Obama Administration: We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith

Originally posted by TheComte
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Abortion is legal in the United States. The radical Christians have to get over it and move on. That war was fought and lost. There are no more battles.

But the radical Christians will just keep re-opening the abortion debate until they get their way. That's what I mean when I say they are intent on imposing their beliefs on others. It's all they think about. They can't accept the fact that abortions are legal.

Umm.. Who is imposing their belief here?

The status quo has been undisturbed and without problem since Abortion was made legal. No one would challenge that here. What has changed has changed 100% by the administration. "Radical Christians" as you describe a vast majority of this nation, did not change a thing here. Change has been FORCED on them at the point of Government order and mandate by threat of compounding fines. (financial ruin)

Now...That would be a 1st amendment violation.

I'm not alone in seeing it this way. This is why states, including Missouri, have outlawed the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, outlawed Insurance exchanges in any form and made it illegal for anyone outside the state to penalize a resident OF the state for NON-compliance with any provision of this ignorant attempt to force federal mandate and control of Health Care onto the states with or without their consent.

States wouldn't have outlawed Obamacare as they have in MANY cases ...if this was all nice and Kosher. It's FAR from it....and it's baffling how many people love this man so much they can't see what even states are willing to go head to head with the Federal Government over. The President badly over-stepped his authority here.

(Of course.... Obamacare waivers ARE issued... hundreds of them...but not to Christian business. )

reply to post by CB328

Well, the exemption applies to Moslems and the following:

Other excluded groups include Amish, American Indians, and Christian Scientists.

I would agree that there is some fear mongering and a little bit of misinformation but both sides do it.

The worst was when they ALL teamed up against Ron Paul, Libs and Repubs. All of a sudden, the "liberal" media was pro-war and couldnt care less about individual liberties...

reply to post by pavelivanov22
Ok i just have to stop and point something out to the whole lot of ya.......Please stop believing that these people have total power.....they only have what we allow them to,Even if the fact sheet of life is telling all of us that they have more wealth and weapons.In truth they are people who are making mistakes against their own kind, and the universe will balance this all out in the end.Believe in yourselves to make a change....if one person were to make a change no matter what the cost then...history has shown those people succeeded in their endeavors.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by jimmyx

 

...yeah... so what?...it applies...and why do i think that?....because the racism that everybody thought had finally been tapped down and been put to bed in history...came roaring back when obama was elected...i'm a white male, and even i can see it

Absolutely,
false, there may be those who are, but how do you explain the rampant Bush hatred?
or,
Palin hatred?

The only reason race is an issue is because you people made it an issue.

An issue I didn't even see coming until I was first called a racist, it made me physically ill that people would think that of me, this is why so many people keep quiet.

to me, "hate" is a strong word...and i never hated bush or palin, nor have i heard (unless it was some smartass on TV or youtube) or talked to people that "hated" them. they didn't like or agree with their policies, or political philosophies...

are you black? if not, you might want to have a serious and sober discussion with them to see if racism is alive and well

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Really.....

Are you trying to suggest that Hostess was doing so well in business that it decided to file for Bankruptcy?

Does that mean millions of Homeowners have done so well with their mortgage payments that they've decided to go into Foreclosure?

As Hostess is obviously off topic, and we're both bound to get our posts deleted, I'll give you the last word.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Umm.. Who is imposing their belief here?

It's pretty clear that the owners of Hobby Lobby do not want to follow federal law and want to impose their radical Christian beliefs on their employees.

Originally posted by flice
LAW superseeds religion ALWAYS... otherwise the world would be an even more awful place.

People guided by religion are in a way psychologically sick and brainwashed and cannot be trusted to perform sensible decisions. That christian idiots choose to believe that life begins during conception should not mean that their employees should be subject to the same insane train of thoughts.

If the Hobby Lobby choose to employ people who still have a free choice in their own life, then Hobby Lobby should without a doubt be subject to the laws that safeguard the people that are employed and not some made bull# from 2000 years ago.

Everytime I hear religious people open their mouth about their ignorant beliefs in fairytales and superstition it forces me to instantly vomit.

We really need much much harder laws towards ANY religion to keep the general population safe from their brainwash!

