitution.  

How will you lose any religious liberty if LGBT people have equal rights? What do you fear could happen when this passes?

Do you understand that many people are put off by your support of LGBT bigotry, and they are leaving relgion or changing what church that they belong to? 

 
 
 
Kavika
1.1.4  Kavika   replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.2    3 weeks ago

More of the ''Sky is falling'' from the religion responsible for taking religious freedom from other Americans.....

 
 
 
katrix
1.1.5  katrix  replied to  epistte @1.1.3    3 weeks ago

[Removed]

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.6  Gordy327  replied to  epistte @1.1.3    3 weeks ago
How will you lose any religious liberty if LGBT people have equal rights? What do you fear could happen when this passes?

It's very telling and sad how some people feel so threatened by others having equal rights. It also speaks volumes about their character if they oppose equal rights too and/or associate with organizations that do too.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.7  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.2    3 weeks ago
There are still millions upon millions of Americans that some aspect of the illegitimately named so called equality act that will lose their religious liberty to it as it will trample upon their free exercise there of of their religious beliefs rights.

Using the excuse of 'religious liberty' to discriminate against millions upon millions of Americans is what is illegitimate Xx.

The Civil Rights Act caused millions of Americans to loose their 'religious liberty' to discriminate against women and people of color. Do you advocate for that law to be repealed?

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.8  Gordy327  replied to  Dulay @1.1.7    3 weeks ago
Using the excuse of 'religious liberty'

And an excuse is all it is too. I have yet to see anyone specify how they or anyone else has lost any "religious liberty" whatsoever.

 
 
 
epistte
1.1.9  epistte  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1.8    3 weeks ago
And an excuse is all it is too. I have yet to see anyone specify how they or anyone else has lost any "religious liberty" whatsoever.

The racists who opposed the 1964 Equal Rights Act made the same argument about religious liberty, despite the fact that Jesus told his followers not to discriminate. They are hiding their bigotry behind our religious freedom guarantees, but the hypocrisy is obvious to most people. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.1.10  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.2    3 weeks ago
There are still millions upon millions of Americans that some aspect of the illegitimately named so called equality act that will lose their religious liberty to it as it will trample upon their free exercise there of of their religious beliefs rights.

Did anyone have their supposed religious freedom to discriminate trampled on when the 1964 civil rights act was passed? There were many who claimed a religious right to discriminate back then, claiming black Americans were "cursed by Cain" and other such religious nonsense. So if a person truly believed that their God had cursed blacks and thus they didn't want to serve them at a lunch counter or bake a wedding cake for a black couple, would that justify their discrimination?

What part of "No American should ever be treated as less than equal in the eyes of the law." do you have a problem with anyway? It's not making any religious person "be friends" with gay people, it's not forcing them to invite transgender people over to their houses or force them to let them use their private restrooms. All this bill is doing is saying that as long as you are a law abiding American citizen, whether three feet or eight feet tall, whether male, female, gay, straight, transgender, black, white, good at soccer or bad at video games, you should be treated as equals in the eyes of the law.

What some religious persons are claiming their religious freedom should allow them to do is reject equality for specific classes of people their religion defines as "sinners" even though they haven't broken any secular laws. They want a pediatrician to be able to refuse to treat the children of gay couples, for employers to be able to fire employees they find out are gay, and banning service in the military if you're transgender. They want bakers and other service industry persons to be able to refuse service to LGTBQ Americans, and even though it's now settled law by the supreme court, some religious folk want to overturn the right for gay Americans to marry and enjoy the same benefits and rights as straight couples.

So who are the ones really having their rights trampled? The same ones who've been enduring such treatment for centuries, the minorities, those who had been forced into the shadows of society by religious zealots pushing an unproven faith and labeling any dissent as heretical. Thankfully, we have a constitution that, when applied properly, stands up for all citizens, not just the ones who are blinded by their own imagined radiance and undeserved privilege.

 
 
 
epistte
1.1.11  epistte  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1.10    3 weeks ago
Did anyone have their supposed religious freedom to discriminate trampled on when the 1964 civil rights act was passed? There were many who claimed a religious right to discriminate back then, claiming black Americans were "cursed by Cain" and other such religious nonsense. So if a person truly believed that their God had cursed blacks and thus they didn't want to serve them at a lunch counter or bake a wedding cake for a black couple, would that justify their discrimination?

Maurine Bessinger of Piggie Park BBQ did because he claimed that his religious rights were being violated when he was forced to equally serve black and interracial people at his BBQ joint. 

 He and Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop are both Baptists.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.12  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.2    3 weeks ago
The Alliance Defending Freedom, American Family Association, And Family Research Council
https://www.splcenter.org/
These are all hate groups as noted by the SPLC

'Religious Liberty' and the Anti-LGBT Right

The hardline groups promoting ‘religious freedom restoration acts’ to justify anti-gay discrimination.

In recent years, the LGBT rights movement has witnessed a sea change in American attitudes toward the gay community and, along with it, a series of dramatic policy and legal victories — most notably marriage equality — that would have seemed unthinkable just a decade ago.

Yet, while the majority of Americans support LGBT rights, these gains have produced a strong backlash.

The hardline religious-right groups that have long relied on the use of demonizing falsehoods to justify discrimination against LGBT people have not simply folded their tents and walked away.

Rather, they have used their large megaphone to create a dangerous new narrative that portrays Christians who object to homosexuality on biblical grounds as victims of religious persecution. This idea is particularly compelling to millions of evangelicals who see themselves and their values as being under siege in a rapidly changing society.

Across the country, these opponents of LGBT equality are working to persuade state legislatures to pass laws known as Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRAs) — statutes that ostensibly allow individuals to deny goods and services to LGBT people on the basis of their religious beliefs.

They are named and loosely modeled after the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.

But that law was intended as a shield to protect religious liberty. These new laws, such as the one enacted and then modified under intense public pressure in Indiana last year, are intended as a sword to promote discrimination against the LGBT community in the public sphere.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby added a powerful tailwind to the RFRA movement. The 5-4 ruling allowed a large, family-owned corporation to opt out of a requirement under the Affordable Care Act to provide its employees with insurance coverage for contraceptives because of the owners’ religious beliefs.

The new RFRAs are being championed by extreme religious-right groups that — as these profiles reveal — want to reverse the recent progress toward equal protection under the law for the LGBT community. If they had their way, the country would return to the era when gay people remained in the closet and the government claimed the right to say what could go on between consenting adults in their bedrooms.

These groups are clever — and cynical.

They know that, as Americans have grown more accepting of LGBT people, they can no longer rely on discredited stereotypes to stymie the march toward full equality. So they have wrapped their bigotry in the cloak of religious freedom.

The public should not be fooled.

Religious liberty is a cherished constitutional value, enshrined in the First Amendment. But, as earlier efforts to offer biblical justification for slavery and Jim Crow segregation have taught us, religious liberty should not be used as an excuse to discriminate.

The danger of these laws goes far beyond the way in which courts may ultimately balance them with statutory and constitutional protections against discrimination. The peril also lies in the atmosphere of bigotry and discrimination that will be created by legitimizing the very idea that LGBT rights threaten religious liberty.

The reality is that few cases of discrimination will ever find the ear of a sympathetic lawyer, and even fewer will find their way into a courtroom.

Most people who face discrimination on a daily basis have nowhere to turn. That’s why we must push back against these laws and this false narrative.

It’s why we must expose them for what they are — excuses to discriminate against other Americans for who they are and who they love.

And, it’s why we must expose the groups behind these laws as extremists that despise the LGBT community.

Download the report (.pdf)

 
 
 
epistte
1.1.13  epistte  replied to  katrix @1.1.5    3 weeks ago
Losing the ability to persecute and discriminate against others scares the crap out of Christian dominionists.  They're just like extremist Muslims, trying to impose their brand of sharia law on everyone else. 

This idea is their biggest fear.

When You’re Accustomed to Privilege, Equality Feels Like Oppression

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.14  Gordy327  replied to  epistte @1.1.9    3 weeks ago
They are hiding their bigotry behind our religious freedom guarantees,

Indeed. it's just cowardice at its core!

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.1.15  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.12    3 weeks ago

I openly side with each and every group defamed as so called hate by the terrorist inspiring racist sexist hate group SPLC. Being so labeled by them and their allies is a badge of honor and point of pride.  

 
 
 
epistte
1.1.16  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.15    3 weeks ago
I openly side with each and every group defamed as so called hate by the terrorist inspiring racist sexist hate group SPLC. Being so labeled by them and their allies is a badge of honor and point of pride.  

Let me get my violin,

tiny violin

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.1.17  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.12    3 weeks ago

The ones who discriminate are the LGBTQ 🏳️‍🌈 bigots who make a point out of coercing those they know hold to original literal biblical belief on marriage and sexual morality to act and create in ways to support the perversion of their beliefs on their behalf.  No one is saying gay people can’t do whatever it is that they do to themselves or that they can’t be employed or served in buying and selling of existing goods.  The issue here is the gaystapo knowingly coercing people to violate their conscience in servitude to their demands creating things to celebrate their raw power because they can.  

 
 
 
epistte
1.1.18  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.17    3 weeks ago
The ones who discriminate are the LGBTQ 🏳️‍🌈 bigots who make a point out of coercing those they know hold to original literal biblical belief on marriage and sexual morality to act and create in ways to support the perversion of their beliefs on their behalf.  No one is saying gay people can’t do whatever it is that they do to themselves or that they can’t be employed or served in buying and selling of existing goods.  The issue here is the gaystapo knowingly coercing people to violate their conscience in servitude to their demands creating things to celebrate their raw power because they can. 

If that is how you feel then I can only suggest that you do not voluntarily open a business that is required to serve the public equally?

It is an alternate reality claim that demanding equal rights is somehow discriminatory. Where black and interracial people also discriminating against racists when they demand equal rights? Who did MLK discriminate again in his fight for equal rights?  Would jack Phillips also complain if he was required to bake a wedding cake for an interracial couple, or is he just a homophobe and not a racist bigot?  Does he ask to see a birth certificate for a child so he knows that the parents were married when the child was conceived and born?

Your customers aren't asking to be liked or for you to endorse anything. It is a simple exchange of goods for cash that doesn't imply anything more than market capitalism.  It is your own irrational emotions that are adding to the situation.

 

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.19  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.17    3 weeks ago
original literal biblical belief on marriage and sexual morality

So your posit is that the LGBTQ community are trying to force religious fundamentalist to return to incest and polygamy. Got ya...

The issue here is the gaystapo knowingly coercing people to violate their conscience in servitude to their demands creating things to celebrate their raw power because they can.

How do they KNOW what a business owners 'conscience' tells them Xx? 

There is ZERO evidence in any of the cases that have been litigated that the customer 'targeted' a business owner because of his religious beliefs. I have however read about one case where a fundie targeted a baker because of their POLITICAL beliefs. 

Here in Indiana, they tried to get an Amendment attached to the RFRA that would require those who intended to claim a religious waiver to inform customers in their advertisements and storefronts and the GOP voted it down. 

 
 
 
epistte
1.1.20  epistte  replied to  Dulay @1.1.19    3 weeks ago
Here in Indiana, they tried to get an Amendment attached to the RFRA that would require those who intended to claim a religious waiver to inform customers in their advertisements and storefronts and the GOP voted it down. 

Bigots don't want to tell potential customers that they are bigots before they buy their merchandise. They know that idea would be a death sentence for their business if they were forced to inform people that they had the right to deny service based on their own religious mythology.  This is also why Klan members wear hoods.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.21  Dulay  replied to  epistte @1.1.20    3 weeks ago

Yep. That's about what the debate about the Amendment sounded like to me. 

It's WORSE that the 'Whites Only' signs.

They want to demean you one on one, face to face.

Come on into my business so that I can tell you that you don't meet my moral standard and just how much my god has condemned you...

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
1.1.22  Phoenyx13  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.17    3 weeks ago
The ones who discriminate are the LGBTQ 🏳️‍🌈 bigots who make a point out of coercing those they know hold to original literal biblical belief on marriage and sexual morality to act and create in ways to support the perversion of their beliefs on their behalf.  No one is saying gay people can’t do whatever it is that they do to themselves or that they can’t be employed or served in buying and selling of existing goods.  The issue here is the gaystapo knowingly coercing people to violate their conscience in servitude to their demands creating things to celebrate their raw power because they can.  

so you are upset because secular public business owners are being asked to do their job and serve the public ?

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.23  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.17    3 weeks ago

Pot meet kettle!

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.24  Gordy327  replied to  epistte @1.1.16    3 weeks ago

[Removed]

 
 
 
katrix
1.1.25  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.1.17    3 weeks ago
original literal biblical belief on marriage and sexual morality

I'm surprised you admit so vocally to supporting such immorality.  Little girls being sold to old men; rape victims being sold to their rapists; adulterous women (but not men) being stoned to death; rape victims being murdered if they didn't scream or if nobody witnessed the rape; widows being forced to marry their husband's brother (even if he was already married); slaves being forced to submit to their owners' sexual demands (in fact, the bible states that if a slave owner fails to rape his slave, she must be set free) ... I could go on, but you get the picture.  BTW, your false prophet Paul is the only one who even mentioned marriage; Jesus never did.

