I kinda like Trump's Executive Order on Religious Freedom

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't figure out if you are mentally retarded, a fascist, or both.

Or maybe you are just a troll.
My following comment here isn't directed specifically at DocMcStuffins. This thread just gave me the opportunity to rant about something that's been getting to me.

To be clear I didn't vote for Trump nor for Hillary. But it seems that these days anytime, anyone disagrees with someone about a political issue it's not long before people start throwing out terms like Fascist or Nazi. To use the term so loosely shows a lack of understanding of what they did to the world 75 years ago. More than that, it's intellectual laziness. If you disagree with what someone is saying argue your point rationally. This is what turns me off about American politics these days. It's all turned into a shrill shouting match with very little discussion of ideas.

Rant finished. I will say no more.
 
My following comment here isn't directed specifically at DocMcStuffins. This thread just gave me the opportunity to rant about something that's been getting to me.

To be clear I didn't vote for Trump nor for Hillary. But it seems that these days anytime, anyone disagrees with someone about a political issue it's not long before people start throwing out terms like Fascist or Nazi. To use the term so loosely shows a lack of understanding of what they did to the world 75 years ago. More than that, it's intellectual laziness. If you disagree with what someone is saying argue your point rationally. This is what turns me off about American politics these days. It's all turned into a shrill shouting match with very little discussion of ideas.

Rant finished. I will say no more.

exactly,

I was so surprised DocMcStuffins reacted that way, calling me retarded just because I shared a video about President Trump
 
Last edited:
Well, for a non-American not living in America and not willing to migrate there, I must say sometimes I find him entertaining. I even follow him on Twitter (guilty pleasure!)
But if I was American , well, maybe sometimes I'd just pretend I'm Canadian
 
  • Like
Reactions: TAG Manager
post something of a real opinion instead of reactionary semi-trollish threads.

clap.gif


Agreed. Stop letting other people think for you and write something of your own true value. Just like the idiots on FB that can't think for themselves and do that copy/paste bullshit from someone else's status. (no offense to anyone who does, but really, have some original thought)
 
View attachment 3512

Agreed. Stop letting other people think for you and write something of your own true value. Just like the idiots on FB that can't think for themselves and do that copy/paste bullshit from someone else's status. (no offense to anyone who does, but really, have some original thought)

This past election and the couple of months since Trump was inaugurated have caused me to put the majority of my FB friends on follow only status.

I got so tired of the endless flow of memes with zero commentary from the people forwarding them. That's from FB friends on both sides of the political aisle. There is no shortage of people who are either too lazy, or unable to articulate their opinions.

I think Trump is an embarrassment as president, but he is hardly a Nazi. If anything he got elected on a counterswing of the political mood of the country following the Obama years.

Trump claims to be a populist, someone seeking to represent the concerns of ordinary people, and his campaign rhetoric was tailored to that end and heavily spiced with nationalism.

While it is true that fascists often use populism and nationalism to gain power, the comparison effectively stops there.

That is also where my defense of Trump stops.

He simply isn't qualified for the job. He isn't a statesman or diplomatic at all, he speaks unfiltered and that is going to continue to cause gigantic problems and disruptions for the US Government at home and abroad.

A lot of people are attracted to him because of his unfiltered mouth and Twitter feed, but I say it is what makes him such a terrible choice as president.

PS

Is that Orson Wells in the gif?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cabbie
He simply isn't qualified for the job. He isn't a statesman or diplomatic at all, he speaks unfiltered and that is going to continue to cause gigantic problems and disruptions for the US Government at home and abroad.

A lot of people are attracted to him because of his unfiltered mouth and Twitter feed, but I say it is what makes him such a terrible choice as president.

Despite his money, he lacks class and tact for that matter.

But the problem is, even if we speed through the next 4 years, who's going to be there to take the reigns from Trump and cleanup the disaster he's leaving in his wake. (Some of Trump's ideas about American jobs, look good on paper and sound good speeches... but there's a lot of unknowns and I assume, backroom dealing that will hurt Americans more than help them.)
 
watch the video



I watched the video and found it devoid of meaningful content.

It basically amounted to "yay religious freedom" without explaining what the executive order would practically do, or how we didn't have religious freedom previously.
 
I watched the video and found it devoid of meaningful content.

It basically amounted to "yay religious freedom" without explaining what the executive order would practically do, or how we didn't have religious freedom previously.