Wow, so according to your logic, a full 84% of the world are psychologically sick and brainwashed, and can't be trusted to perform sensible decisions! Good thing you showed up to set everyone straight!

reply to post by murphy22
e

ya, I know, we're doomed!!!

they are, have been using people's proverty to get their foot into the door so they can decide such personal matters, and whle they have been doing this they have also been busy creating more and more proverty by allowing inflation to run rampant, even ignoring it in the statistics, shipping jobs overseas, ect. both parties are guilty in one way or another!!

i have been to churches from many denominations, you cannot go for long without hearing a good sermon about marriage...
ya know wives obey your husbands in all things....husbands, love your wives...
I have yet to hear the sermon that alleviates the wife from obedience if their husband's desires for something that actually harms her overshadows that love he has for her. I have also interacted with many christians on boards such as this, and I am amazed at just how many people are out there who actually believe that come hell or high water, the wife should be obedient...IN ALL THINGS1

so, to me, those churches, those christians who can't find it in their heart to give women the permission to say no to thier husbands, but demand obedience instead. not only are not really serious when they tell those women to just keep their legs crossed, they have no business telling them that!!
to be honest....in my opinion, in a purely christian persective...this whole problem should be laid at the men's feet!!
they shouldn;t be insisting the women give them the goodies and make the babies that they cannot support, or don't want. they should be more sensitive to the women's desires and not so insistent...they should be better leaders!!!
yes, i had a bad experience, like I said, sometimes they church doctrines themselves can step on a person's rights to act according to their faith!!
the last thing I would tolerate is a boss baratting me because I didn't give my husband obedience and respect he was "endowed" by the creator with!!!

Originally posted by BritofTexas
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Really.....

Are you trying to suggest that Hostess was doing so well in business that it decided to file for Bankruptcy?

Does that mean millions of Homeowners have done so well with their mortgage payments that they've decided to go into Foreclosure?

As Hostess is obviously off topic, and we're both bound to get our posts deleted, I'll give you the last word.

There ya go.. Inventing what I said again.. Look, You're deliberately misrepresenting what I said now. Not even gray area on that anymore. You've failed to link a single instance to back what your saying as you've repeatedly stated I'm misreading or misrepresenting this. I've stated 3 times now, in detail, what happened.......yet your opinion to call me wrong is supposed to be worth anything? No... Link a point of basis for your calling me wrong ...again and again and again .... Or drop it.

Accusation is what demands more than opinion for proof.

I don't even understand why you're running clear off on this side trail anyway. My point ..and ONLY point...in citing this example was to note how in this case, like Obama today, the needs of the MINORITY are pushed down the throats of a majority with total disregard and a reckless one at that. In doing so, the entire war is lost to fight one battle. You work at Hostess? This Union? Your fighting this ...and from a bad position at that, as if this total side line example is a personal crusade? Oh well.. Links or we're done. I'm sick of being called a fabricator by a different name with nothing but pure opinion offered to support it.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

The status quo has been undisturbed and without problem since Abortion was made legal. No one would challenge that here. What has changed has changed 100% by the administration. "Radical Christians" as you describe a vast majority of this nation, did not change a thing here. Change has been FORCED on them at the point of Government order and mandate by threat of compounding fines. (financial ruin)

No, "radical christians" are NOT a vast majority of this nation, not even a SLIGHT majority of this nation. If they were a majority, we wouldn't be having this conversation because that "evil obama who is out to destroy everything they believe in" would not have been elected. The people doing this are not Christians, they are not a majority and they will not succeed. They are an extremist group just like the other extremist group that attacks us as a country. They are no different from the jihadists, they are cut from the same cloth.

If they were a "vast majority", then they would have their way, Obama wouldn't be president, all the opposition to them would have been squashed and we'd be living in a theocracy because that's what they want. They are not a majority at all, THANK GOD!

reply to post by TheComte

Indeed. Hobby Lobby won't violate what they see as Natural law to follow Man's law. Right behind them, is the State of Missouri by Constitutional amendment...and Texas...and others. Obama has just his first fight with this private business. It goes Government vs. Government in a real fight fairly soon .....because neither side appears able to give and after passing the Constitutional Amendment in our state? It's flat out the law that we, as a state will NOT follow federal law. Period. Full Stop.

