Supreme court overturns Roe v. Wade

Most catholics I knew growing up were actually good people.

They believed in the constitution and understood that it provided them the freedom to practice their religion without.
They also understood that they should not force their religious beliefs on others.

For some reason, the country and many hypocritical catholics have forgotten that.

1 Like

This kind of reasoning could be extended to the various laws/regulations that prohibit intimate relationships between teachers and of-legal-age students.

Generally, such relationships are forbidden because the power imbalance between teacher and student creates the appearance of coercion even if there is no active coercion.

I think, despite what the majority of SCOTUS judges claim, the same applies here.

1 Like

I agree, and even worse, step father / step daughter relationships

1 Like

If by many you mean a zealous minority, I would agree with you.

1 Like

Lol. A measure of > halfway Christian?

1 Like

Sort of. It’s an indication that they’re serious about their faith anyway.

Some people consider 10% aspirational: something they are working towards. It’s a lot.

And a LOT of people consider campaign contributions charitable. I see that at VITA all the time. No, your contribution to Donald Trump’s campaign is not a federal tax deduction! But in their mental accounting they might consider that part of their tithe. Of course in a survey they might put it in the wrong category too, I dunno.

I really didn’t put a lot of thought into the 5% threshold… was just meaning to exclude the middle class & higher folks who give their church $50 a year.

Didn’t know which thread to put this in.
Alito, Supreme Court’s Abortion Opinion Author, Decries ‘Hostility to Religion’ - Bloomberg

Alito said the decline of faith in the Western world had left believers vulnerable to discrimination.

“The problem that looms is not just indifference to religion, it’s not just ignorance about religion,” he said. “There’s also growing hostility to religion, or at least the traditional religious beliefs that are contrary to the new moral code that is ascendant in some sectors.”

The Supreme Court last month bolstered religious rights in a pair of rulings. With Alito in the majority, the court gave public school teachers and other staff more freedom to pray in public spaces and beefed up the rights of parents to use taxpayer funds for religious education.

> “Unless the people can be convinced that robust religious liberty is worth protecting, it will not endure,” he said. [bolding mine]

I find the word robust as in “robust religious liberty” to be troubling in its potential after a ruling that allows taxpayer funded religious education (indoctrination).

2 Likes

It’s interesting how widely views can swing on these types of issues. In France, for example, it’s illegal even to wear a necklace with a cross on it to public school.

Small crosses are allowed, but yarmulkes are not, which seems absurd to me. But the law is about “conspicuous” religious clothing or symbols, and they seem to have been mainly targeting headscarves but wrote the law in a way that ensnared yarmulkes as well.

(To be clear, I think the headscarf is fine as long as it doesn’t cover the face. I think it’s reasonable for security reasons to require that faces be uncovered. There’s certainly no problem with yarmulkes and turbans are only a problem if they are SO big that other kids can’t see over/around them, which I doubt comes up very often.)

France is a very antisemantic country, no reason to think yamulkas were incidental

2 Likes

Jsm drops dubious hot take, go actuary says hmmmmm

a thread should once again be created in my honor

He’s probably right, that we won’t want to protect Christianity as much when Christianity dies off. We don’t have a stellar history of protecting minorities, including religious minorities.

I wonder if one day we will have a ‘Religion Party’, that is mutli-religion and multi-ethnic.

I think the larger issue is that in america, secularism in government was seen as good for religion, which was supposed to exist primarily in the sphere of personal conscience. This is not as true in europe, as i understand it, which may help explain some of the french laws.

Remember that when congress first considered school prayer in the 1960s, major religious leaders came out against it. This was partially because they thought a prayer that made everybody happy would have to be devoid of any real content.

It is very unfortunate this trend is reversing in america. In my opinion, this christian nationalism is anti american. There is a tradition in american protestantism which argues that the corruption of the church has really started when it was adopted as rome’s state religion.

2 Likes

It’s anti-American and anti-Christian IMO.

5 Likes

Somebody must have a comment on this:

I like the result, I like the fact it was a referendum.

edit: I see it is in the “Republicans Say the Darndest Things” thread.

Gilead will have to pick a new capital

1 Like

Kansas is not as deep red as people think it is. [It’s not red like Oklahoma, Idaho or Wyoming.] It’s not particularly close to being purple, but people there are starting to wake up to the damage Republicans inflicted there over the last couple of decades.

The fact that tens of thousands of people showed up to specifically vote on (against) the proposed amendment suggests Republicans may be headed toward a day of reckoning. Probably not this year - at least 60% of votes cast for either party went for Republicans, and I don’t think Democrats didn’t have any meaningful contested races is enough of an explanation to dismiss it - but it’s clear Democrats have an issue they can hammer away on if they figure out how to do that and not chase the red laser dots of climate change, student debt, defunding police, equality and diversity, and other issues they repeatedly trip over.

2 Likes

Perhaps this article is incorrect with respect to the issue.

30 posts were split to a new topic: (National) Taxation Solution(s) Discussion 2022