djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,104
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 29, 2015 12:05:23 GMT -5
is the school governed by public accommodation laws?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 18:41:31 GMT -5
No one rewrote the constitution. Unless you are addressing the amendments? The bakery was not a religious institution separate from state. Our Supreme Court rewrote the Constitution when they okayed Obamacare. Freedom of Religion is next. They didn't "re-write" it... they just ignored it. Slight, but important, difference.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 18:42:19 GMT -5
I don't understand why Christians do things like this?!? No matter what your opinion is of anything parents or guardians do- I would think we could ALL agree, it isn't the child's fault. Is there a better mission field than children? What impression of Christianity do you suppose this kid will have now?On the flip side, why would gay parents choose a Christian school? Simple: the objective of gay activists is to eventually criminalize Christianity. Our First Amendment, the only legal guarantee in human history of freedom of speech, of conscience, and of expression, is in grave danger; and as a result humanity itself is in danger of reversing the 5,000 year leap, and taking those first steps into 1,000 years of darkness. An honest one? That's my guess anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 18:51:04 GMT -5
No lawyer worth his/her degree and/or Bar card will take up this case. It's a no-win for the two moms.
A religious institution has the right to follow the tenets of it's beliefs. Period. End of story. Full stop.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 29, 2015 19:05:13 GMT -5
I don't understand why Christians do things like this?!? No matter what your opinion is of anything parents or guardians do- I would think we could ALL agree, it isn't the child's fault. Is there a better mission field than children? What impression of Christianity do you suppose this kid will have now?On the flip side, why would gay parents choose a Christian school? Simple: the objective of gay activists is to eventually criminalize Christianity. Our First Amendment, the only legal guarantee in human history of freedom of speech, of conscience, and of expression, is in grave danger; and as a result humanity itself is in danger of reversing the 5,000 year leap, and taking those first steps into 1,000 years of darkness. An honest one? That's my guess anyway. Christianity is exclusive. The fact that there's a stairway to Heaven, and a Highway to hell says something about expected traffic flow.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 29, 2015 19:11:45 GMT -5
Our Supreme Court rewrote the Constitution when they okayed Obamacare. Freedom of Religion is next. They didn't "re-write" it... they just ignored it. Slight, but important, difference. Actually, they re-wrote the Constitution to allow them to literally- not figuratively- re-write the ObamaCare law the way they believe Congress intended to write it. They do not have the legitimate authority to do this, and their ruling is null and void. No one is legitimately bound by it. They had an obligation to read the law the way it was written and rule on the Constitutionality of the law as written. This is no different than their previous ruling in which the Obama administration took months of denying the individual mandate penalty was a tax and went before the SCOTUS and stated it was a tax because the law as written is unConstitutional. The SCOTUS had an obligation to rule the law unConstitutional as written. If congress was willing at that point to amend it, they have the authority to do that. However, ObamaCare as written is illegal and unConstitutional. I would argue that the law wasn't even passed-- if you recall the "deem and pass" stunt; and the fact that spending bills / tax bills cannot originate in the Senate. This just underscores the fact that we are now living in literal lawless anarchy. With each move the government makes, it is undermining its legitimacy, and losing its authority. But hey- as long as the screaming, crying, temper tantrum cry baby liberals throw gets them what they want-- who the fuck cares, right?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 29, 2015 19:13:08 GMT -5
is the school governed by public accommodation laws? Public accommodation is not a legitimate argument. Since I know you already have- please do not confuse accepted argument for legitimate argument.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 29, 2015 19:20:36 GMT -5
