Not really true all the time, though in this thread it is.  Consider this argument to remove a veteran memorial because it "offended" someone's "religious freedom".

 

Point taken...I guess my issue is- were the same people who are so concerned about this Kim Davis' religious freedom completely receptive to the person in your example's religious freedom? I think we both know the answer.

 

So its religious freedom, so long as its my religion. 

---

You know where you can kiss... not on the right cheek and not on the left cheek either. :woot:

Something you want to tell us?

---

Her free will was possessed by demons?

 

That explains a lot.

 

LOL.  RJ, you never cease to amaze me.  This actually made my afternoon/evening after a long day at work.  You would make a very good computer programmer.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Technically, the lady is exercising her "free will".  Is she right under the law?  No.  She's not forcing her belief on her staff, she is using her belief to make policy decisions.  Her staff are simply doing their jobs by obeying her instructions as their supervisor.

 

I'm not saying that she is right, but she is not "forcing" anyone to comply with her belief... technically.

And how is that not "technically" forcing her beliefs on someone else? Her staff can't do their jobs and follow the law because of a policy set in motion by her beliefs, no?

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

Huckabee Aide reportedly blocked Ted Cruz from getting up on stage.


 

 

 

When Senator Cruz exited the jail a throng of journalists beckoned him toward their microphones, but an aide to Mr. Huckabee blocked the path of Mr. Cruz, who appeared incredulous.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/09/us/kim....html?_r=0

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Point taken...I guess my issue is- were the same people who are so concerned about this Kim Davis' religious freedom completely receptive to the person in your example's religious freedom? I think we both know the answer.

 

So its religious freedom, so long as its my religion. 

 

To answer your first question, probably not.  However, the example that I posted is not about protecting someone's right to freely practice their religion, it's about prohibiting someone from doing so, even though it wasn't "practicing religion" it was putting up a memorial to veterans.  Just because someone puts up a memorial like that "offends" someone is not a violation of the law.

 

Regarding the part in bold.  Wrong.  Look at the words of the First Amendment.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

And how is that not "technically" forcing her beliefs on someone else? Her staff can't do their jobs and follow the law because of a policy set in motion by her beliefs, no?

 

Separate the duties of a job from religion for a moment.  She is not saying that her staff has to believe as she does, so she is not "forcing her beliefs" on any of them.  She is making policy that her staff has to follow based on her own beliefs.  Her staff is following instructions from her based on her beliefs.  That is not the same as her "forcing her belief" on them.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

I do find it quite odd/interesting that a couple of MODS that don't normally participate on the political forum seem to be really interested in this thread.  I suspect that there is some trolling going on looking for religious references.

 

I'm going to leave this thread until it gets back to actual discussion regarding the topic.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

I do find it quite odd/interesting that a couple of MODS that don't normally participate on the political forum seem to be really interested in this thread.  I suspect that there is some trolling going on looking for religious references.

 

I'm going to leave this thread until it gets back to actual discussion regarding the topic.

Seems to me they are participating directly in the topic at hand.

---

To answer your first question, probably not. However, the example that I posted is not about protecting someone's right to freely practice their religion, it's about prohibiting someone from doing so, even though it wasn't "practicing religion" it was putting up a memorial to veterans. Just because someone puts up a memorial like that "offends" someone is not a violation of the law.


Regarding the part in bold. Wrong. Look at the words of the First Amendment.

I know the words you speak of, however those who move to evoke that right aren't as understanding when people of a different faith look to do so.

---

I do find it quite odd/interesting that a couple of MODS that don't normally participate on the political forum seem to be really interested in this thread. I suspect that there is some trolling going on looking for religious references.


I'm going to leave this thread until it gets back to actual discussion regarding the topic.

I apologize. I guess as a MOD I am not allowed to participate in certain threads.

---

I apologize. I guess as a MOD I am not allowed to participate in certain threads.

 

I'm not saying that at all.  I just find it quite odd that there has been a heavy MOD presence here.  I've never seen that happen in any other discussion.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Separate the duties of a job from religion for a moment.  She is not saying that her staff has to believe as she does, so she is not "forcing her beliefs" on any of them.  She is making policy that her staff has to follow based on her own beliefs.  Her staff is following instructions from her based on her beliefs.  That is not the same as her "forcing her belief" on them.

In the case of at least the five deputy clerks that have begun issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, one could posit that their not issuing licenses was based solely upon her belief-based instructions not to. Being that not following your boss' instructions is a great way to lose your cushy government job, it's not too long of a reach to suggest that her beliefs forced them to behave in a manner inconsistent with how they would have acted otherwise. I don't see how interference like that is anything but beliefs being forced on them.

---

Separate the duties of a job from religion for a moment.  She is not saying that her staff has to believe as she does, so she is not "forcing her beliefs" on any of them.  She is making policy that her staff has to follow based on her own beliefs.  Her staff is following instructions from her based on her beliefs.  That is not the same as her "forcing her belief" on them.

You seem to be confusing "forcing her beliefs on them" with "forcing them to believe"... there's a difference between the two.

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

I'm not saying that at all.  I just find it quite odd that there has been a heavy MOD presence here.  I've never seen that happen in any other discussion.

Maybe it could be that these mods have interest in the same kind of threads, involving the same kind of topic. Or we are all out to get you...you decide.

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

Maybe it could be that these mods have interest in the same kind of threads, involving the same kind of topic. Or we are all out to get you...you decide.

Illuminati confirmed. 

---

Illuminati confirmed.

Shhh!! Only one conspiracy theorist per thread!! :thumbsup:

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

I'm not saying that at all.  I just find it quite odd that there has been a heavy MOD presence here.  I've never seen that happen in any other discussion.

It's probably because this thread borders on the subject of religious discussion...

 

 

Tread lightly.

---

This might be a shocker to some...but we are actually capable of watching a thread without participating in it. So if we are in it, it's because we want to be. Shocking huh?

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

This might be a shocker to some...but we are actually capable of watching a thread without participating in it. So if we are in it, it's because we want to be. Shocking huh?

"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you."

-Joseph Heller

---