Bobby Jindal Promises Executive Order Allowing Discrimination Against Gay People

originally posted by: mamabeth
a reply to: TrappedPrincess

If you are hungry and thirsty Mama will make you something
to eat and drink.If you need a warm coat I will find one for
you.The only thing I can't do is anything for a gay wedding.

So if there was a gay wedding happening beside you and a series of earthquakes started happening like in Nepal and people needed shelter and food you would deny the patrons and the gay couple of the wedding?

How Christian of you.......

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: dragonridr
For example churches provide homes for families in need. Does this mean they would be required to provide those services to all Maried couples. Would Maria get councilors provided by churches be required to council gay couples.

The Supreme Court's decision has NOTHING to do with churches. Absolutely NOTHING. It's about law. NOTHING about church or religion or anything like that. Clear?

Except that's not really true is it?

Do you know who Donald Verrilli is? I don't expect you do, so let me tell you. Mr. Verilli is the Solicitor General of the United States.

Arguing before the Supreme Court, Mr. Verilli acknowledged the current track towards dhimmihood for American Christians - and argued FOR it.


You are so dishonest that it makes me ill.


Alito:

"Hey Mr. Solicitor General of the United States of Americk - if we overturn State law in favor of Federal 'we know better than you do you stupid southern rednecks,' won't Obama and his little minion be able to come after churches a-la Bob Jones University?"


Verilli (swallowing his own tongue in the process):


"Yes, it's certainly going to be an issue."

a reply to: Seamrog

gee while I go hunting around the internet to learn more about the reference to
Bob Jones University, can you share some light on why it was referenced before I jump the gun and decide that it was a christian college that the gov't forced to take black students?

upon further reading, well all I can say if they haven't infringed on this universisty's freedom of religious expression to date-
declaring the gays should be stoned
blaming the rape victims for their rapes, ect...

well, I don't think that adding gays as a protected group legally is gonna change anything!!

what really blows my mind is reading the first page of reviews on this site.
www.studentsreview.com...

a reply to: dawnstar

Yes, Bob Jones University has an interesting past...

www.jbhe.com...

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Seamrog


well, I don't think that adding gays as a protected group legally is gonna change anything!!

It's not about adding 'gays' as a protected group.

And it most certainly will change MANY things.

Even the minion arguing for it knows this.





And admitted it.

originally posted by: Seamrog
Alito:

"Hey Mr. Solicitor General of the United States of Americk - if we overturn State law in favor of Federal 'we know better than you do you stupid southern rednecks,' won't Obama and his little minion be able to come after churches a-la Bob Jones University?"

"Yes, it's certainly going to be an issue."

Your "quote" is not a quote at all. You made it up. Who's lying now? In fact, Alito didn't mention churches at all. He was talking about colleges or universities.

Who's being dishonest again?

So, here's the ACTUAL and HONEST quote: www.washingtonpost.com... se/

Justice Alito: Well, in the Bob Jones case, the Court held that a college was not entitled to tax­-exempt status if it opposed interracial marriage or interracial dating. So would the same apply to a 10 university or a college if it opposed same­-sex marriage?

General Verrilli: You know, ­­I don’t think I can answer that question without knowing more specifics, but it’s certainly going to be an issue. I don’t deny that. I don’t deny that, Justice Alito. It is­­ it is going to be an issue.

With COLLEGES, not churches.

Not only that, here's where Scalia asked about churches:

Justice Antonin Scalia asked attorney Mary L. Bonauto, who is representing gay couples in the case, whether it is it conceivable that a minister could decline to marry two men if indeed the Supreme Court holds that they have a constitutional right to marry.

“No clergy is forced to marry any couple that they don’t want to marry,” Bonauto said. “We have those protections.”
...
“You agree that that ministers will not have to conduct same-­sex marriages,” Scalia asked Bonauto.

“If they do not want to, that is correct. I believe that is affirmed under the First Amendment,” Bonauto said.

Maybe if you knew a little more about the law and the Constitution, you wouldn't be under the misconceptions that you carry...

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic


Bob Jones University is a RELIGIOUS institution.

It is WHY he was asking the question.

Same reason Roberts asked about married housing - it's not brought up to reference public universities - it is about RELIGIOUS institutions.

You KNOW this and you cannot be honest about it.




Say...why did / does Bob Jones "University" have a tax-exempt status anyway?

a reply to: Seamrog



After reading the reviews of this college and well some of the articles about this college as it operates in the now, I am sorry but I think somethings should change in it!!!

thinkprogress.org...

let me ask you something here....
should colleges and universities that treat our young people in such manner while charging them for that treatment be given tax exempt status to begin with?? I don't mind religious organizations getting a tax exempt status when they are doing something good for the community that they are in but well what that article I posted describes is just plain destructive and unacceptable!!!

