I never referenced evangelicals. You do not have to be an evangelical to want to push religion beyond a neutral stance.
I believe the conservative majority is willing to do that
Jim Harbaugh
- Thread starter Knight Shift
- Start date
- Status
I believe the conservative majority is willing to do that
Jefferson cut out the supernatural parts of the Bible and called it The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, something that no doubt would land a person in jail, or worse, in some theocracies.
Come on now. To name a few? That is dead on arrival you moron. There will be no ban on abortions. It will be decided by the states. Will some crazy states ban it? Maybe. But you must understand it has zero chance of a federal ban.
Again, you make a sound argument. Compare IQ levels little boy? Thought not. But carry on
Just like Biden said we could pack the court? Lots of things could happen. Doesn't mean they have a snow balls chance in hell.
The original point being that people who said they think states should decide now want a federal law. Whether it passes or not doesn't change that hypocrisy/lie.
I don’t have the confidence you do in your position. McConnell is many things, He is a shrewd Senate leader.
I think that is a naive opinion
Republicans control all 3 branches it will be a priority and likely pass
I have always believed in the separation of Church and State.I’m still good with that as long as the State is not attempting to overstep it’s boundaries with everything else .The Christian Evangelicals also should avoid the confrontational issues as much as possible but as US citizens they do have right to disapprove just as the left has their hot topic picks. Problem with this is it is never going to happen with those we have in leadership at all levels.
The fact that Dobbs was a political decision is evidenced by Alito's preemptive strike that the opinion had no precedential value. If the right to privacy no longer exists, what does that mean for same sex marriage or contraception?
Not to worry, Alito says, those are safe. Because he said so. Because the court doesn't want to overturn them (yet?). Therefore the legal principles applied in Dobbs do not apply for those issues. What a crock.
At least give Thomas some credit for honesty. He alone put his judicial agenda on the table, for all to see.
Yet even Thomas was disingenuous, leaving out Loving v Virginia. These justices are mostly clowns.
"Have the courage to let the unborn be born," which is bizarre when you consider that sometimes the mother might die without an abortion. "Have the courage to die even if the fetus is self-aborting."
Tell that to the people who believed the recently appointed justices who said they believed in settled law. Now that you’ve called everyone who disagrees with you a moron maybe it’s time to look in the mirror at the real moron.
I'm left and liberal (but not crazy) and have already said many times in this discussion he is allowed to give his opinion...
OK- so directly to me from his mother - He decided on his stance because of how grateful he was to be handed the luckiest card in the universe.
He had just signed this huge contract and he thought of the privileges he was now afforded. But saw all these other kids, born much into the same life he was, that didn't have such a wonderful, caring and loving family adopt them. He was allowed to live a great life and thrive on the football field only because of pure luck. At the time of his birth, there was a much better chance he would be dead, drugged or in jail instead of college educated and worth millions living his dream.
That luck of privilege and knowledge he could have been one of those homeless, unloved and troubled minorities, led him to make a stand regardless of what it cost him. His mom told me that he did regret wearing those socks but also felt it was crazy that was what everyone wanted to talk about rather than the injustice.
Both his mom and agent agree he did make some mistakes during this whole protest, but it did come from his heart and from the right place. He also made the mistake of not articulating it the way he should have as well.
He didn't feel he deserved better than what he could have been.
So- you could call it hearsay but I got it from his adoptive mother. So maybe closer to the truth than you have ever heard.
So- I wish more people of "privilege" did something so honorable. I am sure you wouldn't. I honestly don't know if I would have.
I hated to quote Clay Travis. I'm fairly middle of the road (believe it or not) and lean hard left on many social/personal freedom issues, but one thing that drives me nuts with a lot of people on the left, particularly the tech companies like Google, Twitter, etc, is their trying to suppress free speech. It happens on the right too. Just say what you want to say, but say it politely and be ready to politely discuss/debate your position. Can't see why this is so hard for some people.
Last edited:
That is exactly where I am too. It's funny- I grew up republican and would have been a slight right to middle of the road conservative all the way into my 30's...And I hear so many people talking now exactly how I used to be until my eyes were opened.
I do try to respect that and understand it, and I am always open to hear an opinion and have a discussion. And it is so shocking how many people just wont do that.
Wait a second, I thought Jeebus was the first one to think murder and stealing wasn’t a good idea
Jesus also threw out the money changers. Loved the meek and poor. Supported refugees.
And anyone know what "Judeo Christian values" have to say about the death penalty? Maybe we should just adopt what the Pope and Israel say about that and call it a day?
