Christian Conservative Republican homophobia on open display

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

  1. asher

    asher So Did We

    Messages:
    9,033
    Likes Received:
    686
    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    Because slutty sluts doing slut things.

    (read: people are assholes. the whole case is about using privately held religious beliefs to ignore science and not pay benefits for those claims or medications specifically)
     
  2. ferret

    ferret Not worthy

    Messages:
    1,574
    Likes Received:
    384
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Lots of insurance policies don't cover lots of things. Or rather, they didn't before the ACA was passed. Hobby Lobby was in essence a company using "religious freedom" to get out of the requirements by ACA that insurance include contraceptive products for women. Viagra for men they're ok with, but anything that acts as a contraceptive for women, regardless of the reason the woman is using that medication.........
     
  3. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,586
    Likes Received:
    565
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    And our ....in social justice system held that up? What a bunch of pricks.
     
  4. asher

    asher So Did We

    Messages:
    9,033
    Likes Received:
    686
    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    Guess how the SCOTUS split on Hobby Lobby?
     
  5. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,586
    Likes Received:
    565
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    I don't even want to.

    Edit: I looked it up. It was 5-4. That's not so bad I guess, almost an even split. The way you said it was so ominous like they unanimously supported Hobby Lobby lol
     
  6. Grindspine

    Grindspine likes pointy things

    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    124
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2014
    Location:
    Indiana
    Us & Them mentalities are generally bad and tend to dehumanize the "other".

    Unfortunately, those who ascribe to no faith find themselves being the "other" in conservative media. This puts atheists and agnostics in a defensive position where it is easy to see conservatives as the "other". It is difficult for either side to have meaningful conversation or debate when defensive positions are so strongly reinforced by attacks.

    That all being said, I wish that others in the world would just pick up more books, take an ethics class, take a trip to another country/culture, and try to be more sympathetic toward other worldviews in general.

    It is entirely too unfortunate when groups try to dictate laws on the private/personal behaviors of others; that is something against which we all need to defend.
     
  7. asher

    asher So Did We

    Messages:
    9,033
    Likes Received:
    686
    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    5/4 party line split, but the majority's legal reasoning is complete garbage.

    ed: added hyperlink reference.

    PPS: It also bears repeating that Hobby Lobby's pre-ACA health plans already supported the contraceptives in question, making any claims that it's a religious argument, not political, complete bullshit.
     
  8. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,393
    Likes Received:
    970
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    Were you aware that the 2012 National Republican Party platform specifically called for a Constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage?

    I don't know if you're claiming that the National Republican Party is made up of extremists... in which case, why are you arguing with the portrayal of Republicans based on the actions of the National Republican Party, as well as those who are members and contributors?

    That 2012 platform, in the wake of the whole whacky GOP "legitimate rape" stuff, also included a call to recognize a fetus as a human being, creating a conflict which they didn't resolve (read as, didn't address specifically because it would make their thinking obvious) regarding cases where the life of the mother was in danger, or in cases of rape.

    It's that kind of thing which makes people view the National Republican Party, and its members and contributors, as the national leaders on that kind of stuff.

    You know, because they've done that kind of stuff.

    I recognize that now, some strategists have realized that they're losing votes from younger voters, and so they have to recruit more moderates.

    But that just means all that sh1t apparently wasn't a principled stance for some, but treating other human beings in a sh1tty way because it got them more votes.

    In other words, profit, no matter who gets hurt.

    Again, that doesn't make then look very good.

    It's pretty ridiculous to say that people who generally fight for equal rights are trying to maintain the status quo in order to hold onto votes. In that case, if the actual generators of divisiveness just allowed equal rights (including voting rights, religious rights, rights to decide their own reproduction, and marriage rights), then the Republicans would have stripped away that strength from the Democrats.

    That's a completely inverted and silly point of view. It's like making the asinine assertion that abolitionists and slaves wanted to maintain slavery in order to hold onto power.

    Seriously? :lol:
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2014
  9. pwsusi

    pwsusi SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    32
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2013
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    No. what i'm saying is both sides have extremists and both have moderates; it has been like that since our country was founded. it's not fair to label people because of the views of the extremists in their party. I know you're going to say that even if one says they're not a racist that they are enabling racism because of party affiliation....and perhaps even making them a racist (guilt by association). But that is a simplistic view of the world imo. I know we (unfortunately) have a 2 party system and that automatically aligns people with some moderates of their own kind but unfortunately also the extremists. The reality is we have many problems and issues to debate; not just the one at hand. There will always be people that blindly tow the party line, but most thinking people are not like that (left and right alike). The problem is most of our politicians (on both sides) ARE like that...they will tow the party line and i think this is mostly because they have to do this for their own self-preservation (pander to your base and have the backs of your party members). It sucks, but it's reality. And just because the politican's do this doesn't mean we should be as shallow (even though they want us to be because it helps them stay in power).

