Cook says discriminatory 'religious freedom' laws are dangerous, calls for action

1111214161725

Comments

  • Reply 261 of 492
    msanttimsantti Posts: 1,377member
    msantti wrote: »
    H
    How can socialism and capitalism both be believed in at the same time?

    You don't frequent many message boards do you?
  • Reply 262 of 492
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ned bulous View Post





    I think it's hilarious how conservatives define liberty to mean they should be free to infringe on the rights of others.



    Liberals, in contrast, define liberty to mean one can do whatever one wishes, so long as they don't hurt others. I believe the right to choose ones own family is paramount in a free society, but conservatives believe that the government should define who one can marry. I believe that folks should be able to use marijuana and other drugs, but conservatives believe the government knows best. I believe that couples should be able to use birth control as they see fit, conservatives think the government should be able to ban birth control. Etc, etc, etc.

     

    I guess you're going to have to make a list of specific examples, because the recent majority Democratic Congress and the allegedly "liberal" president have engaged the country in more illegal wars, have violated the sovereignty of foreign nations in military actions and have foisted an economically damaging national healthcare program on the country. These things actually hurt people and constitute unconstitutional, illegal and immoral actions.

  • Reply 263 of 492
    Just for your edification, go to Truthdig, Huffpo, Daily Kos, Politico and other liberal and progressive sites and you'll see regular posts calling for the murder of "the rich". It's very disturbing.

    Please share some of those links.
  • Reply 264 of 492
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by msantti View Post





    You don't frequent many message boards do you?



    Did you just attack your own comment?

  • Reply 265 of 492
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by websnap View Post

     



    With all due respect, that’s silly. They don’t care why you think they are lesser than (here is a tip, I guarantee they have heard it numerous times), nor should they. Your reasons are your own and that is about you. They cannot/will not/should not be expected to both understand and not be offended by your own personal choice when you have, by all accounts, set up shop to cater to a certain service or industry. So you want to tell them “honestly” why they are such heathens that you won’t take their money? That is even MORE insulting. Your answer is to take the time to tell them how their personal lives are so disgusting to you that you not only won’t take their money, you wouldn’t politely lie to them? As a minority – let me tell you – The polite lie is much better from a stranger than the honest truth. The polite lie – even if it is obvious – at least tells the person they didn’t want to hurt your feelings. The honest truth from a stranger is a sermon no one asked for and is just about always insulting and condescending.

     

    Then again, if you were to turn away service from a person just looking to give you money – you don’t care much about people’s feelings anyway.




    Obviously you are too emotional about this. You don't call them disgusting heathens for starters. So you want to be lied to, ok...whatever. If the baker said something like please let me find you another baker because my religious convictions are in conflict with same sex marriage which makes me uncomfortable with this job. If it is done politely the gays should not be offended.

     

    Just to be clear I won't refuse to work for them because I'm not a religious crack pot.

  • Reply 266 of 492
    I guess you're going to have to make a list of specific examples, because the recent majority Democratic Congress and the allegedly "liberal" president have engaged the country in more illegal wars, have violated the sovereignty of foreign nations in military actions and have foisted an economically damaging national healthcare program on the country. These things actually hurt people and constitute unconstitutional, illegal and immoral actions.

    I guess you weren't paying attention when these illegal wars were started by the previous administration, which also condoned the illegal practices of torture and warranties wiretapping. The Obama administration actually put an end to these immoral, illegal, and un-Christian practices. "Violated the sovereignty of foreign nationals" like when Obama killed Osama Bin Laden?!?!? Economically damaging healthcare program? LOL!!!!! The law was passed by congress, signed by the president and upheld by the Supreme Court! And, according to the CBO, it SAVES money on healthcare.

    Meanwhile conservatives want to tell you who to marry, what substances you can put in your body, what sexual acts you can engage in, what birth control you can use, and what you can do with your own body.
  • Reply 267 of 492
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,924member
    ned bulous wrote: »
    I think it's hilarious how conservatives define liberty to mean they should be free to infringe on the rights of others.

    Liberals, in contrast, define liberty to mean one can do whatever one wishes, so long as they don't hurt others. I believe the right to choose ones own family is paramount in a free society, but conservatives believe that the government should define who one can marry. I believe that folks should be able to use marijuana and other drugs, but conservatives believe the government knows best. I believe that couples should be able to use birth control as they see fit, conservatives think the government should be able to ban birth control. Etc, etc, etc.

    That's funny.

    No one is banning birth control. The argument for that was who pays for it.

    Marriage is a contract so of course the govt has to define it.

    Explain abortion. Isn't that hurting an unborn child? I guess liberals can explain that away.

    Liberals are for free speech as long as it's consistent with their views.

