Kome: F*ck you with a rake made of AIDS
grumpfuff: All it will take is one non-straight Christian to deny service to a straight Christian.Watch how quickly these laws get scrapped once that happens.
Serious Black: grumpfuff: All it will take is one non-straight Christian to deny service to a straight Christian.Watch how quickly these laws get scrapped once that happens.Make sure the straight Christian is remarried after a divorce first.
Kome: Amazing that your religious freedom impacts the freedoms and rights of millions of Americans to marry the person they are in love with, but that them legally marrying the person they want to does not in any way affect how strongly you believe in the tenets of your faith. It's almost as if, and bear with me here, your entire argument is a bunch of hollow bullsh*t that you whine like a spoiled child about so you can continue to hate people for no good goddamn reason. F*ck you with a rake made of AIDS, you stupid f*cking douchecanoes.
DamnYankees: Religious freedom does not mean we read your mind to determine whether or not a particular belief is motivated by religious reasoning. Conservatives shouldn't want us to to do that.
God Is My Co-Pirate: DamnYankees: Religious freedom does not mean we read your mind to determine whether or not a particular belief is motivated by religious reasoning. Conservatives shouldn't want us to to do that.We're going to have to have a conversation about this, and I mean all of us in Western society. Who the hell is the State to decide if a religious conviction is valid? On the other hand, do we just take as law whatever an individual says about themselves? Maybe it was easy when there was just one church in town, but you can't say that some religions are "real" (and tax-exempt) and others aren't. On the other hand, religion cannot be a catch-all excuse for open bigotry, or for, say, failing to fill prescriptions at your job.
Diogenes: I guess only Christian rights matter. Good thing the Constitution enshrines Christianity as a state religion.
Mentat: I thought your rights end where your fist hits my face?
God Is My Co-Pirate: On the other hand, religion cannot be a catch-all excuse for open bigotry, or for, say, failing to fill prescriptions at your job.
R.I.P. Dr. Katz
HMS_Blinkin: I know from personal experience; when I was younger (like middle school), I was weirded out by gay people. One of my friends (who was more thoughtful than I was at the time) asked me why. I couldn't think of any reason, so I just said "it's against my religion" and left it at that. It's such a conversational nuke---you can't tell someone their religion is bullshiat to their face---that you get left alone after that point, and you don't have to go to the EFFORT of considering why you feel that way and confronting your own beliefs.
theknuckler_33: Would it really be long until someone refuses service to someone because they are muslim or black and claim immunity under these types of 'religious freedom' laws?
China White Tea: Do we really need religious freedom?
China White Tea: Do we really need religious freedom? In 2014, it seems like such a quaint, antiquated notion. People should definitely be free to believe what ever ridiculous fairy-tale fantasy that helps them cope with the fact that some day they're going to die, but do we really need to allow that to extend beyond the confines of their skull?
neversubmit: [pbs.twimg.com image 523x720]
SpankyPinkbottom: I'll just leave this here:[www.pewresearch.org image 707x384]Best of luck to the GOP.
WraithSama: Passing a bill that puts legal force behind action done in the name of "sincerely held religious belief" could NEVER EVER backfire in any way. Do republicans that do bills like this seriously never remember that there are other religions besides Christianity too, and that you're giving the same legal privileges to them as well? Hell, ANYTHING can be a "sincerely held religious belief," it doesn't even have to be from a particular religion; it could just be your sincerely held religious belief.
grumpfuff: neversubmit: [pbs.twimg.com image 523x720]Not to defend them or anything, but we have some books that date to the 2nd century, and most Biblical scholars agree much of the New Testament was first written down in the late 1st to 2nd century. So no, not centuries later. Decades.If you want to criticize something, at least have the knowledge to do it correctly.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jan 22 2017 23:34:55
Runtime: 0.309 sec (309 ms)