Sexual orientation laws trump religious freedom, California Supreme Court says (CNA)

[Fitswimmer]

fortunately the Constitution does not say we have religious freedom unless it does “harm” to someone else. And what does “harm” mean, is that open for interpretation? Am I doing harm by posting my thoughts on this forum? It is possible someone could interpret it that way. This is a can of worms. That is why you have to err on the side of rights specifically designated by the Constitution not on the opinions of judges with their own agendas.

Perhaps harm isn’t the right word. Perhaps I should have better said, our rights end when they abridge the rights of another. If my enforcing my rights steps all over the rights of someone else, there’s going to be a problem.

 

[LRThunder]

Yea its the dominant religion yet a handful of anti-Christian judges have been eroding their rights slowly but surely.

So what if it is worse in China, no kidding, just because we don’t have it as bad as China does not mean everything is Ok

Exactly. To use an analogy, in the 1930’s and 1940’s, African-Americans didn’t have it as badly in the U.S. as Jews had it in Germany, but that didn’t make it right for what they went through.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Exactly. To use an analogy, in the 1930’s and 1940’s, African-Americans didn’t have it as badly in the U.S. as Jews had it in Germany, but that didn’t make it right for what they went through.

To use the word “persecution” to describe such problems as having a bored teenager in Target saying “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” is an insult to those who suffer real persecution. It’s not even in the same zip code.

 

[LRThunder]

To use the word “persecution” to describe such problems as having a bored teenager in Target saying “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” is an insult to those who suffer real persecution. It’s not even in the same zip code.

I agree with that, however the court rulings limiting the religious expression of doctors or compelling Catholic adoption agencies to provide babies to gay couples is a good example of persecution. Not all persecution involves secret police, firing squads, or being thrown to the lions.

 

[po18guy]

I agree with that, however the court rulings limiting the religious expression of doctors or compelling Catholic adoption agencies to provide babies to gay couples is a good example of persecution. Not all persecution involves secret police, firing squads, or being thrown to the lions.

Amen!

2 Corinthians 11:3 “But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.”

 

[Fitswimmer]

I agree with that, however the court rulings limiting the religious expression of doctors or compelling Catholic adoption agencies to provide babies to gay couples is a good example of persecution. Not all persecution involves secret police, firing squads, or being thrown to the lions.

In both of the circumstances you cite-there are choices that could be made to avoid government intrusion and still remain faithful.

 

[LRThunder]

In both of the circumstances you cite-there are choices that could be made to avoid government intrusion and still remain faithful.

And there are alternatives to those agencies (and doctors) gays and lesbians could go to.

 

[Fitswimmer]

And there are alternatives to those agencies (and doctors) gays and lesbians could go to.

I don’t believe there was an equal alternative in this case, which is why it was brought in the first place.

I’m sure that homosexuals would much rather not go to doctors who have objections to their lifestyle and would avoid them if possible. There are circumstances where even a chaste homosexual must disclose, and I know I’d feel better if I didn’t have to worry about condemnation. I’ve been lucky in my life that I’ve never had to experience such a thing.

 

[HappyPerson]

Do yourself a favor-learn about some real Christian persecution going on in the world today and pray for those who are truly suffering. We look like fools in the US whining about how persecuted we are.

I wasn’t whining. I was making a point that your statement was beyond assinine, and I succeeded with multiple examples, none of which you effectively rebuked.

Is it worse in other countries? Absolutely. Yet, based on your line of reasoning, gay people who merely get assaulted for their homosexuality in America have no right to complain, because children in other countries get raped and murdered.

In a pluralistic multicultural society, people aren’t likely to be sympathetic towards the complaints of other groups who are claiming their rights are being violated, especially when we feel that such groups are violating OUR rights. The difference is, however that it is genuine God given and Constitutionally protected rights of Catholics vs. self-proclaimed unconstitutional perceived “rights” of gays. Catholics SHOULD win by a landslide.

Those judges should be forcefully removed from office and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Personally, I feel that all who are socially/norally liberal should be banned from holding office in America, just like confederate generals were, since liberal judges and politicians are betraying the moral fabric of this nation.

 

[Fitswimmer]

I wasn’t whining**. I was making a point that your statement was beyond assinine**, and I succeeded with multiple examples, none of which you effectively rebuked.

Is it worse in other countries? Absolutely. Yet, based on your line of reasoning, gay people who merely get assaulted for their homosexuality in America have no right to complain, because children in other countries get raped and murdered.

In a pluralistic multicultural society, people aren’t likely to be sympathetic towards the complaints of other groups who are claiming their rights are being violated, especially when we feel that such groups are violating OUR rights. The difference is, however that it is genuine God given and Constitutionally protected rights of Catholics vs. self-proclaimed unconstitutional perceived “rights” of gays. Catholics SHOULD win by a landslide.

Those judges should be forcefully removed from office and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Personally, I feel that all who are socially/norally liberal should be banned from holding office in America, just like confederate generals were, since liberal judges and politicians are betraying the moral fabric of this nation.

Nice-and you wonder why I don’t answer your questions. Why bother? It’s not like you’re going to bother to consider any opinion that varies from yours.

I think you should find yourself a nice island, and populate it only with people who are sufficiently Catholic and conservative enough for you, because you’re going to live a miserable life in the United States. We ARE a pluralistic, multicultural society and that’s exactly what we were meant to be.

 

[Michael_Neal]

We were meant to have religious freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution, there are many cultures and ideas but they can not be used to stamp out someone’s Constitutional rights. Homosexuality does not have the same Constitutional protection as religion.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

There’s a LONG thread on this one in the “News” section.

If the MD’s had won-it would have set a precedent that a doctor’s belief can be used to deny treatment. Do you know your MD’s views on Catholics?

I agree, this is a very slippery slope and to even think about refusing medical care for someone based on this or that personal characteristic is pretty cold.

 

[fix]

I agree, this is a very slippery slope and to even think about refusing medical care for someone based on this or that personal characteristic is pretty cold.

They were not refused medical care. They were refused a nonessential fertility therapy.