Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Another SCOTUS decision on religious liberty.


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

I don’t see the distinction between a coach praying alone on a field after a game and offering a prayer over food in a public situation if one assumes he is praying to be seen of men.

Neither do I.  Did you think I would? Why would praying over food be meant to be seen of men? I don’t assume they are praying to be seen of men when midfield either. I just know there are some Christians who are careful where they pray to avoid the appearance of praying to be seen of men and it simply made me wonder how the coach approached it, which could be a number of ways, only some for appearance.  He may simply not care in the least what people think. It may be an unspoken invitation to join them. Being curious is not being critical. 
 

If you think I have been criticizing them, you have misinterpreted my comments. 

Edited by Calm
Posted
2 hours ago, Teancum said:

I am sure you can figure it out.

Apparently your definition of "ramming down one's throat" is very different than mine.

If I have the ability to walk out of earshot of a prayer, I don't consider that ramming.  If I have the ability to say my own prayer to my own god in the same place and at the same time, I don't consider that ramming.  If I have the ability to freely talk about bbq, religion, gas prices, or the War in Ukraine, to whoever will engage with me on the topics, I don't consider that ramming.

I think we really need to hammer out a workable definition of ramming if we expect to have a profitable discussion.  Otherwise we're just gonna continue to have "is to/is not" types of conversations.  If you don't want to engage in the discussion at that level, that's fine.  I'm not going to ram this discussion down your throat.

Posted
Just now, Obehave said:

Please, let's just not use that analogy and replace it with a better analogy. I'll either barf or poop this stuff out if it continues to be force fed down my throat.

So, feed troll, get troll poop? Sigh. Yeah. You're probably right.

Posted
1 hour ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Apparently your definition of "ramming down one's throat" is very different than mine

Apparently.

Posted
2 hours ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Apparently your definition of "ramming down one's throat" is very different than mine.

If I have the ability to walk out of earshot of a prayer, I don't consider that ramming.  If I have the ability to say my own prayer to my own god in the same place and at the same time, I don't consider that ramming.  If I have the ability to freely talk about bbq, religion, gas prices, or the War in Ukraine, to whoever will engage with me on the topics, I don't consider that ramming.

I think we really need to hammer out a workable definition of ramming if we expect to have a profitable discussion.  Otherwise we're just gonna continue to have "is to/is not" types of conversations.  If you don't want to engage in the discussion at that level, that's fine.  I'm not going to ram this discussion down your throat.

Here you go:

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/01/1109141110/the-christian-right-is-winning-cultural-battles-while-public-opinion-disagrees

 

 

Posted
10 hours ago, Teancum said:

Whenever a court makes a decision, there are winners and losers.  Some might say when the Supreme Court gave the ok to same sex marriage, one side was ramming same sex marriage down their throat.  In reality, unless a person's life is really affected by a court decision, nothing is rammed down their throat.  We don't get everything we want in life.  Sometimes we have to accept the fact that our opposition get some victories.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...