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

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

No; they are being enacted to protect Constitutional rights, regarding freedom of religion. They are being enacted to protect people of faith from intolerant activists.

Tell me you actually read the whole article I linked.

Be honest.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

These laws (based on RFRA) are enacted to establish a superior "religious class" that is not subject to law.

The Federal RFRA has been declared unconstitutional in major provisions by the Supreme Court, indeed, it was determined that Congress has overstepped its Constitutional bounds by establishing a greater status for religion than the Founders intended.

These laws have been and will be defeated in the court of public opinion, and in time, they will be removed for their unconstitutional provisions.

Expanding government manded "religious practice" to cover whatever laws a given religious person doesn't like is a travesty in light of the Constitution.

Speaking of the RFRA:

POLL: Hoosiers Reject Business Discrimination, As Indiana Spends Millions on Damage Control

The state hires a prominent PR firm to help rebuild its image, while a poll finds most residents don't approve of faith-based antigay discrimination. -- TRUDY RINGAPRIL 14 2015

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence - - Enacting a “license to discriminate” law, since altered, cost Indiana some goodwill — and now it’s going to cost the state at least $2 million to have a prominent public relations firm do damage control.

www.advocate.com...

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

No; they are being enacted to protect Constitutional rights, regarding freedom of religion. They are being enacted to protect people of faith from intolerant activists.

Tell me you actually read the whole article I linked.

Be honest.

You first. What articles have you read from the other side of the issue, and what did you think of them?

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

No; they are being enacted to protect Constitutional rights, regarding freedom of religion. They are being enacted to protect people of faith from intolerant activists.

Tell me you actually read the whole article I linked.

Be honest.

You first. What articles have you read from the other side of the issue, and what did you think of them?

That's a deflect.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

No; they are being enacted to protect Constitutional rights, regarding freedom of religion. They are being enacted to protect people of faith from intolerant activists.

Tell me you actually read the whole article I linked.

Be honest.

You first. What articles have you read from the other side of the issue, and what did you think of them?

That's a deflect.

As is your lack of an answer on the other thread.

What you don't like your own tactics?

What I stated was factual, no matter what the claims of others might be.

I see that Ted is using the old "I am the only person who will protect you from the boogey man." Trick.Sadly they all will be trying to do this,you pick a group then build them up as a threat and then just step back and watch as the genuinely frightened marks say and do anything you tell them to do in order to "protect them and their family."It is a trick as old as time.

originally posted by: Seamrog
a reply to: DeadFoot

I wish you peace in your life, and I will continue to pray for the children that are subject to your care.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

In rough order of your post:

Yes, I know you consider establishing EQUAL rights for all Americans to be "special rights" because to elevate gay and Lesbian Americans from the second-class status they had (and still have in some states) must seem "special" to you. I'm sure you'd agree with re-enacting the sodomy laws as well. However, laws which prevent unfair or unlawful discrimination do NOT bestow any rights upon gay and Lesbian Americans to simply ignore the laws of the land as the RFRA spawn does for "the religious." You are mistaken.

No judges have "ignored" religious freedom. What in the world? The Constitution itself supported slavery, does that make IT questionable? Keep your logical fallacies to yourself. Religious freedom does not mean that you get to define anything and everything within the parameters of your religious beliefs. The logical failures of that concept are legion and have been pointed out by Supreme Court Justices, lower court judges, law professors and really, any one who can reason logically. The Constitution guarantees the Free Exercise of religion, not the ever expanding lawlessness that you would like to see.

Slavery again? Wow. I'm sorry you think that you should have more rights than the People of the United States. Who cares if YOU think public opinion is wrong? You're in a dying minority that wants to see some Americans held down and some Americans elevated for barbaric and archaic reasons. You don't get to impose your beliefs or your will on the rest of us. I know that makes you unhappy in your christo-fascist heart of hearts, but it is simply the truth.

Calling it "homosexual marriage" just demonstrates your desire to keep a certain population of Americans in a second-class position. You don't want to extend your straight-Christian privilege of entering into the State-sponsored contract of marriage to those you consider to be less than you. That's the basic truth at work.

Of course it's "government mandated" religious practices when the GOVERNMENT enforces a LAW that allows a religious person to ignore the laws of the land that govern the rest of us! Of COURSE IT IS! That's one of the many problems with all of the versions of the law ... it is a government mandate of special rights for the religious. There is no argument there.

I am well aware that folks who believe as you do Green Eyes would love to see the Cross Wrapped in the Flag as our national symbol, but I assure you that people who believe as I do will fight you every step of the way.

originally posted by: Gryphon66


I'm sure you'd agree with re-enacting the sodomy laws as well.

