Equality Act – a 'wrecking ball' on religious liberty
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 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 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.
Chambers"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
Who is online
92 visitors
“"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."”
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:
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
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?
More of the ''Sky is falling'' from the religion responsible for taking religious freedom from other Americans.....
[Removed]
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
'Religious Liberty' and the Anti-LGBT Right
In this article
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)
This idea is their biggest fear.
Indeed. it's just cowardice at its core!
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
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.
So your posit is that the LGBTQ community are trying to force religious fundamentalist to return to incest and polygamy. Got ya...
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.
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.
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...
so you are upset because secular public business owners are being asked to do their job and serve the public ?
Pot meet kettle!
[Removed]
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.
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?
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?
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,.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 New International Version (NIV)
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 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:
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?
Because otherwise there would be no upvotes for such hateful, ignorant comments.
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.
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.
How does that answer the question?
Where, Chapter and verse please.
He also said those who are without sin cast the first stone. Please proceed.
How does refraining from discrimination aid and abet others actions? Please be specific.
Here's where the crickets come in
Should I explain what a eunuch is? It can be translated as gay or trans' or both.
I'm not offended in any way. I just think that it is funny when other people can see you doing it.
Spoken like a true "christian". SMDH
Those are the words of Paul, not Jesus
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.
Yet trump is the chosen one?
Isn't that is the Gospel of Judas or is that the work of the mysterious 3rd Corinthian?
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.
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
[Removed]
https://onenewsnow.com/education/2019/04/24/equality-act-also-threatens-school-curriculum-says-group
Then go back inside.
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?
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.
That article is hysterical and laughable.
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.
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.
There certainly seems to be a lot of delusion out there.
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
Actually our actions are legit and right on. https://afaaction.net
Yep no sweeping generalizations there.
100 Bible Verses about Equality
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.
"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.
All pigs are equal butt obviously some pigs think they are more equal...
Animal Farm, one of my early favorites. Oink, Oink:)
[Removed]
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?
SparkNotes: Animal Farm: Symbols
Does your god want some people to be more equal than others?
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.
What special services?
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.
A cake!
Lol the same services that are provided to every other citizen of the country
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.
Oh but have you seen the unique artistic expressions of Jack Phillilps?
I could probably do better than that and I hate decorating cakes. They look like an 8-year-olds refrigerator drawing on a cake.
I thought some of them looked amateurish
They're asking for equal treatment. Nothing more. No special services at all.
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?
[Removed]
What "special services" would those be? Be specific!
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!
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.
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.
We both had a comment censored 🤬 here today so we have that at least in common.
Us repressed believers are the chickens who tried to withhold our eggs and were taken out by Napoleons dogs.
The repressed believers are the chickens who tried to withhold their eggs (cake, photos, floral arrangements, etc.) and were taken out by Napoleons dogs.
When have you ever been repressed?
What about the pigs, goose and sheep that were killed. Were they agnostic?
That was a good one. Classic, Lol
[Removed]
That's easy: Never!
That about sums it up.
Why don't you move to a theocracy if you feel so persecuted?
Indeed. I suppose some people simply prefer to whine all the time.
[Removed]
He never has. [Removed]
Your father is a great man.
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.
Please provide a link to prove your claim Xx.
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.”
They are one and the same anymore..
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 EXACTLY the issue.
The new conscience protections aren't JUST about abortion Xx.
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.
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.
Yes, we know McConnell is too chicken shit to bring it up for a vote he knows he'd lose.
[Trolling]
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,
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.
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.
Proselytizing generally pisses people off.
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.
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!
I think it's pretty arrogant to not let others continue to live their lives as they see fit.
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.
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.
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?
.
Interesting 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.
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.
[delete]
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.
Are you being persecuted when you are commanded to follow Matthew 7:12?
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.
If you would just stay in your lane and not bother everyone else no one would care. [deleted]
[Meta]
[Removed]
Are you proselytizing for your point of view?
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.
Why did you ignore my question about being required to follow teachings of Jesus as recorded in Matthew 7:12?
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.
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.
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?
They already did that back during the Protestant Reformation.
Hence why I don't get overly upset when the Christians and Muslims go at each other, those two groups are the worst.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
Your most valuable post here ever!
I totally agree. This...………….piece...……..is a vacuum.