Weird how the activist court isn't so Catholic when it comes to the death penalty, refugees, and expanding SSI/SSD in the Insular cases, but when it comes to abortion, it's almost like there's a direct verbatim quoted line from right wing political groups/
Harry Potter being anti-Christian is a new one to me. Christians can be really weird, man. It has always been unfathomable how Christians can selectively follow some rules (against homosexuality), but ignore others (usury, eating shellfish). This and the cult of persecution for a group that is the large majority of this country. Personally, I don’t care if y’all want to speak in tongues and practice exorcisms on one another (assuming the exorcee is willing), but cannot object more strongly the the whole anti-gay thing. It is the very persecution that so animates Christian ideology.
Nothing riles up the righties like capitalism existing and having effects on the market that don't align with feigned pseudo religion.
I am Christian.
I don’t hate gay people and I don’t think anyone should persecute them.
Christians are subject to the Law of Christ, under the new covenant.
We are not subject to the laws given by God to Moses and the Israelites because we are not citizens of the theocracy known as Israel around 1400 BC.
So shellfish is fine. In fact, God said all food is fine for us to eat.
AKA capitalism, but as we know the people who tried to cancel Nordstrom, Yeti, Keurig, the NFL, etc are not such big fans of the free market, especially when the free market decided money from LGBT and non-white folks was just as good as money from everyone else.
Back to Jim and his position on abortion--I see his point. I am not religious, and I'm sure it has been hashed out in this long thread, but somewhere on the other side of the debate the life of the fetus seems to be forgotten. A reasonable limit should be a reasonable compromise, and it seems that most countries have about 15 weeks as the cutoff point unless the mother's life is in jeopardy.
What if they just put guillotines outside for the VP as he certifies the results of an election?
That's legitimate political discourse right?
Much to the chagrin of the far right America is a capitalist nation. Unpatriotic Americans who don't like LGBT or people of color are free to only seek employment and commerce with companies with Sharia-style values. Send the kids to Liberty, shop at Hobby Lobby, post on Gab, etc. Who is stopping them?
We need more people like this instead of the current politicians and pundits that have demonized their opponents to the point of people outright hating each other over their political beliefs. We have lost the ability to peacefully disagree and listen to each other's points and present a level-headed, rational counterpoint. Now it's shouting, name-calling, fear-mongering, etc.
You mean who the FBI who never investigated any allegations even though they claimed they did?
Maybe if "you know the perjurer/sexual assaulter Republicans nominated to the SCOTUS" wasn't answered with "Which one?" things would go smoother.
But hey, at least the "Republican nominee who violated ethics rules by voting on cases involving his insurrectionist wife's crimes" is just one answer.
By the weak how's that leak investigation going? Did you admit it was Ginni or are you going to check with the judge who has to defer decisions to her husband on her cult's orders?
No no, it was multiple Republican congressmen who voted to not fund the police.
But then again, their base is the people who beat the police with the American flag, so I get it.
In any case I am sure that funding in places like Uvalde is working wonders.
That is a capitalist society. Much like "Truth Social" bans people who post about Jan 6 hearings.
As we see on this board...owners decide...and they are legally permitted to cancel opinions (and posters) they don't like...and have exercised that right on very many occasions.
The Democrats have a lot of to deal with - fighting off an increasingly intolerant left. The GOP, OTOH, has to find a way to shake off the cult of Trumpism. That's going to be a long slog. Both parties need to take a big step back from the edge. Unfortunately, money drive politics (increasingly dark money).
Or their wallets. Witness how much people shriek when gas prices go up, as if price fluctuations aren't inevitable in a market economy.
I remember when Howard Dean was laughed out of the 2004 Democratic primaries just because he made funny noises at a press event.
Doesn't matter what he thinks or what you or I think about it. It only matters what the pregnant woman, inside of whom resides whatever it is, thinks.
To say otherwise is to believe that women are the property of the state. Which is, of course, what this is all about - controlling women.
Supposedly, your God gave us all free will. So who are humans to deny a woman that free will to determine what takes place inside her body? If you believe God designed humans, then God designed women such that they can exercise their free will on their bodies, including on whatever is inside them. For humans to override God's design and impose a restriction on woman's free will is both arrogant and evil.
If God has a problem with abortion, then God will surely deal with anybody involved appropriately. And if God and heaven both actually exist, then what's the big concern for the fetus? Surely the fetus hasn't done anything wrong and will therefore wind up at God's side in heaven.
So then you're all for having your taxes raised to provide for all those unwanted children, right? Surely you're not hypocritical enough to want to see a fetus delivered only to abandon it at birth. Either you care about life, which includes the living not just fetuses, or you don't.
How about we wait to see his actions rather than handing out a medal because he said something?
- Status