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.

 

Six GOP Hopefuls Vow To Enshrine Anti-Gay Discrimination Into Law

page: 2
43
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Do you believe...


No. I do not. (Thought that was obvious. But appreciate you asking for clarification.)

Do you??




posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: NthOther


The same "sides" have been debating the same fake issues for generations and things only get worse, never better, regardless of who's in power.

You have to be intelligent enough to have noticed this by now.

Yes, I'm intelligent enough.
That doesn't change the fact that half of all people are of below-average intelligence, by definition. I'm not trying to preach to the choir. I know who my intended audience is. If even ONE of them takes heed, it can make a difference.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

So you do believe a government should not taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that: (1) marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage?"



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

Yes, I'm intelligent enough.
That doesn't change the fact that half of all people are of below-average intelligence, by definition. I'm not trying to preach to the choir. I know who my intended audience is. If even ONE of them takes heed, it can make a difference.

Take heed to do what?

Vote Democrat (or Sanders, specifically)?

Everything I said went right over your head.
edit on 12/19/15 by NthOther because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   
The First Amendment Defense Act legalizes discrimination, which is horrible. The examples given in the O.P. are realistic, given my research into this type of thing in the past. I hope nothing like this ever passes, because it basically lets someone be a bully based on their religious beliefs.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Believes? No. A government should never take action against anybody for what they believe.

Acts? This one is a little more gray. If they "act" by going to the religious center of their choice and praying, or talking to people about how they feel on this or any other issue, then also No.

If they "act" by violating secular laws regarding discrimination, or if they attempt to do harm to somebody, then Yes.

It is impossible to have a law like this without violating the very same First Amendment these mooks are pretending to defend. Since only some religions have a problem with gay people, then any law along these lines favors those, and only those, religions, which is a clear violation of the First Amendment clause regarding establishment of a state-preferred religion.


+2 more 
posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Do you believe that a government should be "taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that: (1) marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage?"


I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I'd like to respond anyway.

I would say "no". Any action taken against the religious person should not be discriminatory. In other words, anyone who takes the same action should pay the same price. For example, if a religious person, whose job it is to issue marriage licenses for the state, refuses to do so because of their religious convictions, they should be punished the same as ANYONE whose job it is to issue marriage licenses for the state, and refuses to do so for any reason.

Religious people should be treated THE SAME as everyone else.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Open_Minded Skeptic

So you agree with the law?


+3 more 
posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

What are you attempting - to confuse me with buried rhetorical meaning?


So you do believe a government should not taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction



My OP speaks clearly enough. The additional sources are provided.
I do NOT believe that government should ENABLE discrimination against certain citizens by other citizens.

If you're trying a round-about way of getting me to say something you can misconstrue as "supporting terrorism" (which many religions are guilty of), I'm not taking the bait.



edit on 12/19/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

So then you agree with the proposed First Amendment Defence act?



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: NthOther

No, it didn't. You give yourself too much credit.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I'm asking you if you agree with the law or not. Your OP is clearly against it. Therefore you believe the government should discriminate against religious people for those reasons.


+7 more 
posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I BELIEVE THE GOVERNMENT should NOT ALLOW religious folks to act like assholes to other people and call it "religious conviction."




posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

That's tyranny.


+3 more 
posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

So then you agree with the proposed First Amendment Defense act?

The only people who would support this are the ones that spit on the constitution and think their religious beliefs should overrule everything. So do you agree with the proposed law?


+5 more 
posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

That's tyranny.

No it's called equality. America was never meant to be ruled by religion.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

meh.

"Act like an asshole, get treated like an asshole."

That's existence in society.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   
a reply to: buster2010




No it's called equality. America was never meant to be ruled by religion.


So you believe a federal government should be taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that: (1) marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage?"



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs




meh.

"Act like an asshole, get treated like an asshole."

That's existence in society.



Exactly. A free market will sort it out. People will stop buying their services.


+2 more 
posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I'm asking you if you agree with the law or not. Your OP is clearly against it. Therefore you believe the government should discriminate against religious people for those reasons.

Enforcing the law is not discrimination. It is the religious people that are doing the discriminating.



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join