So Hobby Lobby is in good company and far from alone. They've simply come up as the first. it's going to be a looong Spring.

reply to post by kthxbai


we wouldn't have the financial mess we find ourselves in either..
no bank bailouts, no liar's loans, no over appraised home values, no, AAA credit rating giving to crap securities because well...
let's just hope we make our millions before the house of cards fall....


all that took alot of immoral people....

I feel that as crhistians they are commanded to follow the law of the land,
so they will be just fine, following what jesus told em to, however this has
and never will actually be about what they believe, it is the special treatment
they want as always, their book would allow them to follow the law just fine
without even breaking any commandments, i for one do not see the problem.......

Originally posted by kthxbai

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by kthxbai

 

But alas, he's got a D in front of his name and a dark hue to his skin, he must be the anti-christ as a result.

Seriously?

Yes, seriously. And you should be ashamed for it.

Ashamed for what?

reply to post by kthxbai


lol..... I wonder... How is it you reconcile your viscous approach against pretty much anything Christian in more than simply name here ...with the fact the Amish and Muslims ARE getting waivers? You know... there is another Constitutional amendment we're seeing violated here as well. It has to do with Equal Protection. You can't give to one group and slam another on the very same item. Although. by the highly selective issuance of waivers ...and SOME of those on strictly religious grounds....equal protection is blown clear out of the water.

So.. There are deep issues on this from more than one angle...but I'm sure there is a justification for all of it... some reasoning that makes that okay too.

(Imagine if Bush had forced something and gave waivers to Christians but not Muslims and the others? He'd have had calls for impeachment I'll bet. Baseless for that..but the calls would have been deafening)

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by kthxbai

 

lol..... I wonder... How is it you reconcile your viscous approach against pretty much anything Christian in more than simply name here ...with the fact the Amish and Muslims ARE getting waivers? You know... there is another Constitutional amendment we're seeing violated here as well. It has to do with Equal Protection. You can't give to one group and slam another on the very same item. Although. by the highly selective issuance of waivers ...and SOME of those on strictly religious grounds....equal protection is blown clear out of the water.

So.. There are deep issues on this from more than one angle...but I'm sure there is a justification for all of it... some reasoning that makes that okay too.

(Imagine if Bush had forced something and gave waivers to Christians but not Muslims and the others? He'd have had calls for impeachment I'll bet. Baseless for that..but the calls would have been deafening)

edit on 31-12-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

Apparently they actually live up to what they say they'll live up to instead of wanting waivers for some things and protections for others. You can't have it both ways

I don't know about any of their supposed waivers, please extrapolate by telling us what those waivers are, what they allow for and what the conditions are. The waivers always have conditions, not just a blind waiver given because somebody says "gimme a waiver cuz I not wantin ta dew whut u is tellin me ta dew!!". There is always more to it, please cite these said waivers and I'll address them with the proper information.

Originally posted by jazztrance
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

Sorry, but taking the opposite extremist view is still an extremist view. Granted, prenancy cannot be determined the morning after sexual intercourse, but at the same time, calling people "retarts" isn't going to solve anything either, especially when you are trying to insult someone's intelligence and do it with a display of non-intelligence of your own

reply to post by kthxbai

I don't know about any of their supposed waivers, please extrapolate by telling us what those waivers are, what they allow for and what the conditions are.

Someone else can do that.. I think I'm about done here. (The point and info you want was made earlier in the thread, BTW.. We're down to repeating things the 2nd and 3rd times..) I'm sure I'll be called this that and more for disengaging at this point but I've honestly made about all the points I have to legitimately make in a debate forum. I've replied to just about everything as well.

Now, it's moving fast from debate to argument, if not fight. I don't do running fights and I never have ...although I've probably come closer here than I really ever like to.

Take care on the thread all! It's been fun...but I'm getting off the ride before it hits the loops and drops ahead.

reply to post by pavelivanov22

Then neither should corporations be afforded the rights and freedoms of an individual personage. They can''t have it both ways.