I'm so glad I am far more moral than fundamentalist Christians.  I can't imagine going through life being so immoral as to support all those horrible things.  No wonder you're so angry all the time.

 
 
 
epistte
1.2  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    3 weeks ago
“"The Equality Act is going to impact every person in the United States of America," Chambers tells OneNewsNow. "Second of all, the Equality Act will serve as a wrecking ball against the religious liberty of all Americans in the country."

How are equal rights for LGBT citizens an attack on your religious liberty, unless a cornerstone of your religious belief is hatred and bigotry?

Where did Jesus tell you to act in this manner? Is Luke 6:31 not in your bible?

Luke 6:31 New International Version (NIV)

31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

Why does it seem that your reaction to equal right for LGBT people is remarkably similar to the same religious conservatives opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act? 

Chambers continues: "Say someone believes that marriage is between one man and one woman, for example – or even if someone believes that biology is established at birth and

is not changeable or is immutable. Then those people would be at odds with this law. So, for example if they own a business, they would have to allow men who think they're women into the women's restrooms."

Does this man understand that trans guys (female to male) exist and instead of using the men's bathroom where they belong they will be forced to use the women's bathroom? That means that any CIS guy who wants to molest a woman won't even have to dress in drag to do it. he'll just claim that he is a trans man.  I don't want a trans guy in the women's bathroom because despite not having a penis they are very male. 

 It will also be fun to watch them misgender a very butch lesbian and then watch her kick him around like a Dollar Store soccer ball for your trouble,. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.2.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @1.2    3 weeks ago

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 New International Version (NIV)

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. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Footnotes:

  1. 1 Corinthians 6:9 The words men who have sex with men translate two Greek words that refer to the passive and active participants in homosexual acts.

 
 
 
epistte
1.2.2  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.1    3 weeks ago

Does the word of your savior Jesus outweigh the letters to the Corinthians, or do you cherry pick the passages that you agree with?  

Why do you continue to vote up your own posts when it is assumed that you agree with what you post?  Do you think that we cannot see who upvotes posts? 

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.3  katrix  replied to  epistte @1.2.2    3 weeks ago

Because otherwise there would be no upvotes for such hateful, ignorant comments.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.2.4  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @1.2.2    3 weeks ago

No one actively engaged in homosexual acts or any other sin of any kind is washed, sanctified, or justified in the name of Jesus.  We are told to love the sinner while hating sin.  Jesus told those He forgave to go and sin no more.  Nowhere in His time here or words spoken here say to aid and abet in the commission of another’s sin nor did He ever do so.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.2.5  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @1.2.2    3 weeks ago

I don’t care much what you think about the issue of upvoting and if it offends you I’ll be certain to make a point of doing so.  

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.6  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.5    3 weeks ago
I don’t care much what you think about the issue of upvoting and if it offends you I’ll be certain to make a point of doing so.  

Just as you've said you'll wear a MAGA hat for the sole purpose of pissing off liberals.

What an awesome example of what Jesus would NOT do.  The hypocrisy of Christian fundamentalists (and other religions' fundamentalists, for that matter) never ceases to amaze me.  I'm so glad my morals are much better than that, and that I follow Jesus' example so much better. 

BTW, your bible says all sins are considered equal, so why are you so hung up only on gay sex?  Your sins are every bit as bad, per the bible, but you're obsessed with penises and no other sins.  Makes me wonder.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2.7  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.4    3 weeks ago
No one actively engaged in homosexual acts or any other sin of any kind is washed, sanctified, or justified in the name of Jesus.  

How does that answer the question? 

We are told to love the sinner while hating sin.

Where, Chapter and verse please. 

 Jesus told those He forgave to go and sin no more.  

He also said those who are without sin cast the first stone. Please proceed. 

Nowhere in His time here or words spoken here say to aid and abet in the commission of another’s sin nor did He ever do so.  

How does refraining from discrimination aid and abet others actions? Please be specific. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.2.8  Gordy327  replied to  Dulay @1.2.7    3 weeks ago

Here's where the crickets come in jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
epistte
1.2.9  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.4    3 weeks ago
No one actively engaged in homosexual acts or any other sin of any kind is washed, sanctified, or justified in the name of Jesus.  We are told to love the sinner while hating sin.  Jesus told those He forgave to go and sin no more.  Nowhere in His time here or words spoken here say to aid and abet in the commission of another’s sin nor did He ever do so.  

Should I explain what a eunuch is?  It can be translated as gay or trans' or both.

For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it," (Matthew 19:12).
 
 
 
epistte
1.2.10  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.5    3 weeks ago
I don’t care much what you think about the issue of upvoting and if it offends you I’ll be certain to make a point of doing so.  

I'm not offended in any way. I just think that it is funny when other people can see you doing it. 

 
 
 
Phaedrus
1.2.11  Phaedrus  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.5    3 weeks ago
if it offends you I’ll be certain to make a point of doing so.  

Spoken like a true "christian". SMDH

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
1.2.12  Trout Giggles  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.1    3 weeks ago

Those are the words of Paul, not Jesus

 
 
 
evilgenius
1.2.13  evilgenius  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.5    3 weeks ago
...and if it offends you I’ll be certain to make a point of doing so.  

And the rest of us sane US citizens will continue to support equal rights because it is the right thing to do irregardless of what special rights some religious bigot wants this week.

 
 
 
Ender
1.2.14  Ender  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.1    3 weeks ago
nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God

Yet trump is the chosen one?

 
 
 
epistte
1.2.15  epistte  replied to  Phaedrus @1.2.11    3 weeks ago
Spoken like a true "christian". SMDH

Isn't that is the Gospel of Judas or is that the work of the mysterious 3rd Corinthian?   

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.16  katrix  replied to  Ender @1.2.14    3 weeks ago

Fundamentalists are very choosy about which sins are bad; it seems to be based on the sinner.  Liars, swindlers, adulterers, and slanderers are apparently just fine if they wear MAGA hats.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
1.3  SteevieGee  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    3 weeks ago
the Equality Act will serve as a wrecking ball against the religious liberty of all Americans in the country."

First the flat earthers and now this?  The crazies are out on NT this morning.

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.3.1  Gordy327  replied to  SteevieGee @1.3    3 weeks ago
First the flat earthers and now this?  The crazies are out on NT this morning.

All we need now are the anti-vaccers and we'll have the trifecta of crazies, Lol

 
 
 
epistte
1.3.2  epistte  replied to  Gordy327 @1.3.1    3 weeks ago

[Removed

 
 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.3.4  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  SteevieGee @1.3    2 weeks ago

Then go back inside.   

