Italy Elects Giorgia Meloni As New Prime Minister In Stunning Victory For Feminism Everywhere

#226
#226
AM64 said:
What freedoms? Dems love to derive new "freedoms" all the time. Most of us would agree that everyone has a right to publicly offered services - but our chosen economic way of life says you pay for services used. Dems are the people who drive wedges by announcing one fine day that everyone has a right to free health care - or government paid health care if some one can't or won't pay for such services. We've seen these kinds of wedge issues time and again. It's simply a means to buy support for the party.
Click to expand...
You seriously believe the GOP doesn't engage in these types of wedge issues you speak of?
 
#227
#227
zeppelin128 said:
I'll try again. Do you think freedom from religion is a right?
Click to expand...

Everyone generally should have the right to believe as he or she wishes, and religion falls into that category. There are cases where rules are necessary - dividing traffic on a highway, for instance. You might prefer to drive on the left, but for the sake of all, saner heads derived some rules. Also the right to religious and other freedoms should be tolerated to the extent that they don't infringe on the rights of others. Unlike policies regarding current opinions (such as same sex marriage), the government hasn't established any requirement that you have a religion or that you are not allowed to practice a religion. Perhaps government shouldn't be involved at all in sanctioning marriage for much the same reason - and that includes how the IRS and other agencies treat the union of two people. You are still largely pushing issues that attract a current woke generation or two for political gain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#228
#228
AM64 said:
Everyone generally should have the right to believe as he or she wishes, and religion falls into that category. There are cases where rules are necessary - dividing traffic on a highway, for instance. You might prefer to drive on the left, but for the sake of all, saner heads derived some rules. Also the right to religious and other freedoms should be tolerated to the extent that they don't infringe on the rights of others. Unlike policies regarding current opinions (such as same sex marriage), the government hasn't established any requirement that you have a religion or that you are not allowed to practice a religion. Perhaps government shouldn't be involved at all in sanctioning marriage for much the same reason - and that includes how the IRS and other agencies treat the union of two people. You are still largely pushing issues that attract a current woke generation or two for political gain.
Click to expand...
Saying that heterosexual marriage and LGBTQ marriage are equal is not pushing a "woke" agenda. As long as the federal government recognizes one and affords special privileges to them, then they can and should do the same for the other.

I really wish I could get a straight answer out of somebody on here. Do we have a right to freedom from religion?
 
#229
#229
zeppelin128 said:
You seriously believe the GOP doesn't engage in these types of wedge issues you speak of?
Click to expand...

When I look at political history (and I try not to), what I see is that the right tends to be somewhat staunch in avoiding change or in evolutionary change; the left tends to be far more radical or reactionary in driving revolutionary change especially with regard to social policy, and social policy buys influence and votes. Perhaps you can give us an example of the right driving social change, and before you start don't even go there with Roe v Wade or similar backlash to policy that libs enacted in the first place.
 
#230
#230
AM64 said:
When I look at political history (and I try not to), what I see is that the right tends to be somewhat staunch in avoiding change or in evolutionary change; the left tends to be far more radical or reactionary in driving revolutionary change especially with regard to social policy, and social policy buys influence and votes. Perhaps you can give us an example of the right driving social change, and before you start don't even go there with Roe v Wade or similar backlash to policy that libs enacted in the first place.
Click to expand...
Look at this board. It is the epitome of wedge issues. Trans scare, banning books, banning speech.
 
#231
#231
zeppelin128 said:
Saying that heterosexual marriage and LGBTQ marriage are equal is not pushing a "woke" agenda. As long as the federal government recognizes one and affords special privileges to them, then they can and should do the same for the other.

I really wish I could get a straight answer out of somebody on here. Do we have a right to freedom from religion?
Click to expand...

Not really….and YOU ARE NOT FORCED TO PRACTICE ANY RELIGION.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, Rickyvol77 and AM64
#232
#232
zeppelin128 said:
Saying that heterosexual marriage and LGBTQ marriage are equal is not pushing a "woke" agenda. As long as the federal government recognizes one and affords special privileges to them, then they can and should do the same for the other.

I really wish I could get a straight answer out of somebody on here. Do we have a right to freedom from religion?
Click to expand...

Does the 1st Amendment not say:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
Click to expand...