    In the real world most reasonable people have to pick their poison, and if the party you share views with the most is off the mark on something the best you can do is hold your nose and vote, and try to influence change within the party. The republican party is split in several pieces right now partly for this reason. As much as I'm sure you hate all sides of the republican debate, I view this turmoil as a good thing. It means there is change coming...it may be for the worst, but may be for the better. It's a chance worth taking because what was there before was nothing to write home about.


    The homophobes in your video are not being misrepresented; they are biggots. It's just that liberals love to point out bigotry coming from Christians and use it to talk about how tolerant and interested in equality they are. Yet mysteriously they completely ignore bigotry coming from their own side. Interesting that you did the same thing with my previous post. Why aren't we hearing dems denounce the black panther party for showing up to polls with clubs intimidating people? Why do they call for professional sports team owners to resign for racist comments (rightfully so) yet defend democrats who have made numerous racists comments? Why aren't we calling for people like Sharpton to step down as TV show host with all the anti-semitic crap he has spewed over the years? Why are dems pushing so called anti-hate bills that the Attorney General himself admits discriminates against certain people and justifies it? We go on and on and on about racist republican's but sweep these things under the rug. Why, because we think one side is "not as bad" as the other? Because one form of intolerance is more acceptable than the other? Because one says they're more tolerant than the other or we tell ourselves they care about us more than the other side? I call bullsh1t. They pin us against each other and put on a charade like they really care. Dems are pandering to their base, and republican's to their's to raise money and keep themselves in office. It's that simple. They are all full of sh1t for different reasons. it goes back to my point about picking your poison and having to cast your vote based on more than just one issue and hoping you can get some reasonable people in there than can compromise and do what's best for the people and not themselves.

    You may believe that the dems are actually seeking equality...good for you....i disagree. If one thinks that makes me a racist then so be it. Remember obama himself was anti-gay marriage the first time he ran in 2008. I wonder if a change in popular opinion over the years had anything to do with his about face. He "evolved" just like many others on both the left and right have "evolved" on issues...unless the person is of the other party in which case we call them a flip flopper. The whole bunch of them are full of crap and the people that blindly follow are just as bad. This country is going to sh1t and we have law makers trying to limit the size of our sodas and who are in constant campaign mode blaming the other side day after day after day ad nauseum instead of going behind a closed door and working things out like leaders are supposed to. They are more interested in putting on a dog and pony show on TV and dividing us to get votes....and then after the election do all the unpopular sh1t that they promised their donors they'd do but didn't have the balls to do prior to elections. All i see is dividing and conquering coming from the top down on the left. And yes I also see hatred on the right too. They do what they do in the name of God who is supposed to be all loving and forgiving. It is a complete contradiction and just plain stupid.


    anyway, rant off....peace.
     
    TRENCHLORD likes this.
  10. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,393
    Likes Received:
    970
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    I'm not sure how much racist civilian groups, like the leftist Black Panthers and the socially conservative Ku Klux Klan, have to do with national political parties engaging in bigoted behavior.

    You originally felt that Republicans are unjustly viewed as bigoted, when Democrats propose just as many bigoted legislative initiatives (or so you claimed).

    With the example of the National Republican Party enshrining bigotry in their party platform only two years ago, I was hoping you'd say, well, yeah, as a political party the Republicans are pretty bigoted.

    Instead, you're pulling an Orson Scott Card, who claimed that opposition to bigotry is bigotry. "Democrats are bigots and trying to keep bigotry alive for political purposes!" That reasoning is a fail. Bigotry (against blacks, whites, gays, women) is a form of intolerance, but intolerance of bigotry is not bigotry. That's why the Nazi bigotry was definitely intolerance, but US intolerance of the Nazis wasn't bigotry.

    It would be asinine to claim that the Allies loved having the Nazis around because it made them look good. It was about getting rid of that threat.

    And some view bigotry in the same way, as something to be opposed and removed from the lives of innocent people.

    That's some scary logic, to be able to paint fighting bigotry as a bad thing. It's hard for me to credit it as sincere.
     
  11. AxeHappy

    AxeHappy SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,970
    Likes Received:
    239
    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Location:
    Guelph
    Saying everyone has to play by the same rules is literally the exact opposite of discrimination.

    You don't get to say, "But I have these provably erroneous beliefs so I get to ignore laws that others have to follow."
     