 
 
 
epistte
1.3.5  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.3.3    2 weeks ago
Curry argues that that the bill would manipulate students to carry the LGBTQ banner for homosexual activists – whether their parents approve of it or not – and would force schools to conform to the LBGTQ agenda. "And particularly [it would force] all schools to conform to providing special rights for those who identify as LGBT," she tells OneNewsNow. The public policy manager says the pending legislation stipulates that the homosexual agenda be included in every class in every school, even in math classes.

What LGBTQI agenda is there, except equality? How would public schools be forced to conform, unless you are admitting that LGBTQI students are currently not being treated as equals to heterosexual and CIS students?

"And particularly [it would force] all schools to conform to providing special rights for those who identify as LGBT," she tells OneNewsNow.

They are no special LGBTQI rights, just as there are no special rights for people of different races, religions/creeds, sex, colors, or disabilities. It is about guaranteeing equal secular and religious rights.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.3.6  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.3.3    2 weeks ago

That article is hysterical and laughable. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.3.7  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Dulay @1.3.6    2 weeks ago

Actually, it is exactly right in all that it says.  

 
 
 
Dulay
1.3.8  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.3.7    2 weeks ago
Actually, it is exactly right in all that it says.

Really Xx? So you should be able to give examples of how schools were required to include the agenda of every other protected class 'in every class in every school, even in math classes.'

Perhaps you can give us an example how the 'agenda' of each of the protected classes in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 'race, color, religion, or national origin' were included in Redding California's math curiculum. 

Please support your claim that it's all 'exactly right' Xx. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.3.9  Gordy327  replied to  epistte @1.3.5    2 weeks ago
What LGBTQI agenda is there,

It's funny how those who declare such an agenda exists have never been able to explain what that agenda is. Yet they continue to claim LGBT agenda this and that. Go figure.

 
 
 
epistte
1.3.10  epistte  replied to  Gordy327 @1.3.9    2 weeks ago
It's funny how those who declare such an agenda exists have never been able to explain what that agenda is. Yet they continue to claim LGBT agenda this and that. Go figure.

Delusions of religious persecution will do that to people. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.3.11  Gordy327  replied to  epistte @1.3.10    2 weeks ago
Delusions of religious persecution will do that to people. 

There certainly seems to be a lot of delusion out there.

 
 
 
Don Overton
1.4  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    3 weeks ago

First of all the act does nothing of the claim.  Chamber's is a proven liar and has his head so far up the right's ass the only people that listen to him are the avid trump ass kissers

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.4.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Don Overton @1.4    2 weeks ago

Actually our actions are legit and right on. https://afaaction.net

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.4.2  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Don Overton @1.4    2 weeks ago

Yep no sweeping generalizations there. jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Don Overton
1.5  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    3 weeks ago

100 Bible Verses about Equality

 
 
 
Don Overton
1.6  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    3 weeks ago

Equality Galatians 3:28

 
 
 
Don Overton
1.7  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    3 weeks ago

Romans 2:11 ESV / 582 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

For God shows no partiality.

John 13:16 ESV / 450 helpful votes Thank you for your vote.

Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.

 
 
 
luther28
2  luther28    3 weeks ago

"No American should ever be treated as less than equal in the eyes of the law.

You find exception with this statement somehow?

I thought you were a staunch defender of the Constitution, see below for a refresher.

The 14th Amendment says, "Nor shall any state … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

See there is the thing about freedom, you have to allow others the same consideration even though they may not fit into your own little world, otherwise it is just another word.

 
 
 
JBB
2.1  JBB  replied to  luther28 @2    3 weeks ago

All pigs are equal butt obviously some pigs think they are more equal...

 
 
 
luther28
2.1.1  luther28  replied to  JBB @2.1    3 weeks ago

Animal Farm, one of my early favorites. Oink, Oink:)

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.2  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  JBB @2.1    3 weeks ago

[Removed]

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.3  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  luther28 @2.1.1    3 weeks ago

in animal farm it is the secular progressive statists who are the some animals are more equal than others pigs 🐖.  

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.4  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.3    3 weeks ago
in animal farm it is the secular progressive statists who are the some animals are more equal than others pigs

So who are the 'religious regressives' in Animal Farm Xx? 

 
 
 
luther28
2.1.5  luther28  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.3    3 weeks ago

SparkNotes: Animal Farm: Symbols

https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/animalfarm/symbols/
Animal Farm, known at the beginning and the end of the novel as the Manor Farm, symbolizes Russia and the Soviet Union under Communist Party rule.
Bit of a leap to a Progressive.
 
 
 
epistte
2.1.6  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.3    3 weeks ago
in animal farm it is the secular progressive statists who are the some animals are more equal than others pigs 🐖.  

Does your god want some people to be more equal than others?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.7  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  JBB @2.1    3 weeks ago

And why should the LGBTQ community be able to demand special services from people they know would be violating their own religious beliefs and conscience were they to submit to and comply with their oppressive demands?  The California judge got it right in these cases and soon the US Supreme Court will make that ruling the law of the land when it next rules on these matters.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.1.8  Trout Giggles  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.7    3 weeks ago

What special services?

 
 
 
evilgenius
2.1.9  evilgenius  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.7    3 weeks ago
And why should the LGBTQ community be able to demand special services from people they know would be violating their own religious beliefs and conscience were they to submit to and comply with their oppressive demands?

Please enlighten us with an example of a "special service" the oppressive LGBTQ community is demanding? I'm pretty certain it really isn't all that "special" nor does it have anything to do with the Christian religion. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.10  Tessylo  replied to  evilgenius @2.1.9    3 weeks ago

A cake!

 
 
 
Freefaller
2.1.11  Freefaller  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.8    3 weeks ago
What special services?

Lol the same services that are provided to every other citizen of the country

 
 
 
evilgenius
2.1.12  evilgenius  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.10    3 weeks ago

I've been searching all versions of the Christian Bible for a couple of years now and I can't find "baking a cake" as a prerequisite for Christianity. It seems, from my various searches online, that the MAJORITY of Christians believe the Messiah would have baked the cake. I would like to think a being said to be the embodiment of LOVE would have baked the cake and blessed the couple and then would have admonished the bigots for being so prissy in the first place. Paul on the other hand was very obsessed with keeping himself holy and pure. Personally I think too many people follow Paul and too little actually follow Jesus.

