Respectful Politics Thread (Let's Just See)

[D'Snowth]

We have Separation of Church and State for a reason, however, a lot of churches want this abolished, because they feel that they should get involved with politics, if they feel it affects them personally. Clearly, this is another reason why Trump has appealed himself to so many rightwing Christians - a lot of them believe that Fox News B.S. that Obama was a Muslim and trying to rid America of God and Christianity in the name of Islam . . . which never happened.

But again, it also goes back to their whole "Religious Freedom" facade, where they use religious freedom as a mask for their own bigotry - like refusing service to LGBT people or anything like that . . . and then the one time Sarah Sanders were refused service, those same people went ballistic, even though it was the exact same principle.

 

[Censored]

Nobody's afraid of you. They just get along with Dwayne because he's not an ***.

Read. I didn’t say that anyone was afraid of me. I said that they were afraid to disagree with Dwayne out of friendship. Read.

 

[Censored]

We have Separation of Church and State for a reason, however, a lot of churches want this abolished, because they feel that they should get involved with politics, if they feel it affects them personally. Clearly, this is another reason why Trump has appealed himself to so many rightwing Christians - a lot of them believe that Fox News B.S. that Obama was a Muslim and trying to rid America of God and Christianity in the name of Islam . . . which never happened.

But again, it also goes back to their whole "Religious Freedom" facade, where they use religious freedom as a mask for their own bigotry - like refusing service to LGBT people or anything like that . . . and then the one time Sarah Sanders were refused service, those same people went ballistic, even though it was the exact same principle.

I’ve yet to see a conservative lawmaker who could separate his or her religious views from proposed legislation.

 

[Censored]

Before we can ever have mutual understanding here or anywhere else, people are going to have to learn how to read and comprehend.

 

[Censored]

It stems from insecurity. Some people don't like the idea that others think they will be punished for not believing something. It's like that Seinfeld episode where Putty thought Elaine was going to **** and Elaine got mad even though she didn't believe. It also allows people to wrongly invalidate any argument a person makes. "You believe in x so therefore when you say y it is not true."

This particularly would bug someone who feels the need to virtue signal. Someone who virtue signals does so because they want to be seen as morally superior. However, virtue signally can't work against someone that believes in God unless the signaler also believes in God. So the signaler gets mad because they can't be seen as morally superior in the eyes of a religious person.

Personally, I am not religious, but I don't care if someone else is as long as their views do not affect me. A person being religious is fine, but a law maker who uses religion to guide what laws they make is wrong.

No, it’s the hypocrisy of someone being nice to your face, but believing you’re going to be eternally condemned.

 

[Censored]

Bingo.

Bite your tongue! Gambling is a sin!!! (Well, as long as one’s saved, I guess it doesn’t matter).

 

[MWoO]

But again, it also goes back to their whole "Religious Freedom" facade, where they use religious freedom as a mask for their own bigotry - like refusing service to LGBT people or anything like that . . . and then the one time Sarah Sanders were refused service, those same people went ballistic, even though it was the exact same principle.

Eh... its not exactly the same thing.

The argument that the bakery used was that they did not provide cakes for gay weddings, not that they did not provide service to gay people. Its playing semantics, but legally relevant. If they were asked to make a satanic cake or an erotic cake they likely wouldnt have done it either. They declined to provide the service requested, not to serve the person requesting.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders family was ejected based on political views and then when they left they and went across the street the owner of the Red Hen followed her to the next restaurant, taking it too far. They declined to provide a service that they provided to others.

Again, fine line. In either case a private business reserves the right to not provide a type of service or decline to serve an individual.

 

[D'Snowth]

Eh... its not exactly the same thing.

The argument that the bakery used was that they did not provide cakes for gay weddings, not that they did not provide service to gay people.

Oh, let's face it: even if a gay person wanted a cake just for any other occasion, they probably would have refused service to him or her for the same reason: simply for being gay.

Like as shared a few pages back, that young Christian singer being chastised by much of her Christian following for being on Ellen DeGeneres's show simply because Ellen is gay.

I mean, if we could get a little playful, here's a couple of storybooth videos that kind of illustrate how this all works:

And @Censored, I know you'll appreciate this one:

 

[Censored]

Eh... its not exactly the same thing.

The argument that the bakery used was that they did not provide cakes for gay weddings, not that they did not provide service to gay people. Its playing semantics, but legally relevant. If they were asked to make a satanic cake or an erotic cake they likely wouldnt have done it either. They declined to provide the service requested, not to serve the person requesting.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders family was ejected based on political views and then when they left they and went across the street the owner of the Red Hen followed her to the next restaurant, taking it too far. They declined to provide a service that they provided to others.

Again, fine line. In either case a private business reserves the right to not provide a type of service or decline to serve an individual.

Would he have been allowed to legally deny making a wedding cake depicting an interracial couple?

 

[Censored]

Eh... its not exactly the same thing.

The argument that the bakery used was that they did not provide cakes for gay weddings, not that they did not provide service to gay people. Its playing semantics, but legally relevant. If they were asked to make a satanic cake or an erotic cake they likely wouldnt have done it either. They declined to provide the service requested, not to serve the person requesting.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders family was ejected based on political views and then when they left they and went across the street the owner of the Red Hen followed her to the next restaurant, taking it too far. They declined to provide a service that they provided to others.

Again, fine line. In either case a private business reserves the right to not provide a type of service or decline to serve an individual.

That’s it, my friend, you and your kind will get the “Whites Only” signs put back in stores yet.