    Conservatives aren't the only group that has fringe crazy folks.
  • Reply 268 of 492
    craiger77craiger77 Posts: 133member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by specialflav View Post





    Marriage was instituted in the bible, by God. Who also said that homosexuality is wrong; in the same book.

     

    He also said in that same book that eating shellfish is wrong. That wearing clothes of two different fabrics was wrong. That interracial marriage was wrong. That slavery was right, etc etc. The bible was used to support segregation and ban interracial marriage in the past. These kinds of laws would allow businesses to do the same. 

  • Reply 269 of 492
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,513member
    craiger77 wrote: »
    He also said in that same book that eating shellfish is wrong.

    That served more as valid and commendable health advice at the time. Clams and oysters caused a lot of sickness and disease. Same purpose served by telling the people about eating meat of cloven-foot animals.

    The "mixing two fabrics" was also addressed to that particular time, and intended as a command to avoid the Canaanite fertility rites. Staying away from interbreeding animal types, creating a "marriage", was also mentioned. There's a lot of things in the old testament that applied to the times, more of a historical record as such.
  • Reply 270 of 492
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ned bulous View Post





    I guess you weren't paying attention when these illegal wars were started by the previous administration, which also condoned the illegal practices of torture and warranties wiretapping. The Obama administration actually put an end to these immoral, illegal, and un-Christian practices. "Violated the sovereignty of foreign nationals" like when Obama killed Osama Bin Laden?!?!? Economically damaging healthcare program? LOL!!!!! The law was passed by congress, signed by the president and upheld by the Supreme Court! And, according to the CBO, it SAVES money on healthcare.



    Meanwhile conservatives want to tell you who to marry, what substances you can put in your body, what sexual acts you can engage in, what birth control you can use, and what you can do with your own body.

     

    Ah, I see... the old "he started it" defense.

  • Reply 271 of 492
    websnapwebsnap Posts: 224member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     



    Obviously you are too emotional about this. You don't call them disgusting heathens for starters. So you want to be lied to, ok...whatever. If the baker said something like please let me find you another baker because my religious convictions are in conflict with same sex marriage which makes me uncomfortable with this job. If it is done politely the gays should not be offended.

     

    Just to be clear I won't refuse to work for them because I'm not a religious crack pot.




    I love that too – if someone tells you how it honestly feels to be on the other end of something you may not be familiar with – we are being to “emotional”.



    First off I am not gay, so none of this has happened to me but as a person who actually HAS been discriminated against most days of my entire life. I though I would pass along a bit of knowledge of what it is like to be on the receiving end of something like this, not just once but for most of your life – and then see people make a case for it to be legal, and on the books so that any hope of it getting better would get eliminated. I can appreciate you saying you wouldn’t do this yourself, and I’ll take your word for it that you wouldn’t – our word is all we have. I’m just saying when you are talking about a group that is constantly seen as “less than”, polite rejection for doing nothing wrong is still rejection for doing nothing wrong. I’m letting you know how it feels when something like that happens – because I can guarantee it wouldn’t have happened for the first time to that gay customer. 

  • Reply 272 of 492
    jungmark wrote: »
    That's funny.

    No one is banning birth control. The argument for that was who pays for it.

    Marriage is a contract so of course the govt has to define it.

    Explain abortion. Isn't that hurting an unborn child? I guess liberals can explain that away.

    Liberals are for free speech as long as it's consistent with their views.

    Conservatives aren't the only group that has fringe crazy folks.

    Funny, in Griswold versus CT the conservatives wanted to ban birth control for married couples. Prominent conservatives like Santorum and Rush Limbaugh have still said they believe Griswold was wrongly decided. More recently, some have wanted to ban the morning after pill and any birth control which prevents implantation.

    I believe in free speech, but also that all should be treated equally. Which is actually in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

    I don't really want to get into abortion (but it was practiced in biblical times and never once mentioned in the Bible), but if you're for "small government", you most certainly don't want to ban abortion. Unless, of course, you want women prosecuted and sentenced to death for "murder", investigated for things like not wearing seatbelt or drinking or smoking while pregnant, etc, etc.
  • Reply 273 of 492
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by websnap View Post

     

    First off I am not gay, so none of this has happened to me but as a person who actually HAS been discriminated against most days of my entire life. 


    If you belong to a protected class then the discrimination was illegal. I'm just saying that gays are generally reasonable people and they can certainly understand how it could be a problem for some devout individual. Practically speaking though, religious crack pots are not generally known for social astuteness, people skills or politeness.

  • Reply 274 of 492
    Ah, I see... the old "he started it" defense.

    You apparently weren't paying attention. Obama ended torture and warrentless wiretapping, as well as the illegal Iraq War. I, for one, don't believe killing Bin Laden was immoral- Pakistan was clearly not our ally in the WOT and was hiding OBL.
  • Reply 275 of 492
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ned bulous View Post





    You apparently weren't paying attention. Obama ended torture and warrentless wiretapping, as well as the illegal Iraq War. I, for one, don't believe killing Bin Laden was immoral- Pakistan was clearly not our ally in the WOT and was hiding OBL.