 
 
 
 
epistte
2.1.14  epistte  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.13    3 weeks ago

I could probably do better than that and I hate decorating cakes.  They look like an 8-year-olds refrigerator drawing on a cake.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.1.15  Trout Giggles  replied to  epistte @2.1.14    3 weeks ago

I thought some of them looked amateurish

 
 
 
katrix
2.1.16  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.7    3 weeks ago
And why should the LGBTQ community be able to demand special services from people

They're asking for equal treatment.  Nothing more.  No special services at all. 

 
 
 
JBB
2.1.17  JBB  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.10    3 weeks ago

The damn gop is trying to constitute a New Jim Crow System step by step starting with the LGTBQ community butt they realky want a return to the bad olde daze when ambulances refused to transport people to hospitals that refused to treat them because they were deemed "dirty". That was the excuse given for denying services to black and brown people at everything from restaurants to banks and department stores and schools and jobs and homes to ambulance services and hospitals prior to 1964.

It was normal people died from lack of care back then. Wanna go again?

 
 
 
epistte
2.1.18  epistte  replied to  JBB @2.1.17    3 weeks ago

[Removed]

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.19  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.7    3 weeks ago
And why should the LGBTQ community be able to demand special services

What "special services" would those be? Be specific!

from people they know would be violating their own religious beliefs and conscience were they to submit to and comply with their oppressive demands?

Being asked to provide something you normally do anyway is "oppressive?" And some conservatives like to call liberals "snowflakes." Oh irony! Some of these religious types really need to get over themselves!

 
 
 
epistte
2.1.20  epistte  replied to  epistte @2.1.18    3 weeks ago

Who did my post malign if it wasn't the white Protestant conservative Christians who support discrimination based on their conservative interpretation of the Bible?

 Do they have the right not to be offended by the historical facts?  I hate revisionist history. 

 
 
 
epistte
2.1.21  epistte  replied to  Gordy327 @2.1.19    3 weeks ago
Being asked to provide something you normally do anyway is "oppressive?" And some conservatives like to call liberals "snowflakes." Oh irony! Some of these religious types really need to get over themselves!

Their goal is to filter all secular law through their cherry-picked interpretation of the Bible all while expecting us to ignore the fact that their savior Jesus explicitly told them not to do what they are doing. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.22  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @2.1.20    3 weeks ago

We both had a comment censored 🤬 here today so we have that at least in common.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.23  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Dulay @2.1.4    3 weeks ago

Us repressed believers are the chickens who tried to withhold our eggs and were taken out by Napoleons dogs.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.24  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Dulay @2.1.4    3 weeks ago

The repressed believers are the chickens who tried to withhold their eggs (cake, photos, floral arrangements, etc.) and were taken out by Napoleons dogs.  

 
 
 
epistte
2.1.25  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.23    3 weeks ago
Us repressed believers are the chickens who tried to withhold our eggs and were taken out by Napoleons dogs.  

When have you ever been repressed?

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.26  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.24    3 weeks ago

What about the pigs, goose and sheep that were killed. Were they agnostic? 

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.27  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.24    3 weeks ago
'The repressed believers are the chickens who tried to withhold their eggs (cake, photos, floral arrangements, etc.) and were taken out by Napoleons dogs.'

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.28  Gordy327  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.27    3 weeks ago

That was a good one. Classic, Lol

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.29  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.24    3 weeks ago

[Removed]

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.30  Gordy327  replied to  epistte @2.1.25    3 weeks ago

That's easy: Never!

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.31  Gordy327  replied to  epistte @2.1.21    3 weeks ago

That about sums it up.

 
 
 
katrix
2.1.33  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.23    3 weeks ago
Us repressed believers are the chickens who tried to withhold our eggs and were taken out by Napoleons dogs.  

Why don't you move to a theocracy if you feel so persecuted? 

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.34  Gordy327  replied to  katrix @2.1.33    3 weeks ago

Indeed. I suppose some people simply prefer to whine all the time.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
2.1.36  Thrawn 31  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.7    3 weeks ago

[Removed]

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
2.1.37  Thrawn 31  replied to  epistte @2.1.25    3 weeks ago
When have you ever been repressed?

He never has. [Removed]

 
 
 
SteevieGee
2.1.38  SteevieGee  replied to  katrix @2.1.33    3 weeks ago
[Removed]
 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.39  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2.1.36    3 weeks ago

Your father is a great man. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.40  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  SteevieGee @2.1.38    3 weeks ago

And yet when the Trump administration through its openly gay ambassador to Germany targeted Iran for its persecution and execution of gays and defended Iran’s gay population, America’s gay community openly sided with islamists and the government in Iran 🇮🇷 over fellow gays in Iran because they wanted to oppose Trump and build relationships with domestic Islamist groups in the progressive movement as well as punish fellow gays in Islamic countries for turning to America for help when Trump is president.  

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.41  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.40    3 weeks ago
America’s gay community openly sided with islamists and the government in Iran

Please provide a link to prove your claim Xx. 

 
 
 
Don Overton
2.1.42  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.3    3 weeks ago

Genesis 1:27 ESV / 333 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.

Mark 12:31 ESV / 281 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.43  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  luther28 @2.1.5    2 weeks ago

They are one and the same anymore..

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.2  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  luther28 @2    3 weeks ago

There are conscience clauses for providers of medical services that are legal that a provider/business can choose not to provide due to their religious beliefs.  Those were built in after roe vs. wade and are the law of the land.  Justices Alito and Roberts implied that after the equally flawed gay marriage decision, that similar protections would be needed for believers not willing to go with the the new imposed changes.  It’s just a matter of time before it happens when they fully hear one of these cases.  And Trump just seriously strengthens the conscience clause regarding medical providers, laying the groundwork that other providers should be able to opt out of providing other services based on religious liberty grounds.  

 
 
 
Dulay
2.2.1  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2    3 weeks ago
Justices Alito and Roberts implied that after the equally flawed gay marriage decision, that similar protections would be needed for believers not willing to go with the the new imposed changes.

Please cite exactly WHAT medical services should be denied based on gay marriage. I won't hold my breath for an answer since you've avoided answering almost everything of late. 

 
 
 
epistte
2.2.2  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2    3 weeks ago
Justices Alito and Roberts implied that after the equally flawed gay marriage decision, that similar protections would be needed for believers not willing to go with the the new imposed changes.

How is the Obergfell decision flawed?  The fact that religious conservatives don't like it doesn't mean that it is legally flawed.  That decision is no different than Loving v. Virginia, so either you support both interracial marriage and LGBT marriage rights or you do not support either because the decisions are exactly the same. Why should racism and homophobia be endorsed by the government, just because some people try to disguise their hatred of equal rights for others behind a religious belief? 

