1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Hostility to Tradition

Marcos464 Wrote: Jan 30, 2015 12:09 PM
There is no animus based discrimination. You frame it as if the only possible motivator in the case of Christian vendors is animus. This is false. Discrimination occurs everyday that has nothing to with Animus. That is why I can't be a member of every private organization I want just because I want to.
The ACLJ has petitions online that people can sign urging the Obama administration to denounce Christian persecution in the middle east and Africa. Anyone interested should check it out.
These are the types of suits (the one by the chief) that must be filed and won, if there is any chance of preserving true freedom of speech and religion. If freedom of speech means you can only express (and it is getting to the point of "only believe") leftist PC precepts of the world, than that is not freedom at all.
In response to:

Marriage on the Chopping Block?

Marcos464 Wrote: Jan 27, 2015 4:09 PM
Even before the first supreme court ruling on this, it was written that within the Obama justice department, you could not even say that you disagreed with SSM as that could be interpreted as being "disapproving." If someone "came out" you were not permitted to remain "silent" because that could be interpreted by the person "coming out" that you disapproved of them. One Obama health official stated that she could not think of one instance where religious rights could trump rights related to sexuality. If this is how things are now, imagine with a favorable to SSM supreme court decision.
In response to:

Marriage on the Chopping Block?

Marcos464 Wrote: Jan 27, 2015 3:59 PM
Yes, we do, but those can easily be challenged, ignored or laxly enforced by people in power beholden to political correctness. There are laws that have been ignored by politicians because those politicians believed those laws were 'unconstitutional.'
In response to:

Marriage on the Chopping Block?

Marcos464 Wrote: Jan 27, 2015 3:29 PM
"If the Supreme Court rules as predicted, its decision will achieve the longtime goal of the gay movement: to silence Christians from freely expressing their traditional beliefs in the public square, allowing them, at best, the privilege of speaking to each other privately inside the four walls of their churches." Anyone who doubts this need only look at the effect that the Marriage Act in the UK has had on free speech over there, where you have public officials and public employees being threatened with their livelihood for merely expressing disagreement with the idea of SSM, with no acts of 'discrimination' involved. Some are told that to keep their job they must undergo 'sensitivity' and 'reeducation training.' This is a clear and unambiguous effort to silence anyone from expressing disagreement with SSM. It happened there, it will in all likelihood happen here, despite anyone's assurances that it won't.
In response to:

Why ‘Gay Marriage’ is Evil

Marcos464 Wrote: Jan 26, 2015 7:42 PM
If you are sincere, the compromise I believe is reasonable is: Those who support SSM must accept that religious freedom means people should be allowed to disagree with the idea of same sex marriage respectfully without fear of retaliation or reprisals of any kind. No being denigrated, no being called a bigot, no being sued or threatened with your job. Accept that NOT all forms of discrimination are based on "hate and animus." Some entities (not just churches) cannot always accommodate people who are practicing homosexuals, and it has nothing to do with hate. It is based on moral teaching that is more than 2,000 years old. Allow kids to be with gay couple as foster kids, but preserve adoption for opposite sex parents. my thoughts.
In response to:

Why ‘Gay Marriage’ is Evil

Marcos464 Wrote: Jan 26, 2015 3:32 PM
Here is what is truly pernicious: When an idea (in this case SSM) becomes such a sacred cow that the PC forces in society will seek to denigrate, belittle and ostracize anyone who dares to disagree with it. That is what is truly ugly and corrosive to a free society. That is not the kind of behavior that made this country great. The attitude of "shaming" people who don't agree with SSM is cancerous, and actually 'regressive' and in no way progressive in any sense.
In response to:

Fetal Pain is Grounded in Science

Marcos464 Wrote: Jan 22, 2015 4:06 PM
To any living organism whose life is being knowingly and intentionally terminated for whatever reason, the amount of pain it experiences in the process of being killed is secondary to the fact that at the end of the process, its life has been terminated. Discussing that "pain is minimized" is a red-herring to try and minimize what is happening with an abortion.
I believe Obama knows exactly what he is doing when he gives speeches like this. He knows he is guilty of demonizing and denigrating those who disagree with him. He postures as he is the voice of reason in all of this and all those around him are interested in nothing but partisan one-upmanship. To the low information voter, it is a way of self aggrandizing himself. To anyone with a modicum of objectivity and who follows politics impartially, it is an insult to our intelligence.
1 - 10 Next