• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AG Jeff Sessions Announes Religious Liberty Task Force

Tettsuo said:
I was assume those on the right, that believes in the Constitution, will join those on the left to denounce this abhorrent move by the AG.
Click to expand...

It's election season. He's got the big donors happy, so he needs to make sure the religious right (i.e. white Christians mostly) stay in the fold and vote GOP to protect against the evil doings of the evil, godless Democrat [sic] party. There's nothing wrong with protecting religious liberty - obviously - but he's just sending out the dog whistles.

I'm waiting on a flag burning amendment any day now. That used to be a regular around election time, but it's been a bit out of favor lately. Time to bring that issue back to the front burner!
 
JasperL said:
It's election season. He's got the big donors happy, so he needs to make sure the religious right (i.e. white Christians mostly) stay in the fold and vote GOP to protect against the evil doings of the evil, godless Democrat [sic] party. There's nothing wrong with protecting religious liberty - obviously - but he's just sending out the dog whistles.

I'm waiting on a flag burning amendment any day now. That used to be a regular around election time, but it's been a bit out of favor lately. Time to bring that issue back to the front burner!
Click to expand...

The problem is the creation of a force tied to religious beliefs. We already have police and courts that enforce laws that protect against religious discrimination. Empowering a group just for that is dangerous and reminds me of Middle Eastern theocracies.
 
What's the goal of that task force? Pretty sure we have religious freedom.
 
It clearly implies, IMO, that this administration believes that there are infringements on religious freedom.
 
Ikari said:
What's the goal of that task force? Pretty sure we have religious freedom.
Click to expand...

I'm sure it's to help protect those who practice Islam in our country.
 
Lursa said:
It clearly implies, IMO, that this administration believes that there are infringements on religious freedom.
Click to expand...

Then take it to court. The AG already has a vast police force he can bring to bear.

Also, it does not infringe on one religion to respect those that do not share their beliefs.
 
Tettsuo said:
The problem is the creation of a force tied to religious beliefs. We already have police and courts that enforce laws that protect against religious discrimination. Empowering a group just for that is dangerous and reminds me of Middle Eastern theocracies.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree, but if there's something more worthless (in general) than a "task force" in politics I'm not sure what it would be. It's the same as a 'blue ribbon panel' or whatever. He's virtue signaling and it's obvious why. He works for a guy who's the antithesis of a genuine evangelical, but Trump goes to bat for the religious right and has their love and support - this is more of the same to keep them ignoring all the other crap.

IMO, the best thing to do is ignore it. When the blue ribbon task force comes up with recommendations, we can support or oppose them, but I have my serious doubts they'll do anything besides meet and agree on some principles like 'religious liberty must be protected' which it is by the 1A.
 
Tettsuo said:
Then take it to court. The AG already has a vast police force he can bring to bear.

Also, it does not infringe on one religion to respect those that do not share their beliefs.
Click to expand...

?? Didnt say otherwise but it's odd you believe the entire picture for a taskforce is limited to individual civil cases.
 
Lursa said:
It clearly implies, IMO, that this administration believes that there are infringements on religious freedom.
Click to expand...

Of course there are. It doesn't matter what your religion tells you, you're not allowed to engage in human sacrifice, or exclude blacks from your hotel or restaurant, or apply different rules to mosques in your community to prevent them from being built because your religion tells you Islam is evil (which is what unfettered 'religious freedom' for Christians, but not Muslims, would have meant in a nearby community).

Scalia:

Laws, we said,

"are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices. . . . Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself."
...
Subsequent decisions have consistently held that the right of free exercise does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a

"valid and neutral law of general applicability on the ground that the law proscribes (or prescribes) conduct that his religion prescribes (or proscribes)."
Click to expand...
 
“[Trump] said he respected people of faith and he promised to protect them in the free exercise of their faith,” Sessions said. “He declared we would say ‘Merry Christmas’ again.”
Click to expand...



