Christian Conservative Republican homophobia on open display

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by 7stg, Sep 29, 2014.

  1. crg123

    crg123 SS.orgLocalArchitect

    Messages:
    2,815
    Likes Received:
    273
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Another thing that's confused me (correct me if I'm wrong). Isn't one of the core values of the republican party is to decrease government regulation on daily life? So, aren't things like trying to restrict civil liberties like gay marriage, women's rights to abortions, and birth control kind of Anti-that? It's weird to me that religion or value has any part of the discussion since we were clearly founded on a separation of church and state. So when we're referred to a "a nation founded on christian values" I'm confused. I understand that the majority of people in the united states are christian but who care's really? The thing that great about this county is its diversity and the ability to celebrate any sort of beliefs you have. *shrug* I'm not sure how you can even start to defend that mentality.

    I don't see how you can change the narrative so much:

    How can you take a story about a bigoted women refusing to serve someone based off of their natural sexual preference and change it to a " poor christian women" forced to create wedding cake for "evil" homosexual agenda. It's madness and can't believe they'd want to be on that side of history of civil rights. what if you took the word "homosexual" and replaced it with black, or interracial couple? 50-60 years ago you'd prolly see people doing the same thing when "forced" to serve people they "didn't believe" they should serve.

    I'm not as well informed about politics as I should be at 25 but it's things like that which confuse the hell out of me.
     
  2. asher

    asher So Did We

    Messages:
    9,033
    Likes Received:
    686
    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    Only as it pertains to their individual lives. Otherwise, the government is a tool to keep other people from doing things not approved of.
     
  3. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,510
    Likes Received:
    482
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    It wasn't directed at you. I was thinking more about my roommate who works for a republican campaign. He's a really nice guy, and he's not overtly bigoty or hickish or christian or anything like that... but he's helping a guy try to pass laws that make it more difficult for Hispanics population to vote, ban gay marriage, minimize available welfare in neighborhoods that are already so incredibly poor, redraw lines so that areas that are non-white's votes get overpowered, give more leniency to companies caught polluting, etc, etc,... point being that it doesn't matter what you believe personally if you're contributing to a racist/homophobic/anti-science regime. I think Flint summed up what I was really trying to get at with better words.

    Having said that, I do agree like you suggested, that voting republican/conservative does not necessarily make you republican/conservative. But it's still a bad thing to do. And I don't care how gay black or otherwise that dude on the ticket is--if he's working for the GOP he's working against equality.
     
  4. pwsusi

    pwsusi SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    32
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2013
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    I don't disagree with what your saying about republicans and equality when it comes to gay marriage, but I also question democrats when it comes to legislation around religious freedoms. Both are forms of discrimination in my view.

    As for your roommate, if they are openly doing that kind of thing it is just wrong. Although I must admit dems are guilty of it also when it comes to voter id. I think its reasonable to assume we can find a way to implement something like this in a way that doesnt surpress anyone's vote. I think electring the president is something important enough to warrent measure that ensure the results are accurate and everyone who wanted to vote had the access to it and that all votes are legit.Both sides seem to want to rig things in their favor. It's not worth arguing who is more or less guilty of it. They need to find a real solution and not one that is designed to only work in their favor. I fail to see either side doing that.

    As far as your points on pollution and poverty...i disagree. Sure republicans may be guilty of not doing enough...but dems are not solving the problems and killin the middle class in the process with all the spending. Spending money sounds good and all and gets you votes, but if it's not addressing the heart of the problems then it's a waste. We should spend as much as necessary but only after we have a plan to fix things and not use it as a tool to buy people's votes. Simple things ...like helping to train people for jobs that are in high demand instead of writing checks indefinitely and complaining about lack of work for skills no longer needed in today's economy.
     
  5. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    What religious freedom has any representative of any party removed? Please avoid mentioning all the ones where religious people blatantly misinterpret a ruling so that it sound much more devious than it actually is.
     