    1. Ever read the Snowden documents? Any of them?

     

    2. The Iraq War, although I believe the reasons for going seemed to be complete lies, was approved by Congress.

     

    3. Violating another country's sovereignty is an act of war, plus our own military insisted that OBL was no longer that important.

  • Reply 276 of 492
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ned bulous View Post





    Please share some of those links. Otherwise STFU.

    ETA: Just to be clear, I am responding to the person to whom you were responding.  This discussion has landed so many people on my Blocked list, sometimes it can seem confusing. :)



    I can't believe that on a tech site, of all places, someone would use, "But I read it on the InterWebs so it must be true!" argument.  I mean, really  Someone saying that he saw some posts on some Internet site and using that as support is beyond absurd.

     

    Now, give me a link to someone USING HIS OR HER REAL NAME who not only says, "I hate so-and-so!" but has an actual argument, and then we can talk.

     

    I can -- and I'm not using this word in the "modern" sense here -- literally find a post somewhere on the InterWebs that supports any conceivable idea.  WTF is that supposed to prove?

  • Reply 277 of 492
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,513member
    ned bulous wrote: »
    You apparently weren't paying attention. Obama ended torture and warrentless wiretapping
    Actually he authorized warrant-less wiretapping for another five years back in 2012 when he signed an extension to the FISA Amendments Act from the Bush era.

    ...and yeah renditions to countries that allow torture apparently continue too. He added the additional option to just kill Americans engaged in what is claimed to be terrorist actions in foreign countries instead of bringing them to trial. No due process there right?
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/renditions-continue-under-obama-despite-due-process-concerns/2013/01/01/4e593aa0-5102-11e2-984e-f1de82a7c98a_story.html

    EDIT: speeling...
  • Reply 278 of 492
    websnapwebsnap Posts: 224member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    If you belong to a protected class then the discrimination was illegal. I'm just saying that gays are generally reasonable people and they can certainly understand how it could be a problem for some devout individual. Practically speaking though, religious crack pots are not generally known for social astuteness, people skills or politeness.




    But you can’t go around suing or even just calling out every instance of discrimination that happens every day – I have things to do in my life to stop everything anytime that happens. Seriously, it’s a privileged view (and I don’t mean that as an insult) to be stopped in your tracks every time it happened. Many can be reasonable, that should go with out saying for all people, the issue still remains why does they onus need to be on the one being discriminated against to be reasonable?

  • Reply 279 of 492
    stourquestourque Posts: 360member
    Gay people: we just want to be treated like everyone else.

    Religious Right: then act like everyone else. You're free to not be gay.

    Gay people: Well, no, we don't have that choice.

    Religious right: fine, but don't take away our freedom to hate you and not want you in our lives.

    Russia: hey America, we don't like you, but we love what you're doing to those effing f*ggots.

    Iran: we don't have gay people in our country.

    Saudi Arabia: we don't have a problem with gay people - we just stone them to death. We're still friends aren't we?

    U.S.: you still have oil? Of course we're still friends. And what goes on in your sovereign nation is your business.

    Iran: we're a sovereign nation and you keep sticking your nose in our business! Wtf?

    America: shut up, we don't buy oil from you.

    Israel: I thought we're your best friends?

    America: you are, not sure why, but you are.

    Canada: we thought were your best friends.

    America: you would be, but you keep kicking our ass in hockey.

    Religious right: hey, the conversation was about our right to discriminate against queers. I mean, what's next, polygamy and pedophiles infiltrating us. Btw, have you seen that cute sheep my neighbour has. Bet he's warm at night.

    Progressive liberal: you people are whacked.

    Religious right: shut up libtard. Shut up!

    Fox news: Obama wants to take away your guns if you don't support this new law. You've already lost your freedom to not have health care.

    Religious right: it's all in the bible. God told us.

    Tom Cruise: you people should become Scientologists. Just read the material, it's all there.

    Religious right: shut up Tom, you're gay and just don't realize it yet.

    Gay people: omg!
  • Reply 280 of 492
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post





    Do you appreciate that Cook's opinions will have a material impact on sales if he manages to offend a large number of customers or potential customers? You keep insisting its all about money. Well, beliefs translate into buying decisions.

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by specialflav View Post





    Marriage was instituted in the bible, by God. Who also said that homosexuality is wrong; in the same book.



    Really? Sorry to let facts get in the way, but have you married your cousin? Your half-sister? What about your second and third wives? The Bible's definition of marriage was all over the place, but of course you'd prefer to pick and choose your religious beliefs to support your bigotry.

    http://www.livescience.com/37777-history-of-marriage.html

Sign In or Register to comment.