So happy our AG is concerned about the real stuff. :lamo
 
JasperL said:
Of course there are. It doesn't matter what your religion tells you, you're not allowed to engage in human sacrifice, or exclude blacks from your hotel or restaurant, or apply different rules to mosques in your community to prevent them from being built because your religion tells you Islam is evil (which is what unfettered 'religious freedom' for Christians, but not Muslims, would have meant in a nearby community).

Scalia:
Click to expand...

True, there are. I didnt really over-write there, it was more expedient.

And there are the situations like Jim Crow where religious beliefs are disregarded in favor of other civil rights (is religious freedom considered a 'civil right? I know it's a 1A right).

Anyway, many objected to segregation and interracial marriage on the basis of religion and legislators used passages from the Bible to try and fight it. Those religious objections were not upheld.
 
Ikari said:
What's the goal of that task force? Pretty sure we have religious freedom.
Click to expand...

The purpose is to make it clearly legal to discriminate against LGBT. Secondarily it is to protect nuns from buying contraceptives. Lastly it is to slow or halt the progress of women's rights.

That said, discrimination is wrong no matter who you do or do not pray to. LGBT should not be discriminated against for any reason.

As for the sale or distribution of contraceptives, if you are opposed to contraceptives I don't have a problem with that, but do not force your religion on other people. Don't work where you will be expected to serve the general public and where your religion conflicts with your general duties. If your particular faith is opposed to contraceptives and abortions then serve only those within your faith. Problem solved.

It's 2018 and women are still fighting for complete control over their own bodies. Women are still fighting for equal respect and equal treatment. If you are a woman and you want to wear clothes that cover you from neck to feet; if your belief teaches a women's lot in life is to stay barefoot and pregnant, biscuits in the oven and buns in the bed; if your faith determines a woman's role in life, then by all means go ahead but leave women outside your faith the hell alone. Nuff said.
 
Last edited:
Hello, Supreme Court?

We've got a whopper for ya...
 
IMO, the conservatives dont know how to handle the growing influence of the LGBT community on society (not hiding behind closed doors anymore) and are panicky and confused. It's very threatening to some. And this impact is growing and that is a trend that's going to expand alot more before it results in assimilation and acceptance.

So IMO this taskforce is to try and help them wrap their minds around it and pro-actively try to anticipate legal issues that may arise and try to prepare some legal defenses against (yeah, just IMO) it. Create laws to prevent something and it's harder to overturn later.
 
Risky Thicket said:
The purpose is to make it clearly legal to discriminate against LGBT. Secondarily it is to protect nuns from buying contraceptives. Lastly it is to slow or halt the progress of women's rights.

That said, discrimination is wrong no matter who you do or do not pray to. LGBT should not be discriminated against for any reason.
Click to expand...

I just wrote something similar.

Cheers.
 
americanwoman said:
So happy our AG is concerned about the real stuff. :lamo
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but that's pathetic and tells you exactly what this nonsense is all about. The entire "Happy Holidays" versus "Merry Christmas" thing is a giant non-issue but they created a boogie man and now vow to protect you and slay that scary boogie man they created from thin air.

Gosh, I'm so glad I'm not a Republican anymore and feel any need to defend this garbage.
 
Tettsuo said:
The problem is the creation of a force tied to religious beliefs. We already have police and courts that enforce laws that protect against religious discrimination. Empowering a group just for that is dangerous and reminds me of Middle Eastern theocracies.
Click to expand...

But...but...Fox News talks about "the war on Christmas" all the time! The good Christians in this country are under siege! OMG!
 
JasperL said:
IMO, the best thing to do is ignore it. When the blue ribbon task force comes up with recommendations, we can support or oppose them, but I have my serious doubts they'll do anything besides meet and agree on some principles like 'religious liberty must be protected' which it is by the 1A.
Click to expand...

Wow, I'm surprised you're willing to ignore what could be a special AG force used to uphold religious views. This should NEVER exist in a country where religion should not be in bed with government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom