Republican Congress Strips Women and Gays of Rights Under Guise of ‘Religious Freedom’

Oh look !

More wasting of taxpayers' money.

"Hey guys, let's vote to revoke a law that won't pass muster... just because."

Weeeee !



Your tax dollars hard at work, folks.

a reply to: Onslaught2996

What this certainly does is demonstrate the purpose of multiculturalism and immigration. Such laws as 'religious freedom, are actually designed to promote and create hatred among the masses but by including the word freedom (key button word for Americans) in the title of a law, no one is any the wiser. See, now; you can see there is more than one way of skinning a cat.

There is one small but prominent country that has advocated multiculturalism and immigration for all countries but their own, for decades. Guess who that is?

a reply to: Deaf Alien

So now a house committee voting on something is the same as congress passing a bill?

Gotta love these sensationalist headlines.

Not that they wouldn't necessarily want to pass this, but stop spreading misinformation.

It's all in the new bible

a reply to: c0gN1t1v3D1ss0nanC3

Not that they wouldn't necessarily want to pass this, but stop spreading misinformation.

It seems that I am mistaken. I was not trying to spread misinformation. I was just simply mistaken. One thing for sure though. They ARE trying to vote on this and get it passed. That part is very worrying no doubt about it.

The tricky thing is, religious people want to have the right to discriminate against and ruin the lives of those they don't agree with. They don't understand the concept of this being intrusive.

It is sitting in the senate. Mike Lee pandering to Christian base. Such fools voting for these idiots.

www.congress.gov...

a reply to: Deaf Alien

I don't disagree that the true story is scary, but congressmen regardless of political affiliation are scary enough on a daily basis to simply report the truth rather than sensationalism.

It causes distrust between people that have been constantly misinformed.

Misinformation is the biggest threat to mankind's evolution.

So when is the vote? all I can find are liberal websites claiming that the GOP is going to do it, but no actual details are in any article.

a reply to: xuenchen

I am actually trying to find the bill itself including the original bill that was "revoked" to see the differences.

Still is becoming obvious that Religious "right" what ever interpretation falls under is been used as a political tool this next elections, I wonder why.

a reply to: c0gN1t1v3D1ss0nanC3

I agree, this is more of symbolism than anything else, we do have balances of power within our own government and just one group or "committee" does not dictate policies, bills and laws.

Sad.

Any infringement of rights is unconstitutional.

Be it an infringement on religious expression and belief or an infringement of self-expression from the LGBT community.

The problem is that you cannot legislate respect.

No "group" holds any respect for any other "group" any longer.

The LGBT community no longer respects the religious beliefs of business owners.
The religious business owners no longer respect those of the LGBT community.

But when you "force" respect, then there will be a push-back against it. It's human nature.

Respect is lost. It used to be inherent within our culture. But self-serving ideologies on every side have eclipsed any rational, reasonable approach.

So now you get politicians trying to correct a societal flaw with legislation.

Might as well welcome a dictatorship. If we allow politicians the freedom to dictate/legislate how we behave, where will it stop?

originally posted by: xuenchen
Here's an interesting point of view....

another 1st Amendment battle?

Just before the Christmas break, the D.C. City Council passed a law that could force pro-life organizations to pay for abortion coverage. But that wasn’t the only piece of bad legislation, violating religious liberty which came out of the D.C. Council in December.

A new bill might force Christian schools to recognize an LGBT student group or host a “gay pride” day on campus.

Here’s how: In a unanimous vote on Dec. 2, the D.C. Council approved legislation that revokes religious liberty protections that Congress passed for the District back in 1989. The Orwellian titled bill—“The Human Rights Amendment Act of 2014”—eliminates an important protection for a key human right: religious liberty.

Government Shouldn’t Force Religious Schools to Violate Religious Beliefs

Religious liberty never was meant to mean that you have the "liberty" to discriminate against others. It simply means and meant the right to practice your religion on a PERSONAL level. The moment you project it on to others it is not "liberty" but actually oppression and limiting someone else's liberty.

This is something that conservatives need to get.

a reply to: Onslaught2996

The "fired" can just go work at "Starbucks LBGT Coffee House"...oh it already is.

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: Deaf Alien

you do realize bills have to actually be passed first, right?

Nevermind. I get it. "THE CHRISTIANS ARE COMING THE CHRISTIANS ARE COMING!" lmao... #ing weak.

It matters not.

What matters is that the religious right continues to be trying to reinstate Christian theocracy from the old days, retain Christianity's dominance in western society, and retain special rights for Christians, at the expense of anybody that disagrees, religious minorities, and any other people that violate their dictums.

Even if these bills don't pass, it is cause for both concern and derision.

Christians, STOP trying to project your religious ideas into laws that affect other people! That's not liberty, that's oppressing other people!

employers should have the right to hire who they want. This is capitalism. If you want to market yourself to the job force as someone who in entitled to live anyway you please then your employer should have the right to choose between you and someone that markets themselves as someone who is easier to handle.

originally posted by: beezzer

The LGBT community no longer respects the religious beliefs of business owners.
The religious business owners no longer respect those of the LGBT community.

I didn't know gay bakers wanted laws to refuse Christians service. I did know about the "Christians" wanting to overthrow discrimination laws to refuse gay people services, though.

Maybe, behavior should be based on treating others as you would like to be treated.

originally posted by: darkbake
The tricky thing is, religious people want to have the right to discriminate against and ruin the lives of those they don't agree with. They don't understand the concept of this being intrusive.

But Christians living in a nation founded on Christian beliefs might feel the same way.

How about if you don't like someone do not deal with them.

For the record I would not support this bill. But I still think an employer has a right hire people that fits the image the owner wants to project. Kind of like the guy with swastika and SS tattooed on his face having trouble getting a job in a day care. That guy choose to paint his face like that and the employer chose to pass on hiring him based on that. Seems fair to me.

originally posted by: arpgme

originally posted by: beezzer

The LGBT community no longer respects the religious beliefs of business owners.
The religious business owners no longer respect those of the LGBT community.

I didn't know gay bakers wanted laws to refuse Christians service. I did know about the "Christians" wanting to overthrow discrimination laws to refuse gay people services, though.

Maybe, behavior should be based on treating others as you would like to be treated.

There have been examples of gay-owned bakeries refusing service.

But it all comes down to respect.

Which is non-existent in todays society.