 It’s just a matter of time before it happens when they fully hear one of these cases.  And Trump just seriously strengthens the conscience clause regarding medical providers, laying the groundwork that other providers should be able to opt out of providing other services based on religious liberty grounds.  

Your religious liberty is not being threatened by being forced to obey the previous law of equal public accommodation and doing your job as required as a rational adult.  If your religious beliefs prohibit you from treating others as yourself then either you made the wrong career choice or your religious beliefs are morally abhorrent. Was Jesus a racist and a homophobe?  Should a business be able to deny equal service to blacks and interracial customers, just as they are trying to cite their religious belief to deny equal service to LGBT customers and members of other religions?  The arguments to enforce racism are the very same to deny equal service to women, LGBT people and those of other religions.    These people are still fighting the 1960s equal rights. 

I think that these religious business owners should be permitted to do it, but only if they are forced to post a permanent, standardized, unobstructed, and illuminated 24"x36" statement in Day-Glo orange on the front door and front window informing potential customers of their religious-based intolerance of others.   This statement must also be on their internet and paper advertisements. If you are going to be a religious bigot then everyone deserves to know about it beforehand.

Any hospital/healthcare provider has the right to deny equal care because of the owners or employees religious beliefs but they also forfeit their Medicare, Medicaid, and Social security payments when they do so because while they have the right to their sincere religious beliefs, taxpayer money should not be used to further bigotry in 21st century society.  Private insurance companies also have the right to deny payments because of their support of minority rights as they or their shareholders see fit. 

 
 
 
Don Overton
2.2.3  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2    3 weeks ago

Leviticus 19:33-34 ESV / 151 helpful votes

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Colossians 1:16-17 ESV / 122 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.2.4  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Dulay @2.2.1    3 weeks ago

No one suggested not offering medical services to homosexuals.  That is not the issue.  The issue is letting other providers observe the free exercise there of of their religious beliefs in their business and career that medical providers have in refraining from doing abortion or providing certain birth control or certain Rx’s that violate their conscience.  Wedding planners, stenographers, photographers, florists, and bakers should have the same conscience clause medical providers do in their careers and jobs.  

 
 
 
epistte
2.2.5  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2.4    2 weeks ago
No one suggested not offering medical services to homosexuals.

There are some people who want to deny services to gays and lesbians because of their religious beliefs. Trans people could be denied supportive care for their transition. All LGBT people could be denied care in the ER or even by private ambulance services in some parts of the country.   I could be denied access to birth control because I am not married if somebody at the pharmacy wanted to cite their religious beliefs that I should be celibate because I am divorced. If a Jehovahs Witness could get a job at the blood bank they could deny everyone blood needed for a transfusion because of their religious beliefs. 

On Thursday, San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera brought a lawsuit against the Trump administration claiming the new rule would reduce access to critical health care.

“People’s health should not be a political football. The intent of this new rule is clear: it’s to prioritize religious beliefs over patient care, thereby undermining access to contraception, abortion, HIV treatment and a host of other medical services,” Herrera said in a statement.

Herrera has asked the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to postpone the rollout until further judicial review.

This reversal of an Obama-era policy is part of a larger push by conservatives to ramp up anti-abortion efforts and enshrine in law so-called “religious liberties” that allow people to deny services to LGBTQ Americans.

It would be funny if a Hindu worked at McDees, Wendys, or Arbys and cited their sincere religious beliefs so they could deny people a burger/roast beef sandwich because in the Hindu religion a cow is scared. Theravada Buddhists are vegans so that could be funny if they worked in the meat section at a supermarket.
These people could not be fired because that would be a civil rights violation due to their religious objection to that job.
Be careful what you wish for because you just may get it!
 
 
 
Dulay
2.2.6  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2.4    2 weeks ago
No one suggested not offering medical services to homosexuals.  

They are not only 'suggesting' it, they are giving those that want to do so legal protection from being held responsible for discrimination based on animus. 

That is not the issue.  

That is EXACTLY the issue. 

The issue is letting other providers observe the free exercise there of of their religious beliefs in their business and career that medical providers have in refraining from doing abortion or providing certain birth control or certain Rx’s that violate their conscience.

The new conscience protections aren't JUST about abortion Xx. 

 Wedding planners, stenographers, photographers, florists, and bakers should have the same conscience clause medical providers do in their careers and jobs.  

What possible service would wedding planners, stenographers, photographers, florists, and bakers perform connected to an abortion, birth control or Rx's Xx? 

BTFW, you didn't answer my question about WHAT medical services should be denied based on gay marriage. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3  seeder  XXJefferson#51    3 weeks ago

The bottom line is that there is zero chance of that act becoming law anytime soon.  The senate won’t bring it up and Trump won’t sign it.   

 
 
 
evilgenius
3.1  evilgenius  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3    3 weeks ago
The senate won’t bring it up and Trump won’t sign it.   

Yes, we know McConnell is too chicken shit to bring it up for a vote he knows he'd lose.

 
 
 
Don Overton
3.2  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3    3 weeks ago

320

 
 
 
Don Overton
3.3  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3    3 weeks ago

[Trolling]

 
 
 
Don Overton
3.3.1  Don Overton  replied to  Don Overton @3.3    3 weeks ago

320[deleted]

 
 
 
Don Overton
3.4  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3    3 weeks ago

Proverbs 22:2 ESV / 97 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

The rich and the poor meet together; the Lord is the maker of them all.

Matthew 7:12 ESV / 91 helpful votes

“So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Acts 10:34 ESV / 84 helpful votes

So Peter opened his mouth and said: “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality,

If you can't understand what the Bible and the words of Christ then the articles that the right have lost their Christian values and morals.
 
 
 
JohnRussell
4  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

I have never understood why people think they will be betraying their religion if they submit to "equality". 

Doesn't God know you are complying with the law against your choice and against your will? 

I would think you would get extra credit with the man upstairs just by making your opinion known. 

 
 
 
epistte
4.1  epistte  replied to  JohnRussell @4    3 weeks ago
I have never understood why people think they will be betraying their religion if they submit to "equality". 

Doesn't God know you are complying with the law against your choice and against your will? 

I would think you would get extra credit with the man upstairs just by making your opinion known. 

Jesus told them not to treat others differently than they want to be treated. This is why the religious claim is laughable because even their own bible disagrees with them unless they somehow claim to be a Christian and yet reject the teachings of the person who they claim to be their savior and the son of god. 

Luke 6:31.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.1.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @4.1    3 weeks ago

Luke 6:31-35 New International Version (NIV)

31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

32 “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. 35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.

It is not showing love to others to let them continue to live in sin and not point them to Gods love, salvation, and eternal life if they accept Him and repent.  We would not want others to let us continue to live in sin and be eternally lost because they would not tell us and show us a better way.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.1    3 weeks ago
Removed for context

Proselytizing generally pisses people off. 

