The Irony of Hate

Discussions about politics and goings on around the world. (Please keep discussions civil!)
User avatar
edwardmurphy
Ultimate Member
Posts: 2302
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2015 10:45 am
Christian: No
Sex: Male
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
Has liked: 196 times
Been liked: 134 times

Re: The Irony of Hate

#16

Post by edwardmurphy » Sun Nov 13, 2016 5:12 pm

I don't think that Pence is hateful and I agree that he has faith and conviction, but he's still a bigot. If you seek to withhold rights that the majority has always enjoyed from some specific minority because you don't like how they live their lives then you're a bigot, plain and simple. That's the definition of the word. I don't like it when people try to use their religious convictions to justify denying other people their rights, and I like it even less when they bill it as protecting themselves from persecution. And I think we're going to see a lot of that from the Trump Administration. It won't come from the Donald himself - he's indifferent to such things - but from the social conservatives that he's putting in positions of power.

DBowling
Prestigious Senior Member
Posts: 1649
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 8:23 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Has liked: 29 times
Been liked: 182 times

Re: The Irony of Hate

#17

Post by DBowling » Sun Nov 13, 2016 5:39 pm

edwardmurphy wrote:I don't think that Pence is hateful and I agree that he has faith and conviction, but he's still a bigot. If you seek to withhold rights that the majority has always enjoyed from some specific minority because you don't like how they live their lives then you're a bigot, plain and simple.
What rights do you believe that Pence tried to withhold from a specific minority?

If you are talking about marriage, that was never about rights of people or withholding rights.
That was about whether or not our America legal system would redefine the fundamental historical meaning of marriage to support the agenda of a specific group of people.

The Supreme Court did narrowly choose to redefine marriage within the context of the American legal system.
And since that ruling I am unaware of any attempt by Pence to prevent or overturn gay marriage.

That's the definition of the word. I don't like it when people try to use their religious convictions to justify denying other people their rights, and I like it even less when they bill it as protecting themselves from persecution.
And I think this is where you have a blind spot. You are totally missing the legitimate concern that the faith community has about our culture and Government trampling the First Amendment rights of the faith community. This is not some unrealized theoretical concern, this is something that is already occurring.

I agree that no one has the right to trample on the Constitutional rights of any American citizen. But that extends to the faith community in America just as much as it extends to the LGBT community. It's just as wrong to trample the First Amendment rights of the faith community as it is to trample the constitutional rights of the LGBT community.

My .02

User avatar
Kurieuo
Honored Member
Posts: 10032
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 6:25 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Progressive Creationist
Location: Qld, Australia
Has liked: 647 times
Been liked: 665 times

Re: The Irony of Hate

#18

Post by Kurieuo » Sun Nov 13, 2016 6:02 pm

Nature is currently bigoted too in not providing a way for same sex couples to be teleologically joined. Perhaps such are at the cutting edge of evolution and we'll see nature make a way? Until then, practically speaking, marriage between same sex isn't even realistically possible in anywhere other than one's mind altered reality. Such also provides no benefit to fuller society, so should remain at most an individual endeavor without state involvement.

My .02 million dollars. :P
These users liked this post by Kurieuo:
Hortator (Sun Nov 13, 2016 6:42 pm)
"Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved." (Romans 10:13)

DBowling
Prestigious Senior Member
Posts: 1649
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 8:23 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Has liked: 29 times
Been liked: 182 times

Re: The Irony of Hate

#19

Post by DBowling » Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:01 pm

edwardmurphy wrote:I don't think that Pence is hateful and I agree that he has faith and conviction, but he's still a bigot. If you seek to withhold rights that the majority has always enjoyed from some specific minority because you don't like how they live their lives then you're a bigot, plain and simple.
Ok... I finally had some time to wade thru the text of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the amendment that Mike Pence signed.

And the bottom line is... the assertion that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act withholds rights rights from the LGBT community is without merit. And thus the assertion that Mike Pence seeks to withhold rights from a specific minority is also without merit... as is the assertion that Mike Pence is a bigot.

First... The Religious Freedom Restoration Act is all about preventing the Government from encroaching upon the religious liberties of the citizens of Indiana. Here's the 'short version' from the Bill Digest.
Religious freedom restoration. Prohibits a governmental entity from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the governmental entity can demonstrate that the burden: (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest. Provides a procedure for remedying a violation. Specifies that the religious freedom law applies to the implementation or application of a law regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity or official is a party to a proceeding implementing or applying the law. Prohibits an applicant, employee, or former employee from pursuing certain causes of action against a private employer.
Again... there is nothing in this bill anywhere that advocates withholding rights from anyone.

And the following is from the amendment that Pence signed to explicitly insure that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act does not infringe on the constitutional rights of anyone.
Sec. 0.7. This chapter does not:
8 (1) authorize a provider to refuse to offer or provide services,
9 facilities, use of public accommodations, goods, employment,
10 or housing to any member or members of the general public
11 on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national
12 origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or
13 United States military service;
14 (2) establish a defense to a civil action or criminal prosecution
15 for refusal by a provider to offer or provide services, facilities,
16 use of public accommodations, goods, employment, or housing
17 to any member or members of the general public on the basis
18 of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin,
19 disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or United
20 States military service; or
21 (3) negate any rights available under the Constitution of the
1 State of Indiana.
Contrary to the assertions of some on the Left, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is an attempt to protect the religious liberties of the citizens of the state of Indiana. It is not an attempt to withhold rights from any minority.

Post Reply