3 ms·
>> "the second is about anti-discrimination laws." You are merely changing the language to avoid admitting the reality of a government infringing on religious
by judah 10y ago
>> "the second is about anti-discrimination laws."
You are merely changing the language to avoid admitting the reality of a government infringing on religious liberty.
The government forcing religious people to go against their religion is infringement of religious liberty. Forcing those religious people to undergo government re-education classes is Stalinesque.
The founders of the US saw this potential abuse; it's why religious liberty is protected as the first right in the Bill of Rights.
And on a broader point, this is why we fight for small government: a large, powerful government is a bastion for tyranny. And the religious are merely the canary in the coal mine.
Perhaps the left will recognize this wisdom after President Trump issues executive orders overturning all that the left holds dear.
- int_19h 10y agoWe were specifically talking about government recognition of same-sex marriage. Can you explain again how that infringes on your religious liberty? Everything else in your comment is basically offtopic.
- e40 10y agoIt's pretty clear this person has gotten themselves into a logic box they can't get out of. All discussion has to point to evidence for their point of view, or it's discounted or ignored.
- judah 10y agoI gave you an example of how same-sex marriage can, and has, infringed on religious liberty. You dismissed it as pertaining to anti-discrimination laws, even though it specifically was caused by same-sex marriage laws and involved a dispute about religious freedoms in response to those laws.