  6. pwsusi

    pwsusi SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    32
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2013
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Hobby lobby is one example. As ridiculous as I think the church's position is on use of contraception, the federal government should not be mandating that business owners provide health insurance paying for contraception that in their faith is a sin.
    There is a big difference between this and the gay marriage issue imo. unlike gay marriage failing to provide contraception does not infringe on one's rights or discriminate against a certain group of people. People still have the means to go buy contraception like they always have in the past and frankly IMO it is their responsibility to take care of their own contraceptive needs. If they don't like it they can go work somewhere else. If you flip it around...if you were a business owner you wouldn't want the government forcing you to buy some religious crap that you found objectionable....at least I wouldn't.

    If you don't agree that a liberal judge's vote against hobby lobby is infringing on religious freedoms then I guess we can agree to disagree
     
  7. asher

    asher So Did We

    Messages:
    9,033
    Likes Received:
    686
    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    It's not because for women contraceptive care is more than just "I can have sex without a condom or IUD" but has other positive health care management effects for their body. Not to mention the decision lets them ignore the science on several of the contraceptives in question, which AREN'T abortifactents.

    Not to mention that employers are NOT the same as their business. There are lots of other things the Federal government gets to mandate about your business that one could conceivably claim some religious exemption to but are discriminatory or exploitative all the same (see the FLDS thread below for an example).
     
  8. ZeroTolerance94

    ZeroTolerance94 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    245
    Likes Received:
    44
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Location:
    Fort Drum, FL
    That is mostly the reason I'm registered as a Republican. I believe in a smaller central federal government, and stronger state governments.

    Quite honestly... lately... Fvck the US Government, and fvck every politician involved. They're all crooked liars and thieves. Every. Single. One of them. :realmad::wallbash:
     
  9. ferret

    ferret Not worthy

    Messages:
    1,574
    Likes Received:
    384
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I've always found this topic interesting, because someone can always go a step further... "I believe in a smaller state government, and a stronger county government" ... followed by "I believe in a smaller county government, and a stronger city government", etc.

    Just a thought and not a criticism. Carry on.
     
  10. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,510
    Likes Received:
    482
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    You're thinking of libertarianism. Republicanism is more about decreasing government responsibility towards the communities that it serves.
     
  11. ZeroTolerance94

    ZeroTolerance94 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    245
    Likes Received:
    44
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Location:
    Fort Drum, FL
    Definitely possible to keep taking it a step further and further. And I find it logical.

    One thing I've thought of... Is this:
    The United States is a vast country, with vast amounts of people. It's a melting pot of cultures, and racial diversity. And because of this, it's hard to make laws for everybody that make sense for everybody. Oddly enough, even though it's such a diverse country, people stick to that of their own kind for the most part. I can drive to parts of Florida where not a SINGLE PERSON will speak English... Where it is quite literally Northern Cuba.
    So, some laws that make sense in Hialeah, FL... don't make sense in Yeehaw Junction, FL.

    I think ultimately, boiling down the strongest government to the county level would be ideal. That government could govern it's communities the way the people in that county wish to be governed.

    This is all hypothetical, we all know that could never happen. Just something I've thought of before.
     
  12. pwsusi

    pwsusi SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    32
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2013
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    It doesn't matter if there are other beneficial effects or not. According to the Rick Santorum's of the world you are interfering with the creation of life as God is intending through sexual intercourse. Again, I don't agree with this, but people like him consider it a sin to even use a condom. So it's not just about terminating a life, it's also about preventing one. Furthermore, they are not disqualifying people employment for using contraception or anything like that ...they are simply staying out of it and telling people they need to take care of this on their own because it's something they cannot condone.
    Sure, the government can mandate lots of things from businesses. I would argue such things that should apply include things that directly affect the civil rights of others. This isn't a civil rights issue though and these are products that can be freely acquired by other means. If the govt were to mandate this type of thing it would be discriminating against people of a certain religion because it would automatically disqualify them from owning a business and would not have the same opportunities as those who fine contraception acceptable. Sure the federal government should make sure that the company is creating a safe work environment that doesn't discriminate, but this is completely different regardless of what science says about the other health benefits...it's irrelevant.
     
  13. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,353
    Likes Received:
    934
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    I think it was ruled quite a few decades ago that someone couldn't opt out of taxes which get used for the military based on one's religious beliefs.

    It was already mentioned, but I'm not sure how a for-profit corporation which has no clear religious mission is considered to be a person with religious rights.