  12. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,393
    Likes Received:
    970
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    Do you folks remember when the prescription hormonal therapy known as "the pill" became part of federal health care?

    IIRC, it was initially denied for a long period of time.

    But something else was covered, a quality of life prescription, which the Rick Santorums of the world embraced.

    Erectile dysfunction medication.

    It was pointed out that certain members of Congress were fighting for men's sexual quality of life, and against the same quality of life for women.

    You'll notice that the Hobby Lobby case didn't make mention of their desire to avoid paying for prescription Viagra and such.

    To choose an easy example... is a member of both the American Nazi Party and the Ku Klux Klan automatically disqualified from owning a restaurant? I'm completely unaware of such a law or statute.

    Is a Klan member banned from employment as a firefighter? Not that I'm aware.

    I think what you're saying is, if someone wants to work in a particular field or to own a business, then they are free to do so, but if they then decide they refuse to respect the law regarding the rights of others, then they violate the law and lose the employment and/or license which they agreed to follow when they signed for the license or job application.

    If someone would argue that a business owner has the right to keep out n*ggers or to leave them in a fire because of a sincerely held belief... no, they don't have a right to that business license or employment if they insist on their beliefs being more important than the rights of others.

    A strict Buddhist can apply for and get a job as a butcher... but a reasonable accommodation for that job would not include being exempted from working with meat.

    Same thing. If your idea of a reasonable accommodation for your business license is to be free of n*ggers, or to discriminate against others, then you lose.


    ----

    How far does someone have the right to extend their fist?

    They cannot extend their fist far enough to violate someone else's rights.
     
  13. 7stg

    7stg SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,621
    Likes Received:
    155
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Location:
    WA
    I think that if it involves the government, tax payer money, or tax breaks there should be the strictest of nondiscrimination laws. For example, if a church or other non-profit is preaching hate and they are a 501c3 we are funding that.

    If a person wants to be a bigot, as long as they are not harming another person they should have that right. The question is how far does that go in employment and business.
     
  14. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,393
    Likes Received:
    970
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    At this point, it's interesting to re-read this topic, and there have been many developments.

    There have now been numerous Republican legislatures which have acted to limit LGBT equality, and to codify the ability to discriminate against LGBT Americans. I can't think of a single one passed by Democrats. I guess that the person betting on the Republicans not being antigay lost that one, based upon actual actions of said Republicans.

    ----

    Regarding the bakery, it turns out they were fined because they doxxed the lesbian couple on social media, giving out the couple's personal information. That led to the couple suffering from death threats and other harassment. That isn't an issue of freedom of speech or religion. It's deliberately putting someone's personal info out there to cause trouble, and the court stated as much.

    Further, the only things the bakery owners were prevented from talking about were the couple, and any assertions that they would deliberately break state antidiscrimination laws by refusing to serve all members of the public. You can't state that you are going to discriminate in your business under Oregon law. They were told that, and they said they weren't going to follow that law, but that's not the same as a gag order.

    That's not quite what conservative news sources were saying about any aspects of the case.

    Here's the thing which immediately springs to my mind: If you have to lie in order to make yourself sympathetic, that should be your huge waving red flag that you're in the wrong.

    If a news organization can't bother to find out the facts, it's not a real news organization.

    If a news organization knows the facts, but lies to gain ratings or to ingratiate itself with a group, it's not a real news organization.

    That's a lot of lies which are now cleared up.

    And a lot of clarity arising from Republican legislators putting their bigotry into law.

    And that's the wrap up!
     
  15. pwsusi

    pwsusi SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    32
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2013
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    My guess is that very few people know about the social media aspect of the case, which as you state is one of the reasons for the fine and so called "gag order". I would agree, you're not going to hear about that on conservative news stations...and does leaving this information out fuel the fire of the religious freedom crowd? Yes! But come on, are you honestly saying that all the other major news outlets are not equally guilty of the same thing? Have you heard any of them talking about the social media piece that you call out conservatives for leaving out? No! Why? They are fueling the fire from the other side. They absolutely love demonizing Christians. The truth of the matter is this type of refusal of service goes on every single day, whether we agree with it or not. Look up some of the hidden cam stuff when people have gone into Muslim bakeries asking for gay wedding cakes. Is this any less hateful? These don't get any media attention though, why is that? Is it because there's no social media slandering component to it...i would say not since no one is talking about that on either side of the aisle. It's all about ratings and pushing a social agenda. You will never see the Muslim thing on the news, just like you won't see any stories on discrimination against white people, black on white crime, or a negative piece on illegal aliens.

    As for the whole Republican's are biggots thing. Most people i've spoken to that are against gay marriage (and yes democrats are christians too) don't really care what gay people do. They don't hate them at all or want to deny them anything, they just cannot recognize the union under the eyes of God because they think it's a sin. They also don't want acceptance to be forced on them, just like the secular world doesn't want religion forced on them. The problem is until we separate the legal rights of married people from the religious sacrament of marriage we will continue to talk about this until blue in the face. In this case there is no separation of church and state there should be, because at the end of the day from a legal perspective all it really is, is a contract between two people that has certain legal implications. What is interesting though is that if there are so many "benefits" to being married that too in itself discriminatory. Where is all the outcry for single people :)

    There is a lot of intolerance in the name of tolerance.
     
  16. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Do you really consider these to be equal statements?

    [EDIT]

    I should also point out the Christians also want the second statement along with the first. No Christian wants a foreign belief thrust upon them legally or socially, a Lutheran wouldn't want Catholicism thrust upon them, etc. The issue that arises is many still want to be the ones forcing the beliefs, but they want the group that makes these decisions to be like-minded folk (IE of the same belief).

    When you take this into account the notion is redundant on the positive end. If you're already of the same faith what benefit does a law asserting what you already assert as truth going to do? This indirectly implies that the only purpose is to in fact force these beliefs on those who don't share identical beliefs as themselves.
     
  17. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,393
    Likes Received:
    970
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    pwsusi, I didn't use the word "Christian" in that last post at all, not even when mentioning the Republican antigay legislation which attempted to do exactly what you specifically claimed they didn't do any more than Democrats.

    Further, you said it was wrong to claim that Republican, Christian and antigay actions were tied together.

    It's hard to credit your previous statements when you suddenly acknowledge that connection yourself.

    Anyway, the Republicans have definitely passed more antigay legsilation than the Democrats, and they have done so in order to support religious prejudices against gays, as opposed to honoring the Constitution.

    When the majority of your own party, including Presidential candidates, manage to get in digs at gays, it puts one int he awkward position of losing plausible deniability regarding those facts. You can continue, if you want, but if it is an easy matter to refute those mistaken claims, is there anything to be gained by making them again?
     
  18. pwsusi

    pwsusi SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    32
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2013
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Sorry, the whole thread is about biggoted Christians so maybe i misunderstood. I never said Republicans and Demoncrats are equal with respect to gay/religious legislation. Clearly the republicans pander to religious, gun right groups,etc and democrats pander to gay, minority, and other special interest groups. The point was, as long as we have a religous instiution like marriage that is used as the foundation for legal status in the secular world we're going to have problems like this. I think you're point is that fighting to keep gays from being married is homophobic, while i'm saying that this is a group of people who are trying to preserve something in their faith and prevent changing it to something that they believe is a sin. So separation of church and state was my point. There is no reason we couldn't have a fair tax system that doesn't get marriage all wrapped up in it. There are also ways we could address things like healhcare proxy etc if we used the energy to solve the problems instead of wasting time calling each other names.


    The republican party isn't my party, not sure how you jumped to that conclusion. If there are republicans that have "taken digs" at gays then shame on them. So i guess that disqualifies all republicans and they all become biggots because of certain individuals? No all republicans believe the same thing. If you haven't noticed there are quite a few splits in the party proving my point (moderates, tea party, libertarian, etc). To stereotype or label the whole party is wrong. Are you prepared to stand behind every statement every democrats has made? it's time to stop labeling people based on party affliation, gender, race, etc. We are all Americans. Isn't that what the left wants...tolerance? It seems the left is just as guilty as the right at smearing and waging war on the opposition. Divide and conquor and stay in power, that's what i see coming from both sides. Keep talking about wars on woman and anti gay christians while muslims have woman covered from head to toe and throw gays from tops of buildings. haven't seen one thread about these things or news stories.
     
  19. AxeHappy

    AxeHappy SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,970
    Likes Received:
    239
    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Location:
    Guelph
    The concept of marriage predates the concept of religion. .... off with that religious institution boulderdash.
     
  20. Fred the Shred

    Fred the Shred Shrederick

    Messages:
    4,788
    Likes Received:
    3,117
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    I am a Christian. I promptly admit that it is a belief system, which involves a number of unverifiable truths I choose to believe in.

    Unverifiable, thus potentially incorrect data which is not even viable for testing has no place whatsoever in any country's policies, which have the duty of ensuring quality of life in equal fashion for guys with my belief system, slight variations of it, big variations of it, no belief system at all, completely different belief systems, you name it.

    I find it incredibly backwards to see Christianity used as a political tool AND purpose to boot. History is filled of examples of why that is completely not functional or remotely fair, if the most basic common sense isn't enough. :shrug:
     

Share This Page