Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +--- Thread: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat (/Thread-Alito%E2%80%99s-politically-charged-address-draws-heat) |
Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - GMDino - 11-13-2020 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/13/alito-speech-religious-freedom-436412 Quote:The Supreme Court justice warned that not only is freedom of belief under threat, but freedom of expression is as well. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - Belsnickel - 11-13-2020 I do always find it interesting when justices complain about people trying to politicize the court when it is coming from the side they are not on, but then they turn a blind eye to it (usually) when it is their side or they, themselves, making things partisan. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - fredtoast - 11-13-2020 What a load of shit. Alito never had a problem with Christians insulting homosexuals by calling their beliefs "evil", but now when someone callas out a Christian for opposing equal protection under the law for homosexuals it is an "attack". Our constitution protects "freedom to worship" not "freedom to demand laws follow religious beliefs". RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - bfine32 - 11-13-2020 Trump's still got over a month to replace him... Justices should not be motivated by Political beliefs RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - Au165 - 11-13-2020 (11-13-2020, 04:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Trump's still got over a month to replace him... There is actually the ability to impeach a Supreme Court Justice, but it isn't likely to happen. It is interesting to think about though as only one has ever been brought up on articles of impeachment but was acquitted in the Senate. It would seem that someone who has simply punted on trying to remain politically neutral in a role that must, for the sake of the institution, attempt to be would be a candidate for such proceedings. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - BmorePat87 - 11-13-2020 Quote:Alito also seemed to minimize the significance of a refusal of a Colorado baker to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The justice noted that the couple involved “was given a free cake by another bakery” and that the high-profile standoff prompted “celebrity chefs” to come to their defense. I don't know what's wrong with that black couple not being served at the lunch counter. Another diner gave them a free meal and some celebrity chefs offered to cook for them. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - bfine32 - 11-13-2020 (11-13-2020, 05:05 PM)Au165 Wrote: There is actually the ability to impeach a Supreme Court Justice, but it isn't likely to happen. It is interesting to think about though as only one has ever been brought up on articles of impeachment but was acquitted in the Senate. It would seem that someone who has simply punted on trying to remain politically neutral in a role that must, for the sake of the institution, attempt to be would be a candidate for such proceedings. I really don't see a problem with them explaining their reasoning on a decided case; as long as it's directed toward interpretation of the Constitution. I know folks have differences on interpreting the Constitution when it comes to many freedoms including religious. But when Alito starts anecdotal it's time to zip it/ RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - Yojimbo - 11-13-2020 “Alito argued that some recent Supreme Court decisions, including the landmark ruling upholding a constitutional right to interracial marriage, fueled intolerance to those who believe marriage should be limited to unions between one white man and one white woman. “Until very recently, that’s what the vast majority of Americans thought. Now, it’s considered bigotry,” he said.” I just don’t understand people that can’t see how LGBTQ issues and arguments against, are the same ones used against abolition, desegregation and interracial marriage. All of which we can look back on now as absolutely correct rulings by the Supreme Court. The argument of “the majority thinks” should never be used to oppress. As for religious belief rights. Those end as soon as your beliefs affect somebody else’s life. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - bfine32 - 11-13-2020 (11-13-2020, 05:08 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't know what's wrong with that black couple not being served at the lunch counter. Another diner gave them a free meal and some celebrity chefs offered to cook for them. I agree Alito's comments on the cake were in bad taste, but this analogy misses the mark so far as it relates to religious freedoms. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - Au165 - 11-13-2020 (11-13-2020, 05:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree Alito's comments on the cake were in bad taste, but this analogy misses the mark so far as it relates to religious freedoms. Not really, if I had a religion that people of another race were deemed inferior and I could not treat them as equal does that give me now a right to refuse them service based on their ethnicity? That has always been the crux of “religious freedom” is that why should your religion provide cover for discrimination in any form? We have already accepted in the courts that being Rastafarian does not grant people immunity from the war on drugs even though the smoking of pot is part of their religion, where is their religious freedom? There is a two tiered system when it comes to “religious freedom” that applies to Christianity and then everyone else. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - GMDino - 11-13-2020 (11-13-2020, 07:14 PM)Au165 Wrote: Not really, if I had a religion that people of another race were deemed inferior and I could not treat them as equal does that give me now a right to refuse them service based on their ethnicity? That has always been the crux of “religious freedom” is that why should your religion provide cover for discrimination in any form? The analogy also takes into account how people used the bible to defend their racism. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - bfine32 - 11-13-2020 (11-13-2020, 07:14 PM)Au165 Wrote: Not really, if I had a religion that people of another race were deemed inferior and I could not treat them as equal does that give me now a right to refuse them service based on their ethnicity? That has always been the crux of “religious freedom” is that why should your religion provide cover for discrimination in any form? You'd have to share that religion and in tenants with me instead of making one up. As to the one that considers homosexuality a sin: It makes up over 70% of US citizens. Share with me the percentage of established religion in the US that considers being African American a sin. Or even the percentage Rastafarians in the US. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - Au165 - 11-13-2020 (11-13-2020, 08:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You'd have to share that religion and in tenants with me instead of making one up. The amount of people who follow a religion does not make it more or less true or protected under our constitution. If I invented it right now under our laws it should be protected and therefor allowed as religious freedom. The constitution doesn’t say, “freedom of religion for religions that a certain percentage of people follow”. Let’s use a more main stream but still considered fringe religion to Christians, Mormons. While not practiced for some time Mormons, at least a subset, practiced polygamy. That, even though it was part of their religion, was outlawed by the United States. Where were the Mormon’s religious freedoms? As I said, their are two tiers of religious freedoms in this country. The fact you asked for percentages of everyone else kind of confirms you think that main stream Christianity because of its size does deserve some sort of preferential treatment or that is is somehow more legitimate. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - BmorePat87 - 11-13-2020 (11-13-2020, 10:12 PM)Au165 Wrote: This statement is literally an endorsement of a tiered system where the majority’s religious freedoms are more important or “should be taken into consideration” over a minority. You are literally confirming everything I have said you believed and your getting upset about because you want to play semantics. I think Tommy Tuberville's copy of the Constitution has the 1st Amendment as stating "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of the most commonly practiced religion" Then again, the vast majority of Americans and non-Evangelical Christians support gay marriage, but I guess it's a moot point. RE: Alito’s politically charged address draws heat - bfine32 - 11-13-2020 (11-13-2020, 11:26 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I think Tommy Tuberville's copy of the Constitution has the 1st Amendment as stating "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of the most commonly practiced religion" Why are folks in this forum obsessed with arguing against points not made? I guarantee when there's one person left in this forum he will argue against himself. |