It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Since gay marriage, i dont see seperation of church and state

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   
HRC (Human Rights Campaign) --- BEYOND MARRIAGE EQUALITY.




​Throughout 2015, the Human Rights Campaign will endorse and fight for a federal LGBT non-discrimination bill that will address discrimination in credit, education, employment, federal funding, housing, jury service and public accommodations. This report provides the historical foundation for such vitally important legislation. www.hrc.org...




posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Annee

Not everyone is a federal employee.

Yes Federal Employees that are LGBTQ are protected.



It might be Washington state, but I can not hire or fire based on sexual orientation, a future employer can't even ask, so it is protected here.


Some states have anti-discrimination laws that include LGBTQ.

31 states do not. Not only do they not have LGBTQ anti-discrimination laws, some are enacting laws to make it a legal right to discriminate.


edit on 12-7-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee



Thank you.

I suggest everyone read the report if you're interested



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

That's for federal government employees only. Darth_Prime is correct.

As regards housing, the source CLEARLY states that a gay person MAY be protected, but not under their LGBT status, but because they are seen as "disabled" or their "sex" is being discriminated against. If someone wants to refuse to rent to a couple "because they're gay", they can.

Since the Fair Housing Act lists " race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, and familial status", it should also list LGBT.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: AutumnWitch657

Specious is a word, it means 'apparently good or right though lacking real merit; superficially pleasing or plausible'.



if i had to describe america...or even humans...in two words....pretentiously specious.

thanks for the vocab.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

I do not share your cynicism.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Yes, thank you



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
We are not a protected class, in 31 states you can get fired for being GLBTQ+, you can get denied services and housing/property, because the states lack the civil rights laws, and we are not federally protected. GLBTQ+ people still have issues with adoption, Gay and Bisexual men can't donate blood, on top of all the other hate crimes, abuse and murder of GLBTQ+ people.

Do you seriously not understand that this ruling didn't "add" anything, it ruled that the states were violating the 14th amendment by not allowing same-sex marriages ...

Seriously the ignorance of people lately is outstanding


I respect what you say and I agree...but did you expect any type of different opinions from those on ATS after this ruling?...not me...."we" the ones that agree with the ruling, are now the product of subtle influence by the devil....I've seen this said in our own newspaper here.... the "we" I refer to, have no independent thought, no independent empathy, no independent critical-thinking skills......we are now ruled BY THE DEVIL!!!!
so now, we have been officially declared by the evangelicals as being "those wicked people".....which lets them off the hook spiritually, for committing any harm that may come to the rest of us. the evangelicals will be seen (in their eyes) as fighting evil or the devil.
edit on 12-7-2015 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Seperation of Church and State was thrown out a long time before Gay Marriage.

How about putting "In God We Trust" on US currency, or adding the words "Under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance?

The Church has been forcing their crap on us for decades, now turn around is fair play.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

Neither of those were done by the church.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: babybunnies

Neither of those were done by the church.



those were done by religious zealots in government, who chose not to honor the intent of the first amendment.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
We are not a protected class, in 31 states you can get fired for being GLBTQ+, you can get denied services and housing/property, because the states lack the civil rights laws, and we are not federally protected. GLBTQ+ people still have issues with adoption, Gay and Bisexual men can't donate blood, on top of all the other hate crimes, abuse and murder of GLBTQ+ people.

Do you seriously not understand that this ruling didn't "add" anything, it ruled that the states were violating the 14th amendment by not allowing same-sex marriages ...

Seriously the ignorance of people lately is outstanding


I respect what you say and I agree...but did you expect any type of different opinions from those on ATS after this ruling?


Actually, IMO - the support for LGBTQ on ATS in the last 5 years has significantly swung toward support.

Yes, there is still a handful of Extreme Religious on ATS (which still surprises me), but they now mostly get shut down in the Equality threads.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx
...we are now ruled BY THE DEVIL!!!!


I HATE it when that happens!


originally posted by: babybunnies
The Church has been forcing their crap on us for decades, now turn around is fair play.


While it's true that the church forces it's tenets into law, this ruling on marriage isn't "turnabout" or anything like that. It has nothing to do with the church and the church isn't affected in the least. I know you know that, but I wanted it to be clear to the OP (and others), since they are under the mistaken impression that this ruling is somehow involved with the church. (Since the OP hasn't returned, I can only assume their position.)



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
Yes, there is still a handful of Extreme Religious on ATS (which still surprises me), but they now mostly get shut down in the Equality threads.


Unfortunately, they usually leave the thread, instead of being educated. If they would only take the time to understand what's being said, they would (hopefully) get it. But instead, they leave the thread and go grumble to others of like mind, about how "the church is being forced to marry gay people now"... "slippery slope" ... and "the downfall of society"...



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx
those were done by religious zealots in government, who chose not to honor the intent of the first amendment.


No, they were done by an overwhelming vote in Congress both times so I doubt it was just 'religious zealots'.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: babybunnies

Neither of those were done by the church.



those were done by religious zealots in government, who chose not to honor the intent of the first amendment.


Putting God on US coins and currency was done by Congress.

There are continuous lawsuits by proponents of Separation of Church and State to remove it. Which I believe will happen some day.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Since the Fair Housing Act lists " race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, and familial status", it should also list LGBT.


Why only LGBT too? Begin gay or straight are behaviors so should we also list all behaviors too?

Can a gay person discriminate against a straight person and not rent them a place? I'm not saying any of this is right but people discriminate all the time, everyday. How a person looks is one big one and I'm not sure if that is truly wrong to do though there are examples we could all say are wrong.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
We are not a protected class, in 31 states you can get fired for being GLBTQ+, you can get denied services and housing/property, because the states lack the civil rights laws, and we are not federally protected. GLBTQ+ people still have issues with adoption, Gay and Bisexual men can't donate blood, on top of all the other hate crimes, abuse and murder of GLBTQ+ people.

Do you seriously not understand that this ruling didn't "add" anything, it ruled that the states were violating the 14th amendment by not allowing same-sex marriages ...

Seriously the ignorance of people lately is outstanding


I respect what you say and I agree...but did you expect any type of different opinions from those on ATS after this ruling?


Actually, IMO - the support for LGBTQ on ATS in the last 5 years has significantly swung toward support.

Yes, there is still a handful of Extreme Religious on ATS (which still surprises me), but they now mostly get shut down in the Equality threads.


your description of a "Handful" may be right....to me, I think there is more silence, than voiced opinion. ruling by religious faith, has resulted in millions of deaths in human history, and it's far from being over for the religious fanatics.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

There are continuous lawsuits by proponents of Separation of Church and State to remove it. Which I believe will happen some day.


That would be quite difficult considering there are three major Supreme Court decisions that establish precedent that the words are more ceremonial in nature and in no way establish a religion.



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

No, they were done by an overwhelming vote in Congress both times so I doubt it was just 'religious zealots'.


When we look at separation of Church and State we need to understand this comes from the fact that England had a State religion and it discriminated against all other religions. The separation was more to keep the Government out of Religion and not the other way around. Religion has always been a part of our Government, just not a State sponsored religion. When 78% of America are Christians it would be hard to suggest that the Government would have zero religious influence.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join