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.3  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.1    3 weeks ago
 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.

What do you think this means?  If LGBT and us secular progressive Humanists are your enemies, then you are to be kind to them and us. 

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.4  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.1    3 weeks ago
It is not showing love to others to let them continue to live in sin and not point them to Gods love, salvation, and eternal life if they accept Him and repent.

Bullshit. 

That is about loving your enemies and doing good to others whether they accept 'Him' or not because that's what Jesus does. 

It's not about your enemies grace, it's about YOURS. Sheesh!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
4.1.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @4.1.4    3 weeks ago

I think it's pretty arrogant to not let others continue to live their lives as they see fit.

 
 
 
katrix
4.1.6  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.1    3 weeks ago
We would not want others to let us continue to live in sin and be eternally lost because they would not tell us and show us a better way.  

Bullshit.  We often point out your sins and show you a better way, but you continue with the hate.  When Jesus refuses to know you, don't blame us - we tried.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
4.1.7  Thrawn 31  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.1    3 weeks ago
[Removed]

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.1.8  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.2    3 weeks ago

Oh I forgot, secularists and progressive left “Christians” want to get their shots in unopposed and then cry proselytism while begging for censorship when ever a true believer answers them.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.1.9  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @4.1.3    3 weeks ago

Kind yes, loving yes, aiding and abetting in the committing of sin, absolutely never ever.  

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.10  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.9    3 weeks ago
Kind yes, loving yes, aiding and abetting in the committing of sin, absolutely never ever.  

Bigots also believe that the intermarriage of whites and blacks is also a sin. Why do you discount their sincere devout beliefs? 

Why should intermarriage between races be considered a sin? When two people of whatever race or colour love one another and wish to marry, why should they not do so? Because the Bible asserts that it is wrong to intermarry and, if we believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God, then we have the highest Authority for this claim. The Word of God tells us that segregation is not only right , but a “must,” if the nations are to live in peace. This is not a popular statement at the moment, of course, and is contrary to Church doctrine. God made everything “after its kind” in the animal, vegetable and human world (Genesis 1:24-25). Leviticus 19:19 says, “Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind; thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed; neither shall a garment mingled (mixed) of linen and woollen come upon thee” and, in Deuteronomy 22:9, “Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers (various) seeds; lest the fruit of thy seed which thou  hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled. ” Let us note further what Moses said: “When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. For the Lord’s portion (is) his people; Jacob (is) the lot of his inheritance” (Deuteronomy 32:8-9).

.

Let us take the case of Solomon, and note how his downfall was due entirely to intermarriage with women of other nations. In I Kings 11:1-2, it is said: “But King Solomon loved many strange (foreign ) women; together with the daughter of Pharaoh,  women  of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians (and) Hittites, of the nations (concerning) which the Lord said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you; (for) surely they will turn away your heart after their gods. Solomon clave (clung) unto these in love.” What happened? “For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, (that) his wives turned away his heart  after other gods, and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as (was) the heart of David, his father” (I Kings 11:4). The consequences of this disobedience were serious for, “The Lord said unto Solomon, For as much as this is done by thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend (tear) the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant” (verse 11). So we see the results of Solomon’s sin – the division of the kingdom of Israel. The sin of intermarrying has been prevalent through the ages and the practice was condemned by Nehemiah (Nehemiah 13:23-31).. Ezra, too, was ashamed of the iniquities of the children of Israel and prayed and confessed before God – cf Ezra Chapters 9 & 10 (Note: 9:10-12; 10:10-11).
 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.1.11  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @4.1.10    3 weeks ago

Interesting how others can quote chapter and verse to advance their viewpoint and I can’t.  Typical NewsTalkers double standards at work.  

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.12  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.11    2 weeks ago
nteresting how others can quote chapter and verse to advance their viewpoint and I can’t.  Typical NewsTalkers double standards at work.  

I am not proselytizing in any way. I posted that statement as proof that there are still some Christians who think that it is sinful for the races to intermarry.  Why do you ignore that sin and only focus on LGBT marriage? Its almost as if you have moved past race as a reason to claim a religious objection to minority rights and now only want to focus on citing your conservative religious beliefs to oppose LGBT rights instead? 

 If the Obergfell decision is wrong because of your conservative religious beliefs then Loving v. Virginia must also be opposed by your religion because legally they are the very same idea that marriage between 2 consenting adults is a constitutional right of all people.  You cannot ignore one and oppose the other on religious grounds without being a hypocrite that cherry-picks only what you choose to believe because it supports your currently held opinions. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.1.13  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.1.5    2 weeks ago

As do I. Christians should be able to live their lives as per their beliefs.  

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.14  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.13    2 weeks ago
As do I. Christians should be able to live their lives as per their beliefs.  

Even if those beliefs are a violation of secular law and discriminate against others? The Bible says that some people should be stoned to death for their actions. Should that be permitted because it is a religious belief?  Should Maurice Bessinger have been permitted to deny equal service to black and interracial customers at his BBQ joint because of his racist religious beliefs, despite the protections of the 1964 Civil Rights Act? 

How can we have a Constitution with equal rights for all if people only need to claim that their religious rights are an exemption to secular law?  Your idea sounds suspiciously close to a Christian counterpart to Islamic Sharia law.

 
 
 
bbl-1
4.1.15  bbl-1  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.13    2 weeks ago

[delete]

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.2  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  JohnRussell @4    3 weeks ago

At the time of the end before the second coming there will be tests the faithful will have to face where the choice is to follow Gods law or laws of mankind that directly conflict.  Of course we are to obey the laws of the land we live in as long as we are not put in the position of breaking Gods law to do so.  The time will come where we must obey God first and be persecuted for it and be hated for His name sake.  This present issue could well be the leading edge of this and the hate of those who think God to be too old fashioned for modern humanists is clear to see directed at those who cling to the faith of our ancestors.  

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.1  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2    3 weeks ago
At the time of the end before the second coming there will be tests the faithful will have to face where the choice is to follow Gods law or laws of mankind that directly conflict.  Of course we are to obey the laws of the land we live in as long as we are not put in the position of breaking Gods law to do so.

Are you being persecuted when you are commanded to follow Matthew 7:12?