a reply to: Seamrog

Housing & Dining Home » Life & Faith » Housing & Dining A thriving community of believers your own age—look forward to one of the most important and exciting aspects of BJU. Housing student playing guitar in his residence hall room Girls in their residence hall room You’ve probably heard a funny story that started with “I had this roommate in college…” Now, it’s your turn to have roommates and to be a roommate. And let’s be honest: the relationships you form in college can impact you far greater than a project, test or paper ever will. So, come ready to learn and to give. Have reasonable expectations, and know you have a unity through Christ (Ephesians 4:2-7). Residence hall life can be a profitable time of faith-building and fellowship with other believers. Your room will be joined with 3 or 4 other rooms to form a discipleship group. Four nights a week, your discipleship group will meet for a time of prayer-focused worship. The other nights, you and your roommates or your hall will have a time of prayer. Don’t worry about living out of a suitcase. Your room will have lots of drawer space, closets and overhead bins for more storage. You’ll also find desks for your computer and shelves for textbooks. There are 4 residence halls for women and 4 for men. All residence halls are equipped with a prayer room, study lounge and vending room. One men’s residence hall and all the women’s residence halls have laundry rooms. In addition, 2 residence halls have music rooms with pianos for practicing voice and instruments.

www.bju.edu...

sounds like Bob Jones university doesn't have dorms for married couples, just men's dorms and women's dorms, and well you can't live off campus if you are under the age of 23....

a reply to: dawnstar

We share a sentiment here.

I would be happy if a giant sinkhole swallowed BJU and the faculty there.

The point here is that the federal government taxed a religious institution.

Relating to the argument before the Supreme Court and religious institutions, it has TREMENDOUS implications - in direct conflict with the OP's repeated claims.

The Solicitor General ADMITTED it!

originally posted by: Seamrog
Bob Jones University is a RELIGIOUS institution.

I know that. But it's not a church, which is what I said (and you accused me of lying). A "religious university" is NOT a church. And in 1983 the Supreme Court found that the first amendment did not protect the tax exempt status of a religious university whose practices are contrary to a compelling government public policy. That happened in 1983.

It is WHY he was asking the question.

He asked the question to instill fear into gullible right-wingers who don't know the law.

You KNOW this and you cannot be honest about it.

I am being 100% honest.

Say...why did / does Bob Jones "University" have a tax-exempt status anyway?

From now on, you can do your own research... 501(c)(3) Organizations

AND because they dropped their policy against inter-racial dating/marriage.

The ban on interracial dating was lifted in 2000 after Dr. Bob Jones III, following a media uproar prompted by the visit of presidential candidate George W. Bush, announced its nullification on Larry King Live.

Source

a reply to: Seamrog

Say...why did / does Bob Jones "University" have a tax-exempt status anyway?

because the gov't couldn't just tell them how to run their religious institution outright but they could pressure them to change since the university did open up an avenue to do this -- applying for tax exempt status!!!
don't ya know, such things come with strings attached!

one could always just say okay forget it and give up that status ya know and keep on going the way they want to.

I've got to say this....
If a women who wants her insurance to cover birth control in her employer provided insurance is working for a company that has a religious belief against birth control is told that she can just find a new employer if she doesn't like it.

if a grieving family can be told to just find another minister to perform the service for the deceased because of "religious beliefs" 24 hours before the funeral is scheduled.

if someone can be told that they can travel an extra 20 miles shopping around for flowers for a wedding....

well by god the danged religious organization can just forfeit the danged tax break if they don't like the strings that are attached to it!!!

what the heck that women who wants her insurance to cover birth control might just have a few kids she's already caring for and just doesn't want to die and childbirth and leave them with no caretaker and that job might just be what is keeping the family above water and the cost of that birth control might be just enough to put them under water!!! and the gov't just might not be giving them a danged thing, including tax breaks!!!

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

He asked the question to instill fear into gullible right-wingers who don't know the law.

This is how I know this:

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

I am being 100% honest.

is pure BS.


If you can't admit that that question was not about universities, then you bias speaks far louder than your protests.

edit on 22-5-2015 by Seamrog because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2015 by Seamrog because: (no reason given)

a reply to: Seamrog

Here is the rest of my post that wouldn't show up above:





This is how I know this:

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

I am being 100% honest.

is pure BS.


If you can't admit that that question was not about universities, then you bias speaks far louder than your protests.

originally posted by: Seamrog
Relating to the argument before the Supreme Court and religious institutions, it has TREMENDOUS implications - in direct conflict with the OP's repeated claims.

I have made no claim about "religious institutions" as regards the Supreme Court's marriage equality decision. If you have to lie to make an argument, your position is not strong...

The Supreme Court will decide whether the Constitution protects the right of same-sex couples to marry in this country. That's it. There may be lawsuits following about religious institutions, but this decision is about marriage equality and that is all. It's NOT about churches, not about religious institutions, not about police brutality and not about pet ownership. It's about marriage equality and that is all.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

It's about marriage equality and that is all.

Sorry - I demonstrated otherwise.

It certainly is not about universities, but apparently Alito brought it up for the benefit of 'gullible right wingers.'

Thanks for clearing that all up for us with reason and logic.

originally posted by: Seamrog
If you can't admit that that question was not about universities, then you bias speaks far louder than your protests.

The question WAS about universities! Specifically Bob Jones university, a religious institution. NOT A CHURCH. They are very different.

But a question in the discussion doesn't mean the decision is about churches!

I said: The Supreme Court's decision has NOTHING to do with churches.. And that's TRUE.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic


I have made no claim about "religious institutions" as regards the Supreme Court's marriage equality decision. If you have to lie to make an argument, your position is not strong...

If you have to split hairs to dance around your own words.....

The Supreme Court's decision has NOTHING to do with churches.

then your position is not strong.

LOL.

I guess a church is no longer a religious institution with it is convenient, and a university is not a university, it is a religious institution when it is convenient.