    However, the Satanic Church has already started its efforts to have women avoid receiving mandatory pro-life counseling based on religious freedom grounds, so I wonder if the owner of a for-profit corporation could state that supporting untruthfulness is against the corporation's beliefs... so no watchers of Fox News will be hired. It's not about a political belief, because Fox is "fair and balanced," but about Fox not beinf "fair and balanced," so the religious belief is that such people would be dishonest and therefore "shunned" under the corporation's faith.

    I'm waiting to see the amount of trolling which happens under this law.

    Incidentally, the owner of Hobby Lobby didn't originally start with the religious arguments. He actually stated in numerous interviews that he just didn't want to pay because he wanted to stick it to Obama. That someone had to grab onto an opportunistic liar on the right to make a case about faith being under attack is sad, but par for the course.
     
  14. Grindspine

    Grindspine likes pointy things

    Messages:
    1,186
    Likes Received:
    110
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2014
    Location:
    Indiana
    Shouldn't a woman's health care (or anyone's health care) be an issue between the individual, their health care provider, and NO ONE ELSE? As someone who has worked in the medical field for eight years, I still wonder how the employers got involved in this. It is up to the patient and the physician to decide on any and all medical care.

    If an employer offers health benefits to employees, that should not give the employer rights to invade health privacy laws. HIPAA anyone? Health Information Privacy

    The corporate involvement is ludicrous.
     
  15. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,353
    Likes Received:
    934
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    And now it has been established that someone who has legal power of attorney for a person (including a corporation) can declare that such a person is of a particular religious faith.

    Does that mean, if someone else buys or acquires Hobby Lobby, that the corporation might change its religious views, or become an atheist?

    ----

    Sorry. I just remembered that this topic is actually about some folks who are meeting to strategize about bringing religious freedom to discriminate against others to a wider audience, and how to protect such disgusting and unchristian behavior from the law.

    These people show that quite a few Christians just don't give an actual sh1t about the teachings of Jesus Christ, for whom they took the name but not the examples for their religion of hate.
     
  16. pwsusi

    pwsusi SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    32
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2013
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    You're probably right about them, and yes they are despicable. But did you ever notice that the media and society in general seems to be selective when highlighting the extremists. Usually it is racist or homophobic Christians and/or conservatives. There are plenty of racists and despicable people of all colors, religions with different political affiliations. Maybe it's because people are afraid to call out those from certain groups because they are afraid if it being turned around on them and they themselves being labeled as racists/homophobes. Or perhaps it's because they have ulterior motives so they can put a negative label on an entire group for political gain or to somehow push a particular agenda. Or maybe a little of both.

    Anyway, i'm not disagreeing about the religious folks in the video above, but just find it interesting that we never tend to see or talk about extremists on the other side; in fact the groups that they are associated with are often praised.

    Also, as bad as some people are, we cannot have thought police. You can pass legislature to make it illegal to discriminate in the workplace etc, but you cannot control people's thoughts through legislation. Sadly there will always be people who hate and laws won't fix that; education is the only hope. The problem is both sides of the aisle (I would argue dems more than republicans) try to divide us further through class warfare and legislation that gives preferential treatment to certain groups. This is not the way to unite and promote tolerance. It breeds anger, hatred, resentment and sometimes violence.




     
  17. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,510
    Likes Received:
    482
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    Dudes, am I confused or are all you guys saying that girls (who don't work at hobby lobby) are able to get contraceptive pills on their insurance? Seriously? Why the .... doesn't my insurance pay for my rubbers then?
     
  18. asher

    asher So Did We

    Messages:
    9,033
    Likes Received:
    686
    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    Sigh.

    Because many contraceptive pills have very positive effects for managing a woman's health aside from being anti-pregnancy. And they're not one-size-fits-all (or almost all, hyuk hyuk) because it involves fvcking with your hormones, which reacts differently person to person, instead of popping something on/in.
     
  19. ferret

    ferret Not worthy

    Messages:
    1,574
    Likes Received:
    384
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Because your rubbers don't have any bearing on the rest of your health. Contraceptive pills are often prescribed and used by women for reasons other than, well, contraception.
     
  20. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,510
    Likes Received:
    482
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    If that's truly the case then how can there even be insurance policies that wouldn't cover that under just plain ol' medical?
     

Share This Page