Scott Lloyd Posted July 19, 2015 Author Posted July 19, 2015 Hey Scott - tried to send you a PM, but your mailbox wasn't accepting messages (probably full). Just wanted to ask you about something. Here's a temporary e-mail address (self destructs in 24 hours) that will forward a message to my real e-mail address. If you have the time to shoot me a quick e-mail, I'll respond with my observation. If you don't have time, that's ok too. Thanks! shENtjQx5pB1@meltmail.comjwhitlock, I sent you an email last night at the above address.
TheSkepticChristian Posted July 19, 2015 Posted July 19, 2015 (edited) If it weren't for those darn (Fill in the Blank) pushing their religion onto others there would be no discrimination. Many here feel the religious freedom of business owners will be taken away by the government (this thread is just conservative politics), but they ignore that "one nation under God" and "in God we trust" is still in the dollar bill, which is unfair to Jehovah's Witnesses (it is against their religious beliefs), Hindus, Atheists, and Buddhists. Should the government be promoting Bible religions? How would most Christians react if it changed to "in Satan we trust" or "in no God we trust"? Edited July 19, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
thesometimesaint Posted July 19, 2015 Posted July 19, 2015 I'm for a near absolute separation of church and state. So as long as it spends at my local grocery store I really don't care. I also think Costco was wrong to capitulate to this woman.SEE http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/costco-drops-childrens-dinosaur-birthday-cake-after-arizona-mom-complains-it-promotes-satanism/
TheSkepticChristian Posted July 19, 2015 Posted July 19, 2015 Here is another example of religious freedom being threatened. The Oklahoma's Supreme Court banned religious displays like http://bigstory.ap.org/article/91c72505379845908905cf90ef62dbd6/threats-force-satan-statue-unveiling-secret-detroit-venuehttp://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/06/satanic-temple-looks-to-arkansas-as-possible-statue-location-in-fight-over/
jwhitlock Posted July 19, 2015 Posted July 19, 2015 jwhitlock, I sent you an email last night at the above address. Got it; just getting home from church.
tonie Posted July 19, 2015 Posted July 19, 2015 (edited) Incidentally, Tonie is female. I think she devised her new avatar to disguise that fact.Why, I can't say. We have no gender discrimination here that I can see. One of the most popular posters here is female. Hey Scott - tried to send you a PM, but your mailbox wasn't accepting messages (probably full). Just wanted to ask you about something. Here's a temporary e-mail address (self destructs in 24 hours) that will forward a message to my real e-mail address. If you have the time to shoot me a quick e-mail, I'll respond with my observation. If you don't have time, that's ok too. Thanks! shENtjQx5pB1@meltmail.com Edited July 19, 2015 by tonie
Scott Lloyd Posted July 20, 2015 Author Posted July 20, 2015 Don't know what this is intended to convey but it's creeping me out. 1
thesometimesaint Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 I'm for a near absolute separation of church and state. So as long as it spends at my local grocery store I really don't care. I also think Costco was wrong to capitulate to this woman.SEE http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/costco-drops-childrens-dinosaur-birthday-cake-after-arizona-mom-complains-it-promotes-satanism/ CORRECTION This story has been confirmed as not true. Apologies
Gray Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) I asked at one point on this thread whether the government's power to tax is superior to or overrides the various freedoms we are guaranteed, such as freedom of religion, etc. No one on your side answered it. Those who support the punishment of those who have opposed SSM are more than willing to see removal of tax exemptions as a way to punish churches and others who have taken a moral stance against SSM. Your comments presuppose that the government power to tax overrides our freedoms. They also presuppose that our current system of taxation is legitimate. Neither of those suppositions are true. Yet I suspect that you'll continue to ignore inconvenient evidence against your arguments. I think power to tax and freedom of religion are both essential to the running of a free and orderly society. Regarding whether or not churches are taxed, I don't really care either way. It's not something guaranteed by the first amendment, but I'm fine with it. Edited July 20, 2015 by Gray
Storm Rider Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 I'm for a near absolute separation of church and state. So as long as it spends at my local grocery store I really don't care. What is a "near absolute separation of church and state" mean to you?
thesometimesaint Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) Pretty much the same thing it meant to Thomas Jefferson.SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Statute_for_Religious_Freedom You might find this interesting.SEE http://ashbrook.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/2006-OMalley-Dictates-of-Conscience-PDF.pdf Edited July 20, 2015 by thesometimesaint
Storm Rider Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 Many here feel the religious freedom of business owners will be taken away by the government (this thread is just conservative politics), but they ignore that "one nation under God" and "in God we trust" is still in the dollar bill, which is unfair to Jehovah's Witnesses (it is against their religious beliefs), Hindus, Atheists, and Buddhists. Should the government be promoting Bible religions? How would most Christians react if it changed to "in Satan we trust" or "in no God we trust"? This seems to be a red herring that is often brought up in these types of discussions. First, this nation was and remains, however tenuously you may want to describe it, a Christian nation. It is a fundamental part of its historical evolution. What the nation chose to create is a place where the government could not declare a state religion, which in turn allows for citizens to worship as they choose. The nation never has been a completely secular institution or organization. That may goad secularists, but those are just facts. The acknowledgement of God has always played a role in all things the government has done from the beginning. This appeal or acknowledgement of God may be waning in our current society because of a twisted and inept pursuit of a society where no one is every offended by the actions, words, or even the thoughts of another, but thankfully this segment of our pluralistic society has not yet gained a majority. Shockingly, there remains enough people that live outside of concrete jungles that still breathe fresh air and possess common sense that they don't buy the kool-aid that is being sold. Unfortunately, this segment of our society is under constant attack by the media to fall into line; quit thinking; just relax and drink the kool-aid and abandon all independent thought. BTW, just got a book entitled, "The New Thought Police, inside the Left's assault on Free Speech and free minds" by Tammy Bruce, a lesbian, past president of the LA's National Organization of Women chapter. She was an individual privy to the Left's long-term agenda to destroy all individuals, organizations, and individuals that have the audacity to disagree with their messages of tolerance and love. Pretty interesting book and it is refreshing to see someone from the Left admit the King is not wearing any clothes. It is also quite prophetic in that it was written 2001, I think, and it addresses what has come to pass and the methods used to achieve the Left's ends. 2
Storm Rider Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 Pretty much the same thing it meant to Thomas Jefferson.SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Statute_for_Religious_Freedom You might find this interesting.SEE http://ashbrook.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/2006-OMalley-Dictates-of-Conscience-PDF.pdf I was already familiar with that material. My question was more about your personal ideas and beliefs. I have found that regardless of what organizations, churches, political groups, etc., may teach when it comes to individuals own beliefs and thoughts then a wide array of differences and unique ideas are discovered. The LDS Church may teach many things, but what the members believe and think at times has nothing in common. 1
thesometimesaint Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 I was already familiar with that material. My question was more about your personal ideas and beliefs. I have found that regardless of what organizations, churches, political groups, etc., may teach when it comes to individuals own beliefs and thoughts then a wide array of differences and unique ideas are discovered. The LDS Church may teach many things, but what the members believe and think at times has nothing in common. It is kinda hard to separate out what someone believes from something they have read. IE; If someone has not read even a small part of the BoM it is kinda hard for them to say that they believe it.Personally I believe the Truth Claims of the Church, and have invested the last 44 years of my life in trying to comport my beliefs and behaviors to those Truth Claims. You might say I'm a very Orthodox Mormon in my personal beliefs, but allow all men/women to believe as they choose without fear or favor from the government. 1
Daniel2 Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 When a church sponsored scout troop doesn't want to accept gay adult leaders, it's a real stretch of the imagination to claim that it's forcing one's religious belief on other people. Finally--something jwhitlock and I agree on! I fully agree that church-sponsored scout troops should be able to choose leaders that reflect the values of their congregation, and no one could legitimately claim that such a troop would be "forcing" their values on others who aren't members of the congregation or troop. That's why I believe what the BSA is now proposing is the best solution for all: allow LGBT-inclusive churches to appoint gay leaders in their own church-sponsored troops, and allow LGBT-averse congregations to prohibit gay leaders in their own church sponsored troops. 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 First, this nation was and remains, however tenuously you may want to describe it, a Christian nation. It is a fundamental part of its historical evolution. What the nation chose to create is a place where the government could not declare a state religion, which in turn allows for citizens to worship as they choose Most of our influential Founding Fathers, although they respected the rights of other religionists, held to deism, not Christianity. Our constitution is a secular document, show me where it favors Christianity? Madison said, "the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States" The nation never has been a completely secular institution or organization. So you are saying that our nation should not respect non-Christian religions? Where is the war on religious freedom? I only see a war on secularism and non-Christian religions. The nation never has been a completely secular institution or organization. That may goad secularists, but those are just facts. The acknowledgement of God has always played a role in all things the government has done from the beginning. That may be, but that doesn't mean that dollars bill should say "in God we trust" because it is not fair to Jehovah's Witnesses, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Scientologists.We go to church to learn that. BTW, just got a book entitled, "The New Thought Police, inside the Left's assault on Free Speech and free minds" by Tammy Bruce, a lesbian, past president of the LA's National Organization of Women chapter. She was an individual privy to the Left's long-term agenda to destroy all individuals, organizations, and individuals that have the audacity to disagree with their messages of tolerance and love. Pretty interesting book and it is refreshing to see someone from the Left admit the King is not wearing any clothes. It is also quite prophetic in that it was written 2001, I think, and it addresses what has come to pass and the methods used to achieve the Left's ends. This thread is political, and it is full of conservative arguments. I am not on the Left.
ERayR Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 Most of our influential Founding Fathers, although they respected the rights of other religionists, held to deism, not Christianity. Our constitution is a secular document, show me where it favors Christianity? Madison said, "the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States" So you are saying that our nation should not respect non-Christian religions? Where is the war on religious freedom? I only see a war on secularism and non-Christian religions. That may be, but that doesn't mean that dollars bill should say "in God we trust" because it is not fair to Jehovah's Witnesses, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Scientologists.We go to church to learn that. This thread is political, and it is full of conservative arguments. I am not on the Left. Turn around.
jwhitlock Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 Finally--something jwhitlock and I agree on! I fully agree that church-sponsored scout troops should be able to choose leaders that reflect the values of their congregation, and no one could legitimately claim that such a troop would be "forcing" their values on others who aren't members of the congregation or troop. That's why I believe what the BSA is now proposing is the best solution for all: allow LGBT-inclusive churches to appoint gay leaders in their own church-sponsored troops, and allow LGBT-averse congregations to prohibit gay leaders in their own church sponsored troops. I'm glad that you agree. Unfortunately, others such as Scouts for Equality don't agree with your sentiment.
Stone holm Posted July 21, 2015 Posted July 21, 2015 Well, I don't have the expertise to argue the legal issues. But the specter of churches unable to get insurance because they might be targeted by gay advocacy groups has me worried. It's too much power in the hands of a relatively small but loud segment of society.Has the Church gone into the cake decorating business now? I must have missed the news release. 1
provoman Posted July 21, 2015 Posted July 21, 2015 Has the Church gone into the cake decorating business now? I must have missed the news release. The Church, No, is not in the cake decorating business. However, the Joseph Smith Memorial Building can be rented out for receptions which includes cakes. Well, I don't have the expertise to argue the legal issues. But the specter of churches unable to get insurance because they might be targeted by gay advocacy groups has me worried. It's too much power in the hands of a relatively small but loud segment of society. If insurance is not offered by anyone; isn't that an issue to take up with the insurance racket? And it looks as though you have discovered void that can be filled; "Sermon Insurance".
Daniel2 Posted July 21, 2015 Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) I'm glad that you agree.Unfortunately, others such as Scouts for Equality don't agree with your sentiment.It's unclear to me from reading their website whether or not SfE will be satisfied enough with the compromise to leave it alone going forward. I'm actually reaching out to them to voice my view and find out their position. I will return and report if I hear back from them. Edited July 21, 2015 by Daniel2 2
jwhitlock Posted July 21, 2015 Posted July 21, 2015 It's unclear to me from reading their website whether or not SfE will be satisfied enough with the compromise to leave it alone going forward.I'm actually reaching out to them to voice my view and find out their position. I will return and report if I hear back from them. That would be great. The statement on their site characterized the BSA policy change as a needed step, but "imperfect" and that more work needed to be done so that BSA's chartered religious organizations didn't "discriminate" anymore. Let us know if you get that clarification.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 22, 2015 Author Posted July 22, 2015 It's unclear to me from reading their website whether or not SfE will be satisfied enough with the compromise to leave it alone going forward.I'm actually reaching out to them to voice my view and find out their position. I will return and report if I hear back from them.Thank you for doing so. Like jwhitlock, I will be eager to hear their response.
Stone holm Posted July 22, 2015 Posted July 22, 2015 The question which none of my friends can answer for me is why on Earth would a gay couple want a straight baker to decorate their cake in the first place. I can understand a straight couple wanting a gay baker todecorate their cake, but not the opposite. 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted July 22, 2015 Posted July 22, 2015 (edited) The question which none of my friends can answer for me is why on Earth would a gay couple want a straight baker to decorate their cake in the first place. I can understand a straight couple wanting a gay baker todecorate their cake, but not the opposite. What if it is a small town and no other bakery is around? Why make life harder for gays? We don't want discrimination to spread like a virus, we want it to go away. What about "One nation under God"? "in God we trust"? or a Christian flag in a police station? Is that fair to Jehovah's witnesses? Buddhists? Atheists? Hindus? What if it changes to "In lord Brahma we trust"? or "In no god we trust"? How would most Christians react? Edited July 22, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
Recommended Posts