Would do a whole lot of good for homosexuals...

Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM)a represent approximately 2% of the United States population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV. In 2010, young gay and bisexual men (aged 13-24 years) accounted for 72% of new HIV infections among all persons aged 13 to 24, and 30% of new infections among all gay and bisexual men. At the end of 2011, an estimated 500,022 (57%) persons living with an HIV diagnosis in the United States were gay and bisexual men, or gay and bisexual men who also inject drugs.

a reply to: Seamrog

Sodomy laws were in place until 2003.

That didn't do a lot for the AIDs epidemic, did it?

Curiously, AIDs affects heterosexuals too ... who were statistically NEVER charged under sodomy laws.

Sodomy laws were used to harass and discriminate primarily against gay men.

If you have actual evidence to the contrary, I'll be glad to consider and respond.

EDIT: There is no doubt that the growing HIV infection rate among the young is extremely troubling. Aside from the carelessness that comes from "youthful invincibility" with the advent of so many life-extending treatments etc., the educational efforts in our community particularly have lapsed, and this is having an inordinate effect on young gay men.

Greater education and community outreach are the ways to combat this trend though, not unconstitutional and unethical sodomy laws.

Although, I am not surprised by those who do support such nonsense.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
There is no doubt that the growing HIV infection rate among the young is extremely troubling. Aside from the carelessness that comes from "youthful invincibility" . . . . /quote]

Yes "youthful invincibility"

All young, especially boys, seem to think they are invincible, that nothing can touch them.

It isn't just about gay youth.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Gryphon66
There is no doubt that the growing HIV infection rate among the young is extremely troubling. Aside from the carelessness that comes from "youthful invincibility" . . . .

Yes "youthful invincibility"

All young, especially boys, seem to think they are invincible, that nothing can touch them.

It isn't just about gay youth.

Yes, but it's hard to communicate that to someone who's gloating over lives being ruined.

Further, there but for the grace of random chance go I. /sigh

These kids.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: tothetenthpower

It's hyperbole, but not entirely untrue. He is simply pandering to his base.

It's not hyperbole to his base, they think that nonsense is actually true.

And let's be honest, the gay community only reacts this way when the Christian community does something really stupid, like the Indiana law.

I love how conservative Christians cry foul, but it's basically self fulfilling prophecy. They do things, they know will garner this reaction and then paint surprise on their face when it happens, and use it as proof that everybody is trying to destroy their freedom.

When in reality, all they were told is no, you can't actually just decide to discriminate against people and use religion as your crutch.

~Tenth

Almen brother.

Not allowing a majority and a religious group to have SPECIAL protection under the law and to project their beliefs on to others through the government is NOT persecution. In fact it is not allowing them to have control and persecute others.

originally posted by: Rocker2013
a reply to: tothetenthpower

This is also a good example of how the right wing in the US is becoming more and more extreme.

There are a lot of stories over the last six months of Christians and Republicans ranting about LGBT rights, and using some genuinely extreme language in the process. If these things were being said by a Muslim against Jews, they would be on a watch list.

Like it or not folks, the right wing in the US is becoming more and more radicalized and more and more threatening. They are feeling backed into a corner, and they are acting out of desperation when they get on a podium and start talking about "fighting back". None of these people are actually experiencing any threat to their religious beliefs at all, not one of them, but this bombastic rhetoric is encouraging extremism in their ranks, and they know it.

Religious fundamentalism and extreme social conservatism are not new phenomenons, but instead the dying gasp of antiquated social norms and faith-based realities, threatened by general human progress, science, rationalism, and true freedom.

originally posted by: Seamrog
Ted Cruz is spot on.

The homosexualists are fighting tooth and nail to ram their lifestyle down the throats of Christians - who morally object to that lifestyle.

It will not be long before they are seeking legal remedy against Christian churches that refused to recognize a 'marriage' that is in direct conflict with their religious views.

The lukewarm Christians that don't really care will be made to care.

Christians who hold close to the teachings of Christ will be made to take a stand.

This is not political pandering. It is a recognition of the bigotry and intolerance of the homosexualists who demand Christians accept all facets of their immorality.

Lol, here it comes.

Excuse me, for basically all of church history heretics, non-Christians, and non heterosexual people have been persecuted by Christians, including violently. It is YOU who have enjoyed special rights and have been trying to ram your beliefs down everyone's throats.

Read, it is you who want the law to reflect YOUR beliefs, such that those who do not believe what you do have to comply with your beliefs by law. Mind you, gays are not asking YOU to comply with homosexuality, nor for you to do anything day. They simply want discrimination to stop from YOU.