WATCH: Ted Cruz tells Iowa group that gays are waging ‘jihad’ against Christians

a reply to: tothetenthpower

I told you where to find facts about the "Twitter Ten" gay Mafia attacks. Obviously, you didn't go research on Rush Limbaugh website.

Maybe you are one.

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Boadicea

Under the Constitution, the government is not allowed to deny service to anyone -- due process and all. Under the Constition, the people are allowed to deny service for any reason.

Could you cite that section of the Constitution please?

Thank you!

Due process by government: 14th Amendment.

Denial of Service by the people: 9th Amendment

The government can't deny service because of the 14th Amendment? Well, that's generally true, but not specifically true.

The Ninth Amendment? Really?

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people

So these "other rights" would come through English common law? Like the laws of public accommodation?

No part of the Constitution or any American or English law allows any one in businesses held out as public accommodation to deny service to "anyone at any time" MERELY "for any reason." Period.

a reply to: kaylaluv

It's not about right or wrong.

It's about polarizing and division. Us vs Them.

It's symptomatic to what we even see on ATS. Personally? I'm not a hard-core conservative. Hell, in real life I may be more liberal than you on some issues. But when we debate topics, we tend to polarize ourselves to argue a point.

Cruz is taking advantage of this. There is nothing "rational" in politics any longer.

It is chilling to me that this is only "Phase I."

Random Chance, preserve us from politicians.

a reply to: Granite

Do you honestly think that Rush Limbaugh is a good source of unbiased information about this?

ETA: I can't actually tell if you were serious...or just yanking me.

~Tenth

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Boadicea

Is this not a struggle against unbelievers in gay marriage? Is this not a war against religious freedom and therefore our Constitution which guarantees our religious freedom? Rationalize it any way you choose, but it is what it is.

It's not, because Christianity isn't some catch all term for bigotry and misplaced senses of moral authority.

I'm really not understanding the point you're trying to make here. I referred to religious freedom, which includes Christians but is not limited to Christians. I also know that there are Christians who can validate gay unions within the Church historically and theoretically. I am also assuming (though I haven't asked personally) that there are people of every faith and religion who do and don't support gay marriage. The founding fathers of the Christian faith were also well aware of the persecutions of some Christians by others. But, yes, there is in fact a very public and very ugly struggle between Christians and supporters of gay weddings. What am I missing?

There is no 'jihad' against the teachings of the church, your right to believe what you want or do as you please in a private setting.

The issue is the public sphere. Christians want the right to discriminate and deny services, based on some notion of moral high ground or authority.

We all have a right -- the natural right, the Constitutional right -- to practice our religious as we see fit. We all have the right to provide our services -- whether for free or for pay -- when, where and how we see fit. We do not have the right to force anyone else to do anything for any reason at any time. Our rights are what we can do for and to ourselves by ourselves. If we have to force someone to do something, it's not a right -- it's involuntary servitude forced upon others by bullies.

That's illegal. Always has been, always will be.

Your constitutional right to have 'freedom of religion' does not include the public sphere.

Actually, no. The 9th Amendment says otherwise. Until just recently, the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason was the law. The public accommodation laws were passed in direct violation of the letter and spirit of the Constitution in order to use force under color of law. Forcing someone to do something at the point of the gun -- and that is the end result of ALL laws -- isn't a right. Unless, of course, one believes might makes right.

And we wonder why cops are out of control? It's because we've already told the world that freedom is dead; it's all about what we can force others to do. Might makes right after all...

a reply to: tothetenthpower

I never am sarcastic online or offline.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Boadicea

The Constitution guarantees that the government will not establish a religion nor restrict the free exercise thereof.

Yes.

That doesn't mean and never has that the religious get to decide which laws they will be subject to.

It also means that government cannot pass laws that force the religious to violate their religion... like forcing religious people to bake cakes for gay weddings.

Religious faith doesn't elevate anyone into an extra-citizen status wither they can bid and dispose which laws they will follow.

Of course not... And election to a legislative post doesn't elevate anyone into an extra-constitutional status whither they can bid and dispose which natural and Constitutional laws they can violate.... at the point of a gun.

Religious faith does not bestow special rights.

Neither does homosexuality. That's just ludicrous. Do I have the ability to say no? Yup. That makes it my right. Period.

the real problem is he keeps getting voted into office....what's wrong with those people down there?....too much fraking chemicals in their drinking water?....coexit-laced seafood being served to already mentally stunted Texans?....do these voters listen to what their own representatives say time after time?....this isn't a one-off, this is ted Cruz's belief. and then they have Louie Gohmert, again from Texas, what a box-of-rocks flesh-pile he is.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

The government can't deny service because of the 14th Amendment? Well, that's generally true, but not specifically true.

The Ninth Amendment? Really?

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people

So these "other rights" would come through English common law? Like the laws of public accommodation?

No. Our rights come from nature and Nature's God. Can I say no? Yes, I can. That's a natural right. Unlike someone who must use force to compel me to do their will.

No part of the Constitution or any American or English law allows any one in businesses held out as public accommodation to deny service to "anyone at any time" MERELY "for any reason." Period.

The Constitution does tell the people what they can or cannot do for ourselves by ourselves. The Constitution tells government what they can and cannot do to us. If/when laws are passed that violate the Constitution and our natural rights, it is only under "color of law."

originally posted by: Seamrog

originally posted by: tothetenthpower


And in all reality, none of what the LGBT community has done, has affected Christians in any way, but offend their misplaced sense of moral authority. Me marrying a man does not undermine your marriage, unless you somehow allow it to.

~Tenth

Here is your bias.

You simply not see - despite the widespread news coverage of it - where Christians are being targeted and persecuted by homosexualists.

I understand that you want what you consider your 'marriage' to be accepted and recognized.

Your issue is with God - He is the one who set the rules for our lives.

Leave Christians alone and let them follow God's law.

Three points here. Firstly, there's no such word as 'Homosexualists'. Secondly I'm an atheist. Which god are you talking about again? Thirdly why the use by Cruz of the word 'Jihad', other than to use religion as a crude electoral weapon?

a reply to: Boadicea

What am I missing?

My point is that the most vocal, if not the only really vocal group are conservative Christians. I agree that there are some that we don't hear about that have disagreements I'm sure.

We all have a right -- the natural right, the Constitutional right -- to practice our religious as we see fit.

Yes, in private settings.

We all have the right to provide our services -- whether for free or for pay -- when, where and how we see fit.

Yes, in private settings.

We do not have the right to force anyone else to do anything for any reason at any time.

There are plenty of instances where the Gov can force you to do things.

If we have to force someone to do something, it's not a right -- it's involuntary servitude forced upon others by bullies.

Being in business, is servitude. You are providing a service. You don't get to discriminate. That's why we have protections for certain things.

Forcing someone to do something at the point of the gun -- and that is the end result of ALL laws -- isn't a right. Unless, of course, one believes might makes right.

And we wonder why cops are out of control? It's because we've already told the world that freedom is dead; it's all about what we can force others to do. Might makes right after all...

I agree with you on ALL of this, trust me, I'm more of a natural law kind of guy, which these laws didn't quite exist. But they do.

And as they stand, what Christians want, is illegal. Until such a time that changes, they need to follow the law.


~Tenth

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Thirdly why the use by Cruz of the word 'Jihad', other than to use religion as a crude electoral weapon?

Seriously! That word is not part of our natural vernacular, and I don't want it be. Very poor decision in my opinion.

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Thirdly why the use by Cruz of the word 'Jihad', other than to use religion as a crude electoral weapon?

Seriously! That word is not part of our natural vernacular, and I don't want it be. Very poor decision in my opinion.

I'm sure he must have used it deliberately. 'Jihad' sounds a) foreign and b) threatening in a terrorist kind of way. So Cruz decided to try and use it to his electoral advantage to jazz the base up a bit, in the process reminding yet more people what a total tool he is.
Which makes me wonder - who does he think makes up his base vote? The angry insanely Christian old homophobic bigot part of the electorate?

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Granite
Do you honestly think that Rush Limbaugh is a good source of unbiased information about this?
~Tenth

So paraphrasing Rush:
He hired private investigators to understand attacks on him and his sponsors for years.
The results were just ten Twitter accounts generated thousand of tweets using an allgorithm shared amongst themselves.
He knows their names, addresses, and profession.

They were the first volley of hate on the Indiana pizza business...generated two hours after TV broadcasted story in TINY market.
Then goes instantly viral?

Jesus would be so proud, the sad fact is extremist in islam and christianity both hate gays, they have so much in common.

a reply to: Granite

So you believe there's a Gay Twitter Cabal that's entire purpose is to harass and otherwise make huge issues out of Conservatives refusing to have homosexuality rammed down their throats?

Can you actually link any of that from Rush? I'm curious to see how he went about investigation this and the subsequent results.

( I don't really believe that, but it's certainly possible, weirder things have happened on the internetz.)

Is that not the same as say, the Family Research Council or any of the other think tank groups who do the same thing for the other side?

~Tenth

a reply to: dukeofjive696969

CHRISTIANS DON'T HATE GAY PEOPLE!

Give it a rest.

a reply to: angeldoll

Good one.

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: dukeofjive696969

CHRISTIANS DON'T HATE GAY PEOPLE!

Give it a rest.

Most Christians don't even know what their religion is about, I am pretty sure it is not about singing and eating cupcakes and tea.