From that I would think it's perfectly clear that we have a freedom from religion. Now the touchy part is that the same amendment covers freedom of speech, and I've always believed that also includes the right not to hear someone else's free speech. That would imply that demonstrations of "free speech" in a public place would be limited. So I think perhaps we are where you are hinting that views of someone else's religion (like church bells or church signs) may infringe on another's right to be non religious or of a differing sect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#234
#234
zeppelin128 said:
Saying that heterosexual marriage and LGBTQ marriage are equal is not pushing a "woke" agenda. As long as the federal government recognizes one and affords special privileges to them, then they can and should do the same for the other.

I really wish I could get a straight answer out of somebody on here. Do we have a right to freedom from religion?
Click to expand...
Well, the two are different. Every country on the planet up until recently recognized that the foundation of a country and community was the traditional nuclear family unit with a father and a mother. That is why the state encouraged marriage in these traditional situations. Gay marriages don't produce offspring or oten don't promote values that most states want to advance (up until recently)
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, Orangeburst and AM64
#236
#236
zeppelin128 said:
Look at this board. It is the epitome of wedge issues. Trans scare, banning books, banning speech.
Click to expand...

We on this board aren't the government, and it's most obvious that the government as a whole doesn't represent us.

Perhaps we read differently, but I don't think anyone here is calling for those things outright even though we may feel that they are inappropriate in certain settings. There have been movie ratings for decades (apparently they are now just suggestions) that certain movies are not appropriate for children or warning parents that they may contain inappropriate material for children. The thing is that technology, specifically cell phones and the internet) have changed so much; but, yeah, all things considered I don't believe a transvestite has a place reading books to children or that some books have a place in school libraries. That's different from banning books, speech, or a trans scare. There may be a time and place for everything, but there's also a time for good judgement, too. You'd likely be upset if the NRA ran sales pitches at an elementary school. By the way, isn't it the left that wants to remove history - like references to the Confederacy and those people who felt the US was on the wrong track.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#237
#237
zeppelin128 said:
Saying that heterosexual marriage and LGBTQ marriage are equal is not pushing a "woke" agenda. As long as the federal government recognizes one and affords special privileges to them, then they can and should do the same for the other.

I really wish I could get a straight answer out of somebody on here. Do we have a right to freedom from religion?
Click to expand...

There is a reason that the government recognized and rewarded traditional marriage between and man and a woman. It was to incentivize the growth of our population in stable homes. You may not think that is a good reason, but to ensure population growth and raise well-adjusted children a mother and father are both needed.

Please don't give me the "LGBTQ is just as stable as bad marriages" BS. They are not. Both a male and female perspective is ideal when raising children. Are there exceptions to the rule? Of course they are, but there is a reason it is a rule and has been considered that way for centuries. LGBTQ marriages do not produce children. They can adopt or do in-vitro but that has not become commonplace until the last 20 years or so.

We are guaranteed freedom of religion not freedom from religion. You are free to belong to any religious sect you want or to think it is all a bunch of hooey. That is your freedom. You are free from your government demanding that you are Catholic or Protestant and if you don't like it you can go to jail. That is your freedom.

You really don't want freedom from religion no matter how much you rail about it. If that were to happen, how would you survive without all the "woe is me" and "I am being persecuted for my sexually or lack of religion" posts that you share daily?
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, Orangeburst, Rickyvol77 and 2 others
#239
#239
AM64 said:
Does the 1st Amendment not say:



From that I would think it's perfectly clear that we have a freedom from religion. Now the touchy part is that the same amendment covers freedom of speech, and I've always believed that also includes the right not to hear someone else's free speech. That would imply that demonstrations of "free speech" in a public place would be limited. So I think perhaps we are where you are hinting that views of someone else's religion (like church bells or church signs) may infringe on another's right to be non religious or of a differing sect.
Click to expand...
No, that is not what I am saying at all. I have an issue with any religiosity in government. I have absolutely no problem with free speech and freedom of expression of religion. Church bells can be pretty cool actually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#240
#240
zeppelin128 said:
No, that is not what I am saying at all. I have an issue with any religiosity in government. I have absolutely no problem with free speech and freedom of expression of religion. Church bells can be pretty cool actually.
Click to expand...

