ADVERTISEMENT

Someone please explain the relationship between Progressives (Libs) and Muslims.

Fair enough but I still believe he considers Christians and Jews inherently bigoted and unfair to Muslims.

One of the reasons that bigotry is ultimately self-defeating is because it is intellectually lazy. Over-generalizing is intellectually lazy.

Jews and Christians have often been at the forefront of civil rights progress in this country. If you want to victimize christians to advance your narrative generalizing about me isn't the way to do it.
 
Practice whatever the **** you want. Don't expect me or anyone else to do the same and we will be just fine. Keep you shit to yourself...
You definitely don't share the views of the mainstream left on this topic, cakes for gay weddings and men using the ladies restroom and whatnot.
 
Practice whatever the **** you want. Don't expect me or anyone else to do the same and we will be just fine. Keep you shit to yourself...
Weren't you against the Christian cake maker? Maybe I'm mistaken but I didn't think any progressive strayed from the fold in that situation. Maybe you were silent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Medic007
Liberals claim to want a completely secular society, they are obviously anti Christian, anti Jewish why are they so hell bent on allowing Muslims to do as they please?

Muslim societies are the most oppressive in world, they are misogynists, homophobes and intolerant of other religions.

Resident libs what am I missing?

My enemy's enemy is my friend. At least that is why I think they love, support and cherish them.
 
Weren't you against the Christian cake maker? Maybe I'm mistaken but I didn't think any progressive strayed from the fold in that situation. Maybe you were silent.
Lots of difference between an individual and a business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidallen
He was 100% correct though. It was like you read 3 or 4 words from his post and started smashing the attack keys.

What you somehow read "So because you libs think that Christians and Jews still hold ancient believes from the Old Testament that we are equally intolerant of people not like us."

What he actually said.
"The nuts and bolts of islam and christianity both subordinate women, gays, etc, but islam takes it a step further in practice. The old testament mandates genocide, oppression, etc. but judaism and christianity has moved on. Islam hasn't moved on in many cases."

Genocide is certainly a step further.
 
Genocide is certainly a step further.

giphy.gif
 
Lots of difference between an individual and a business.
This is an interesting topic. Should a Baptist preacher be forced to marry a gay couple? Should a black baker be forced to design a cake for a kkk rally?
 
This is an interesting topic. Should a Baptist preacher be forced to marry a gay couple? Should a black baker be forced to design a cake for a kkk rally?
If the Baptist preacher marries people for profit and advertises that fact, yes. Membership in the KKK is not protected, just like not wearing shoes and a shirt isn't protected.
 
If the Baptist preacher marries people for profit and advertises that fact, yes. Membership in the KKK is not protected, just like not wearing shoes and a shirt isn't protected.
So if my dad just asks for costs to be reimbursed then he doesn't have to wed a gay couple?
 
Yeah, is someone telling you differently?
I don't think my father thought about that. He's a tolerant guy but he's also a 70 year old baptist preacher and believes marriage is between a man and woman. Rather than marry two dudes he just doesn't do marriages anymore.
 
I don't think my father thought about that. He's a tolerant guy but he's also a 70 year old baptist preacher and believes marriage is between a man and woman. Rather than marry two dudes he just doesn't do marriages anymore.
Imagine you had some friends over for some drinks and BBQ and you accepted some of their money to cover your costs. Even though there are laws against against discriminating against black people, you would certainly be within your rights not to invite black people to your next party, hell you could refuse to marry them too.
 
Imagine you had some friends over for some drinks and BBQ and you accepted some of their money to cover your costs. Even though there are laws against against discriminating against black people, you would certainly be within your rights not to invite black people to your next party, hell you could refuse to marry them too.
Got it.
 
Weren't you against the Christian cake maker? Maybe I'm mistaken but I didn't think any progressive strayed from the fold in that situation. Maybe you were silent.
Quite vocal. The notion of a public accommodation is quite relevant here...
 
Some individuals are businesses.
Not really, the idea of providing a public accommodation is very well established in law and practice. Whether a single proprietor or a large corporate entity, doing business is a regulated activity, for good reason, and as such subject to certain requirements including non discrimination. Now what you do in your home dude just don't include those unable or unwilling to consent and we are cool...
 
This is an interesting topic. Should a Baptist preacher be forced to marry a gay couple? Should a black baker be forced to design a cake for a kkk rally?
You boys figured this out long ago - the ultimate quid pro quo. "You want to marry in my church? Well son, a nice little donation will help free up the schedule." Complete straw man.
 
There's some truth to that. The nuts and bolts of islam and christianity both subordinate women, gays, etc, but islam takes it a step further in practice. The old testament mandates genocide, oppression, etc. but judaism and christianity has moved on. Islam hasn't moved on in many cases.