I don't understand why Christians do things like this?!? No matter what your opinion is of anything parents or guardians do- I would think we could ALL agree, it isn't the child's fault. Is there a better mission field than children? What impression of Christianity do you suppose this kid will have now? On the flip side, why would gay parents choose a Christian school? Simple: the objective of gay activists is to eventually criminalize Christianity. Our First Amendment, the only legal guarantee in human history of freedom of speech, of conscience, and of expression, is in grave danger; and as a result humanity itself is in danger of reversing the 5,000 year leap, and taking those first steps into 1,000 years of darkness. IMO that is an unenlightened way of thinking. Gay parents choose Christian schools because they believe that is the best way to raise their child. My parents are staunchly catholic. I know of seven families that were involved in my Christian Upbringing that have children in Gay relationships. I think only one of those families has children, but those children are front and center in church every week. There are many sinners in church. Church calls us to be better individuals, I figure we can pray about something to change. The lord may move those individuals to end their homosexual relationship or it may move people in the church/the church to change their thinking about homosexual relationships, but when we pray about it, we put it in God's hands and the judgmental tendencies go away and you get acceptance. The problem I have with it is one of logic. Christianity as an institution relies on the Bible as the source of spiritual authority. The scriptures teach that homosexual acts are sinful. Why someone would want to be part of an institution that was at odds with their lifestyle, unless they intended to seek to alter their lifestyle to conform with the belief system, doesn't make any sense to me. Unless the aim is to change the institution. I'm all for nailing your arguments to the Church door, and starting your own branch (and I think many denominations have done this) but if you have familiarized yourself with the doctrines of the religious institution you're getting involved with, and you disagree- YOU must conform. You should not seek to use the violence of government against the institution to force it to conform to your lifestyle, nor does the government have the authority to do it anyway. Period. And I'm not stupid. There's a distinct anti-Christian agenda at the heart of this. You'll note they don't try this shit in mosques and madrasas.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 19:40:22 GMT -5
They didn't "re-write" it... they just ignored it. Slight, but important, difference. Actually, they re-wrote the Constitution to allow them to literally- not figuratively- re-write the ObamaCare law the way they believe Congress intended to write it. They do not have the legitimate authority to do this, and their ruling is null and void. No one is legitimately bound by it. They had an obligation to read the law the way it was written and rule on the Constitutionality of the law as written. This is no different than their previous ruling in which the Obama administration took months of denying the individual mandate penalty was a tax and went before the SCOTUS and stated it was a tax because the law as written is unConstitutional. The SCOTUS had an obligation to rule the law unConstitutional as written. If congress was willing at that point to amend it, they have the authority to do that. However, ObamaCare as written is illegal and unConstitutional. I would argue that the law wasn't even passed-- if you recall the "deem and pass" stunt; and the fact that spending bills / tax bills cannot originate in the Senate. This just underscores the fact that we are now living in literal lawless anarchy. With each move the government makes, it is undermining its legitimacy, and losing its authority. But hey- as long as the screaming, crying, temper tantrum cry baby liberals throw gets them what they want-- who the fuck cares, right? I'm not disagreeing with you about them failing to do their Constitutional duty... We just differ on how they did it. I say they ignored, you say they re-wrote. Please produce a copy of the re-written Constitution, thanks... if your premise is correct, of course.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 19:41:15 GMT -5
is the school governed by public accommodation laws? Public accommodation is not a legitimate argument. Since I know you already have- please do not confuse accepted argument for legitimate argument. It is a legitimate argument when it applies. I just doesn't apply here.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,402
|
Post by thyme4change on Sept 29, 2015 19:49:52 GMT -5
An honest one? That's my guess anyway. Christianity is exclusive. The fact that there's a stairway to Heaven, and a Highway to hell says something about expected traffic flow. Do you know the difference between the bible and rock and roll?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,104
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 29, 2015 19:55:17 GMT -5
is the school governed by public accommodation laws? Public accommodation is not a legitimate argument. Since I know you already have- please do not confuse accepted argument for legitimate argument. note that i was ASKING, Paul. i was not making "an argument". i was suggesting that by answering one question you can answer the OP.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,460
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 29, 2015 20:02:10 GMT -5
An honest one? That's my guess anyway. Christianity is exclusive. The fact that there's a stairway to Heaven, and a Highway to hell says something about expected traffic flow. Hell is filling up fast with all those judgy people so make your reservation early.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 20:09:59 GMT -5
Which is better?
or
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,104
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 29, 2015 20:13:32 GMT -5
Public accommodation is not a legitimate argument. Since I know you already have- please do not confuse accepted argument for legitimate argument. It is a legitimate argument when it applies. I just doesn't apply here. i expect that you know that i never claimed that it did.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 20:15:07 GMT -5
IMO that is an unenlightened way of thinking. Gay parents choose Christian schools because they believe that is the best way to raise their child. My parents are staunchly catholic. I know of seven families that were involved in my Christian Upbringing that have children in Gay relationships. I think only one of those families has children, but those children are front and center in church every week. There are many sinners in church. Church calls us to be better individuals, I figure we can pray about something to change. The lord may move those individuals to end their homosexual relationship or it may move people in the church/the church to change their thinking about homosexual relationships, but when we pray about it, we put it in God's hands and the judgmental tendencies go away and you get acceptance. The problem I have with it is one of logic. Christianity as an institution relies on the Bible as the source of spiritual authority. The scriptures teach that homosexual acts are sinful. Why someone would want to be part of an institution that was at odds with their lifestyle, unless they intended to seek to alter their lifestyle to conform with the belief system, doesn't make any sense to me. Unless the aim is to change the institution. I'm all for nailing your arguments to the Church door, and starting your own branch (and I think many denominations have done this) but if you have familiarized yourself with the doctrines of the religious institution you're getting involved with, and you disagree- YOU must conform. You should not seek to use the violence of government against the institution to force it to conform to your lifestyle, nor does the government have the authority to do it anyway. Period. And I'm not stupid. There's a distinct anti-Christian agenda at the heart of this. You'll note they don't try this shit in mosques and madrasas. Don't make the mistake of judging all Chtistisns to be like your, or all interpretations to follow yours..
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 20:16:53 GMT -5
It is a legitimate argument when it applies. I just doesn't apply here. i expect that you know that i never claimed that it did. Yup. I was just refuting Paul's error, in a "general sense". Wasn't addressing how it didn't apply to your post.
|
|
haapai
Junior Associate
Character
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:40:06 GMT -5
Posts: 5,886
|
Post by haapai on Sept 29, 2015 21:48:22 GMT -5
I don't think that this case will become an issue unless the parents are unfortunate enough to find a lawyer that will sue the church-affiliated school. If the school isn't part of a voucher program and doesn't accept any type of public money, the parents will almost certainly lose.
We have a long tradition in this country of letting religious organizations do pretty much whatever they want to do as long as they are truly separate from the state. I seem to remember a time when black people were excluded from the mainstream Mormon church and most Protestant denominations wouldn't let women preach or ascend to the level of bishop. Those rules didn't change because the gubmint demanded change. Those rules changed because folks within the religious organization decided that they were embarrassing and hard to explain to one's children.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 29, 2015 21:58:00 GMT -5
The problem I have with it is one of logic. Christianity as an institution relies on the Bible as the source of spiritual authority. The scriptures teach that homosexual acts are sinful. Why someone would want to be part of an institution that was at odds with their lifestyle, unless they intended to seek to alter their lifestyle to conform with the belief system, doesn't make any sense to me. Unless the aim is to change the institution. I'm all for nailing your arguments to the Church door, and starting your own branch (and I think many denominations have done this) but if you have familiarized yourself with the doctrines of the religious institution you're getting involved with, and you disagree- YOU must conform. You should not seek to use the violence of government against the institution to force it to conform to your lifestyle, nor does the government have the authority to do it anyway. Period. And I'm not stupid. There's a distinct anti-Christian agenda at the heart of this. You'll note they don't try this shit in mosques and madrasas. Don't make the mistake of judging all Chtistisns to be like your, or all interpretations to follow yours.. Not doing that at all. I have pointed out that there are denominations of Christianity that are accepting of people living a homosexual lifestyle. This particular place is not one of them. So, you don't go into a religious institution and try to change it by force, and there's no legitimate argument for government to deprive anyone of life, liberty, or property for refusing to violate their conscience. This is why we have a First Amendment. And a Second- in case they forget.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 29, 2015 21:59:27 GMT -5
Christianity is exclusive. The fact that there's a stairway to Heaven, and a Highway to hell says something about expected traffic flow. Do you know the difference between the bible and rock and roll? Some denominations of Christianity permit a sense of humor. (and there's plenty of Scripture to support the concept- narrow is the road that leads to life and few there be that find it. Wide is the path that leads to destruction and many there be that find it)
|
|
fishy999
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 9, 2015 20:40:43 GMT -5
Posts: 629
|
Post by fishy999 on Sept 29, 2015 22:02:45 GMT -5
I'd like the government to rule that any tax free considerations count as accepting public money- because it is.
|
|
haapai
Junior Associate
Character
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:40:06 GMT -5
Posts: 5,886
|
Post by haapai on Sept 29, 2015 22:54:56 GMT -5
I'll disagree with you there. Most of the properties within my city that are owned by religious organizations are a welcome respite from unrelenting commerce and blight. A bit of Russian sage in late autumn or a flash of evergreen in winter is worth quite a lot to me. Without churches, my city would need a whole lot more parks and public landscaping to be habitable.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 0:57:18 GMT -5
I'd like the government to rule that any tax free considerations count as accepting public money- because it is. That is a good point,the rest of us have to pay more taxes to give churches their exemption. I don't get the whole "Christians are being persecuted" argument. They have tax free churches in every city in the country. I do agree that these moms should not win, the same rights that allow the school to refuse the student are the same ones that would allow a person to ridicule the school and their beliefs without repercussion. I know someone that is a teacher for a private organization and he couldn't disagree more with their views. If the employer knew certain things about the employee, they would be fired immediately. The individual puts up with it because the school pays a lot better than others in the area.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 1:08:20 GMT -5
I'll disagree with you there. Most of the properties within my city that are owned by religious organizations are a welcome respite from unrelenting commerce and blight. A bit of Russian sage in late autumn or a flash of evergreen in winter is worth quite a lot to me. Without churches, my city would need a whole lot more parks and public landscaping to be habitable. But for all of those you have another area where churches take up prime real estate and the cities get nothing. They also get the parsonage exemption to what I think is an unlimited amount. Those megapreachers with mansions pay zero property tax.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Sept 30, 2015 6:58:13 GMT -5
No lawyer worth his/her degree and/or Bar card will take up this case. It's a no-win for the two moms. A religious institution has the right to follow the tenets of it's beliefs. Period. End of story. Full stop. Ha Ha There are thousands of lawyers who would sell their soul for the opportunity. And it only takes one.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Sept 30, 2015 7:03:31 GMT -5
Christianity is exclusive. The fact that there's a stairway to Heaven, and a Highway to hell says something about expected traffic flow. Hell is filling up fast with all those judgy people so make your reservation early. So true. And many are left wing progressives. That's if they even consider themselves as Christians, but they will get a surprise on the day of their death.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,460
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 30, 2015 10:10:03 GMT -5
Hell is filling up fast with all those judgy people so make your reservation early. So true. And many are left wing progressives. That's if they even consider themselves as Christians, but they will get a surprise on the day of their death. I imagine, no, that's not right, I know all those judgmental conservatives will be clogging up the down escalators leaving little room for left-wing progressives.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 30, 2015 10:55:34 GMT -5
I'm very pleased to know the "up" escalator will be darn near empty! I'm very claustrophobic in crowds and I hate escalators to begin with. That's one more thing I can check off my worry list!
And just as an afterthought....I don't think judgmental people will be on the down ride. If that were true, they might as well shut off the up one because there isn't a single person on this Earth who hasn't judged at some point in their lives. It's only deemed to be a bad thing if someone else is doing it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 11:21:46 GMT -5
If the school get some kind of funding from the government, then the two moms would be supporting the school through tax dollars but not allowed to use it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 17:41:13 GMT -5
No lawyer worth his/her degree and/or Bar card will take up this case. It's a no-win for the two moms. A religious institution has the right to follow the tenets of it's beliefs. Period. End of story. Full stop. Ha Ha There are thousands of lawyers who would sell their soul for the opportunity. And it only takes one. And they aren't worth their degrees / Bar cards. Not all lawyers actually understand the law... and some scuzzy ones understand it just fine but use it to get around the law... and the rest that would take it are just out to get their fees, without caring about the interests of the client. So, as I said, not worth their degrees and/or Bar cards.
|
|