So if you feel that way about religiosity in government (and for a change we tend to agree), then how do you feel about catholicism and a catholic politician serving two masters. See, most religious members would be facing a matter of conscience, but for catholics there is also the matter of excommunication for straying from church dictates - and it has been threatened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#242
#242
825VOL said:
There is a reason that the government recognized and rewarded traditional marriage between and man and a woman. It was to incentivize the growth of our population in stable homes. You may not think that is a good reason, but to ensure population growth and raise well-adjusted children a mother and father are both needed.

Please don't give me the "LGBTQ is just as stable as bad marriages" BS. They are not. Both a male and female perspective is ideal when raising children. Are there exceptions to the rule? Of course they are, but there is a reason it is a rule and has been considered that way for centuries. LGBTQ marriages do not produce children. They can adopt or do in-vitro but that has not become commonplace until the last 20 years or so.

We are guaranteed freedom of religion not freedom from religion. You are free to belong to any religious sect you want or to think it is all a bunch of hooey. That is your freedom. You are free from your government demanding that you are Catholic or Protestant and if you don't like it you can go to jail. That is your freedom.

You really don't want freedom from religion no matter how much you rail about it. If that were to happen, how would you survive without all the "woe is me" and "I am being persecuted for my sexually or lack of religion" posts that you share daily?
Click to expand...
"We are guaranteed freedom of religion not freedom from religion. You are free to belong to any religious sect you want or to think it is all a bunch of hooey. That is your freedom. You are free from your government demanding that you are Catholic or Protestant and if you don't like it you can go to jail. That is your freedom."

There it is. I do not, and have never, posted daily, btw.
 
#243
#243
AM64 said:
So if you feel that way about religiosity in government (and for a change we tend to agree), then how do you feel about catholicism and a catholic politician serving two masters. See, most religious members would be facing a matter of conscience, but for catholics there is also the matter of excommunication for straying from church dictates - and it has been threatened.
Click to expand...
American Presidents should serve all Americans. They can worry about their issues with the Catholic Church on their own time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#244
#244
zeppelin128 said:
"We are guaranteed freedom of religion not freedom from religion. You are free to belong to any religious sect you want or to think it is all a bunch of hooey. That is your freedom. You are free from your government demanding that you are Catholic or Protestant and if you don't like it you can go to jail. That is your freedom."

There it is. I do not, and have never, posted daily, btw.
Click to expand...

Now that we both know what is clearly written in our founding document and one of the reasons people left Europe, what is your point?

Ok, I was wrong. It is at least weekly :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#246
#246
zeppelin128 said:
American Presidents should serve all Americans. They can worry about their issues with the Catholic Church on their own time.
Click to expand...

I agree; however, genuinely religious people generally take their religion seriously. Biden and several other politicians have been threatened with excommunication and barred from communion because of political stances. That's interference, and it's wrong. To me freedom of and freedom from religion means that religions keep their damn hands off, too. If not, they lose their exempt status. And I've never understood why we continue to treat the vatican (and by extension the catholic church) as a state.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#247
#247
AM64 said:
I agree; however, genuinely religious people generally take their religion seriously. Biden and several other politicians have been threatened with excommunication and barred from communion because of political stances. That's interference, and it's wrong. To me freedom of and freedom from religion means that religions keep their damn hands off, too. If not, they lose their exempt status. And I've never understood why we continue to treat the vatican (and by extension the catholic church) as a state.
Click to expand...
All politicians need to leave their religiosity at the door. We have an American President, not a Catholic President. We have American representatives, not the insane Evangelical nonsense of Boebert or MTG.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#249
#249
zeppelin128 said:
Saying that heterosexual marriage and LGBTQ marriage are equal is not pushing a "woke" agenda. As long as the federal government recognizes one and affords special privileges to them, then they can and should do the same for the other.

I really wish I could get a straight answer out of somebody on here. Do we have a right to freedom from religion?
Click to expand...

Yes, you have a freedom from religion. We should have the freedom of association too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, marcusluvsvols, Rickyvol77 and 1 other person
#250
#250
volbeast33 said:
Trump was the last republican president ( although I don’t believe that he is truly Republican)….. What policies did he put in place that you don’t agree with?
Click to expand...
The GOP is who I have issues with. Trump was a largely ineffectual President. He passed some tax cuts for his cronies, talked a big game on diplomacy that was immediately reversed the moment saner hands were back in appointed office. He did rile up a crowd though. He will be remembered for 1/6 and nothing more.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top