I think the reason you don't get the tenor you want from libs is that while they're offended at the extremism, liberals don't trust people like you to treat good muslims fairly. We do disagree with islam's violence and oppression, we just also disagree with the fascists that will use that to pile on members of another minority that don't deserve to be treated poorly. By sake of example: your post. No distinctions contemplated.
The Christian Bible "moved on" with the New Testament. The Old Testament and mention of ancient law has to be understood in context with what was said about it in the New Testament in which Jesus commanded us to love our fellow man.
 
The Christian Bible "moved on" with the New Testament. The Old Testament and mention of ancient law has to be understood in context with what was said about it in the New Testament in which Jesus commanded us to love our fellow man.
Jews don't have a New Testament, but some how they moved on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CowboyJD
If the Baptist preacher marries people for profit and advertises that fact, yes. Membership in the KKK is not protected, just like not wearing shoes and a shirt isn't protected.

Imagine you had some friends over for some drinks and BBQ and you accepted some of their money to cover your costs. Even though there are laws against against discriminating against black people, you would certainly be within your rights not to invite black people to your next party, hell you could refuse to marry them too.

Not really, the idea of providing a public accommodation is very well established in law and practice. Whether a single proprietor or a large corporate entity, doing business is a regulated activity, for good reason, and as such subject to certain requirements including non discrimination. Now what you do in your home dude just don't include those unable or unwilling to consent and we are cool...

These posts pre-suppose that a religious rite of a particular denomination...even one for which a fee is charged...is a public accommodation. I'm not so sure about that. Certainly a fringe issue question for the most part anyway. Certainly ways around it as has been pointed out.
 
These posts pre-suppose that a religious rite of a particular denomination...even one for which a fee is charged...is a public accommodation. I'm not so sure about that. Certainly a fringe issue question for the most part anyway. Certainly ways around it as has been pointed out.
If it is exclusively available to members of that particular denomination, sure. If you have ads in the newspaper for your marriage services only $249, hard to call it more religious rite than public accommodation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidallen
Quite vocal. The notion of a public accommodation is quite relevant here...

Devil's advocate: I never really dug into that cake case and I may be torturing the facts. A baker refused to make cakes for a gay wedding? Why is a class of people with any one sexual desire a protected class? It's not an immutable characteristic like age, race or sex.

How come these people of such Christian conviction never refuse to bake cakes for scripturally adulterous marriages? Why just gay marriage?
 
How come these people of such Christian conviction never refuse to bake cakes for scripturally adulterous marriages? Why just gay marriage?
One is usually obviously apparent using only the sense sight. The other usually isn't. I'm not of Christian conviction, but that would be my guess.
 
Devil's advocate: I never really dug into that cake case and I may be torturing the facts. A baker refused to make cakes for a gay wedding? Why is a class of people with any one sexual desire a protected class? It's not an immutable characteristic like age, race or sex.

How come these people of such Christian conviction never refuse to bake cakes for scripturally adulterous marriages? Why just gay marriage?
In Orygon LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ is a protected class specifically by the bureau of labor and industry. In this particular case, prior commissions were accepted, the bakers balked at a wedding cake only when the customer asked for two females on the topper.

Adulterers are not a protected class in Orygon or they would have to include the mistress figure off to the side...
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_xl72qcu5isp39
If it is exclusively available to members of that particular denomination, sure. If you have ads in the newspaper for your marriage services only $249, hard to call it more religious rite than public accommodation.

Don't know that I agree. Pretty sure I don't.

And that's okay.
 
Devil's advocate: I never really dug into that cake case and I may be torturing the facts. A baker refused to make cakes for a gay wedding? Why is a class of people with any one sexual desire a protected class? It's not an immutable characteristic like age, race or sex.

How come these people of such Christian conviction never refuse to bake cakes for scripturally adulterous marriages? Why just gay marriage?

A hopefully informed response to the Devil's Advocate:

The baker refusal cases also involved local ordinances or state laws granting protected status/class for sexual orientation. They weren't based upon Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Additionally, the EEOC takes the position internally/administratively that discriminating against a gay person in the providing of public accommodations is discriminating against them based upon their sex. i.e. if it was a woman marrying that man, you wouldn't be discriminating. EEOC also takes the position that discriminating on the basis of LGBTQ status is also discrimination on the basis of stereotypes and assumptions about sex and is also therefore discrimination on the basis of sex.

Those cases are presently winding themselves through the courts. I expect the EEOC's official position on those issues might change with a new administration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_xl72qcu5isp39
Liberals claim to want a completely secular society, they are obviously anti Christian, anti Jewish why are they so hell bent on allowing Muslims to do as they please?

Muslim societies are the most oppressive in world, they are misogynists, homophobes and intolerant of other religions.

Resident libs what am I missing?

Here you go. The unholy alliance

 
I don't see libs defending Muslim oppression and bigotry they just won't talk about it. I would argue that by ignoring Muslim bigotry libs are giving them a pass

Libs ignore everything as long it gains votes.....look at Madonna, Ashley Judd, the riots....Libs believe in so much freedom to do anything you want that eventually no one will have freedoms.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT