Does Religious Freedom Supercede Gender Identity?

We are talking about NOW!

What happened in the past is NOT a PRECEDENT for violating the Constitution.

 

If they believe that they are, is the same belief that you are a Christian, religious rights could never supercede human rights. GOD created her/him of what he/she is and we should not go against GOD's creations, we are all GOD's creation.

 

You said we should never judge other people.

So if my neighbor abused children I can't judge them or condemn them because my personal belief is children should not be abused?

You are free to withdraw you statement.

 

I don't see how calling one the gender they prefer is lying.
Actually, calling them the opposite of their identity would be lying.

 

So, you are professing to know the minds of other people?

As a matter of fact, if you did not know the person prior to any ID change, you'd likely never know there was a change.

 

But you can support and even put such adulterers and liars in office and not feel it go against your beliefs?

Seems you want to pick and choose how to follow your beliefs without being the least bit consistent.

 

And if Ceasar says it's against the law to discriminate, then do you follow Ceasar's law or your personal belief.
Even though you thoroughly support and put Ceasar into office. Who commits adultery and lies.

I suggest, follow your belief all the way, or don't.
It seems the belief is weak if you pick one thing and say it's ok, because I agree with some things, but on another topic there is no give whatsoever.

It's more of an excuse to me, to be so wishy washy.

 

You are free to withdraw your vacuous STRAWMAN!

 

No strawman you said we should never judge other people. So what about a neighbor who abused his kids?

 

Still not withdrawing your strawman?

Sad!

 

How can that which is commonplace be divergent from the norm? Please reread the definitions.

 

In another thread, I raised this question - the views of the religious should not be ignored just because a person is religious. The whole point is, I can defend laws against stealing and laws against murder without quoting the Bible. In fact, there's no law or social constraint I have ever supported that requires the Bible to defend. Is there any law or other restriction that conservatives defend that you think cannot be defended without the Bible?

 

Leg humping doesn't count.

 

The States have no Congress so they can not comply with the 1st Amendment. There are things in the Constitution that apply only to the States. There are things in the Constitution that apply only to the Federal Government.

 

Like I said, homosexuals will turn everything and everyone into homosexuals.

 

Yes, reading comprehension is my friend. You should make friends with it, as well.

How laws are made is quite specific in the Constitution and there's no interpretation that lets you or anyone else make their own.

Then there's what is called the Supremacy Clause:

There's nothing in the Constitution about freedom from religion. Then there's that pesky 1st Amendment thing that leftists are so confused over:

Nothing in any of that allows Congress to restrict my rights to freedom of religion in order to keep you free from religion. You've clearly managed well enough on your own keeping yourself free from religion.

Neither is there anything in the constitutional process that requires us all to bow to individual interpretations of the Constitution so it doesn't really matter what your interpretation is; it only matters what the Constitution says.

 

When you started with sweet and kind and charismatic I was already picturing Pete Buttigieg. And then I read the rest and realized you were specifically referring to him.

 

Actually, because of my religion I have learned to love my neighbors. Therefore I stand firmly against bringing them up through the Mexican deserts, in terrible conditions, to get to the border and in the hands of gang coyotes who sell the little girls into slavery, rape those and most of the rest, kill those who can't pay, and dump them on our side of the border carrying drugs.

Since Obama put more children in cages than Trump ever did, and since the left is willing to sacrifice the bodies of those immigrants, to get votes and, to quote Bernie Sanders on why we need them, "Pick our vegetables", it is clear that it is the right who does care and the left who does not.

 

The 14th, in privileges and immunities, basically reiterates that the rights protected in the Constitution must be applied to all. What it didn't describe was what were the privileges and immunities. But, I will agree. Everyone in the US has the right that their Congress shall make no law....

Even the 14th doesn't change the opening clause of the 1st Amendment. That would require an amendment on its own.

 

State legislatures are not Congress. They're mentioned and described separately in the Constitution. The Founders knew what they were writing and, by the power of its guns, the Government can force us to play along but that will never make it constitutional.

 

The 14th was passed under duress and is tainted with that history.
It has some 4 unrelated parts that seems more like an omnibus amendment.
One part is the treatment of Confederates that previously sworn allegiance to "The Federals".


REPEAL THE 14TH!
The source of some of the broadest Supreme Court interpretations.


Moi

Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.​

 

That is YOUR problem, NOT mine because it is YOU that misused the term deviant.

 

Denying the evidence of your own eyes now?

 

Semantic QUIBBLING duly noted as a pathetic DEFLECTION attempt that failed.

 

WTF?

That sounds like PARANOIA!