“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”

How can you logically claim to be a follower of Jesus when you willfully reject his core teachings?  You cannot substitute the teachings of Saul Of Tarsus over those in the Gospels and still claim to be a Christian. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.2  JohnRussell  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2    3 weeks ago

If you would just stay in your lane and not bother everyone else no one would care. [deleted]

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.2.3  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2    3 weeks ago

[Meta]

 
 
 
Gordy327
4.2.4  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2.3    3 weeks ago

[Removed]

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.2.5  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @4.2.1    3 weeks ago

Are you proselytizing for your point of view?  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.2.6  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @4.2.1    2 weeks ago

Saul of Tarsus never wrote a thing in the Bible. He was the great persecutor including being involved in the stoning of Stephen after he cut the existing temple leadership to the core of their hearts in a speech right up until he saw Jesus on the road to Damascus to persecute and converted becoming Paul. Nothing that he wrote in the New Testament contradicts anything Jesus taught and all of it was inspired by God or it wouldn’t have been included.

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.7  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2.6    2 weeks ago

Why did you ignore my question about being required to follow teachings of Jesus as recorded in Matthew  7:12?

Saul of Tarsus never wrote a thing in the Bible. He was the great persecutor including being involved in the stoning of Stephen after he cut the existing temple leadership to the core of their hearts in a speech right up until he saw Jesus on the road to Damascus to persecute and converted becoming Paul. Nothing that he wrote in the New Testament contradicts anything Jesus taught and all of it was inspired by God or it wouldn’t have been included.

The claim that Paul saw Jesus on the road to Damascus is likely a delusion from heat and the lack of water.

There are many contradictions of Paul and Jesus, despite what you want to claim or you believe. 

https://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books/175-pauls-contradictions-of-jesus.html

Claiming that his words were inspired by god is also religious belief because there is no proof that god exists or that god ever fact checked his claims to verify that he wrote down gods supposed words accurately and without his own bias.

 
 
 
bbl-1
5  bbl-1    3 weeks ago

Religion and Liberty?  How does that work?  For whom does it work? 

Would it not be simpler to simply allow 'the over religious' to just persecute each other?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
5.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  bbl-1 @5    3 weeks ago

They already did that back during the Protestant Reformation.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
5.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  bbl-1 @5    3 weeks ago
Would it not be simpler to simply allow 'the over religious' to just persecute each other?

Hence why I don't get overly upset when the Christians and Muslims go at each other, those two groups are the worst. 

 
 
 
bbl-1
5.2.1  bbl-1  replied to  Thrawn 31 @5.2    2 weeks ago

The Abrahamic religions thrive on fear and violence.  It is their only redemption.

 
 
 
epistte
5.2.2  epistte  replied to  bbl-1 @5.2.1    2 weeks ago
The Abrahamic religions thrive on fear and violence.  It is their only redemption.

And yet believers claim that their god is a loving God.  By that same claim Torquemada apparently was Mr. Rogers. 

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
6  Thrawn 31    3 weeks ago
A 'Wrecking Ball' On Religious Liberty

I love how not being able to be a total fucking asshole is a threat to religious liberty. Really just proves everything I have said about religion.

 
 
 
epistte
6.1  epistte  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6    3 weeks ago
I love how not being able to be a total fucking asshole is a threat to religious liberty. Really just proves everything I have said about religion.

If as the Bible claims that humans were made in his image then his most devout follower's actions would suggest that their god is a combination of Charles Manson, Warren Jeffs, and David Koresh. I certainly wouldn't worship that amoral prick but apparently, some people have no problem doing so. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
6.1.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @6.1    3 weeks ago

Simply ridiculous.  But since I can’t speak my mind or defend my position or my own beliefs/ opinions with out being censored for so called proselytizing while you all can freely use the Bible to attack my beliefs and values I’m simply locking the seed.   I will not be subject to one sided attacks unable to defend myself while like minded moderators simply delete any thing they personally don’t like or agree with.  

 
 
 
epistte
6.1.2  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @6.1.1    2 weeks ago
Simply ridiculous.  But since I can’t speak my mind or defend my position or my own beliefs/ opinions with out being censored for so called proselytizing while you all can freely use the Bible to attack my beliefs and values I’m simply locking the seed.   I will not be subject to one sided attacks unable to defend myself while like minded moderators simply delete any thing they personally don’t like or agree with.  

I don't believe your bible and I am not trying to convert anyone to the Christian faith. I only use the Bible to throw these ideas back in your face that you want to ignore because they don't support your very narrowly defined beliefs. 

 You want to ignore these inconvenient ideas because they don't support your claims, but I'm not going to allow you to do that. I'll stop doing it as soon as you admit that you pick and choose the passages that you approve of instead of obeying all of the Bible.   You claim that Jesus is the son of God and your chosen savior but when it comes time to obey his teachings you want to act like his existence is as questionable as the latest Elvis sighting. The Sermon On The Mount is arguably his most famous teaching but conservative Christians treat those compassionate commands are 20 tons of religious kryptonite.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
6.1.3  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @6.1.2    2 weeks ago

You may not believe the Bible.  That’s not the issue.  We just expect that those who do believe it be allowed to live their lives as they believe it says and have the free exercise there of right to follow given beliefs in all aspect of their personal, career, and business lives.  

 
 
 
epistte
6.1.4  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @6.1.3    2 weeks ago
You may not believe the Bible.  That’s not the issue.  We just expect that those who do believe it be allowed to live their lives as they believe it says and have the free exercise there of right to follow given beliefs in all aspect of their personal, career, and business lives.  

Maurice Bessinger and slave owners said the same thing when they believed that black and interracial people were inferior and to be ke[pt separate from whites. That bigoted idea is why we have the 1964 Civil Rights act with guarantees of equal service in a public business.

Why do you consistently ignore this bible passage like the plague? Does your bible have an annotated section listing exceptions to this teaching? If you are claiming that religious-based discrimination in secular rights and in public business then you must be able to prove it with an unambiguous passage from the person who you claim to be the son of god and your savior to defend that statement.

Luke 6:31

And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.1.5  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @6.1.3    2 weeks ago
We just expect that those who do believe it be allowed to live their lives as they believe it says and have the free exercise there of right to follow given beliefs in all aspect of their personal, career, and business lives.  

Actually Xx, you don't.

As has been pointed out to you ad nauseam, there are a plethora of biblical edicts that neither you or the vast majority of Christians argue should be allowed by our society. 

 
 
 
Don Overton
7  Don Overton    3 weeks ago

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
7.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Don Overton @7    3 weeks ago

Your most valuable post here ever! jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
bbl-1
7.2  bbl-1  replied to  Don Overton @7    2 weeks ago

I totally agree.  This...………….piece...……..is a vacuum. 

 
 
 
jim999
8  jim999    2 weeks ago

Stop the assault on religious liberty!

Translation...

Stop denying my right to deny others their rights.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Tacos!
Dean Moriarty
Ed-NavDoc
epistte


65 visitors