It was a little ambiguous, but in context of the events from the past four years and Trump's campaign promises to the religious-right wing of the Republican Party (Evangelicals), it is talking about allowing business owners the right to refuse service to gay customers based on religious beliefs.

There were a couple high profile court cases that involved a bakery shop refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding. There was another case that involved a florist refusing to deliver flower arrangements to a gay wedding.

It is basically only an issue that Southern Baptists care about.

Most gay folks I know wouldn't be patrons at a bible thumping bakery or flower shop in the first place.

However from the standpoint of LGBT activist groups, they are solidly against any legislation or executive order that would allow the denial of services to a gay person.

In other words, it is an "election season issue" that was whipped into a much bigger deal than it really was.

While I couldn't see the source of that video because it is embedded, my guess is that the video was produced by an evangelical group to in an attempt to get Trump to fulfill his campaign promise to push for a "religious freedom" act that allows business owners to deny service to gays based on their religious beliefs.

Trump over promised his ass off during the campaign and the group that made that video is trying to rally evangelicals to go to Whitehouse.org to pressure him into keeping his promise to them.

My guess is that Trump won't follow through on this.

It is a classic example of playing to the emotions of an extreme wing of a political party.

The evangelicals got played as chumps, which isn't surprising since they are gullible enough to believe the ridiculous shit in the Bible.
 
Last edited:
what's wrong about this post?

As someone for who thinks the US (and Japan by extension of the US written constitution) gets the issue of religious freedom right, the problem is that this video does not actually say what POTUS Trump would do or what religious freedom means in this context.

Unfortunately the phrase gets used in a kind of partisan way that really doesn't have anything to do with 1st Amendment protections. The issue gets especially complicated when considering Constitutional protections vs federal/state/local legislation on issues such as health insurance.

However from the standpoint of LGBT activist groups, they are solidly against any legislation or executive order that would allow the denial of services to a gay person.

Problem here is that the alphabet soup activist groups don't really have much in the way of Constitutional law to support this and certainly nothing that would override 1st Amendment protections.

Note I'm not saying that actual Constitutional rights should be denied to citizens of the US, just that the law isn't about fashionable causes and rights don't get invented out of thin air.

Well look, the definition of a fascist is someone who thinks the rights of corporations is more important than the rights of minorities. That was true in nazi Germany and it is true today.

Troll skill level 1/10

Failed at both linguistics & history. No dictionary or theorist of government would agree with your "definition" of racism or racist and in fact the Third Reich did not prioritize corporations over any citizens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cabbie and Jbagz
As someone for who thinks the US (and Japan by extension of the US written constitution) gets the issue of religious freedom right, the problem is that this video does not actually say what POTUS Trump would do or what religious freedom means in this context.

Unfortunately the phrase gets used in a kind of partisan way that really doesn't have anything to do with 1st Amendment protections. The issue gets especially complicated when considering Constitutional protections vs federal/state/local legislation on issues such as health insurance.



Problem here is that the alphabet soup activist groups don't really have much in the way of Constitutional law to support this and certainly nothing that would override 1st Amendment protections.

Note I'm not saying that actual Constitutional rights should be denied to citizens of the US, just that the law isn't about fashionable causes and rights don't get invented out of thin air.


.

You touched upon how the phrase religious freedom was being used in a way that doesn't have much to do with 1st Amendment protections.

Perhaps the LGBT groups best bet would be to argue that the right to refuse service isn't a protected religious freedom.

Which I believe is exactly what lawyers representing the LGBT community are doing in this case.

As far as inventing things out of thin air... A group of people are claiming that a deity, that there is absolutely no evidence of, doesn't want them to sell wedding cakes to gay people. I have to laugh at that.

Anyway, I think this whole issue was hyped by the Republican Party just to get Evangelical Christians angry enough to show up at the polls in large numbers. Of course the Democratic Party is just as guilty of hyping it to get the LGBT community angry enough to show up at the polls.

The issue was blown way out of proportion by political strategists.

Some redneck baker didn't want to sell a cake to a gay couple. Big whoop. The gay couple goes somewhere else and writes a shitty review of the redneck bakery on social media.

As an atheist bisexual, the positions that certain groups of Christians take on homosexuality bugs me a little, but I can't see how anyone on either side is getting their rights trampled.

As a Libertarian, I want the government to have a limited role in commerce. I think the free market can solve this particular issue better than the government.
 
I think the free market can solve this particular issue better than the government.
Yeah, i actually agree. I think the opinion those extremist Christians have on gay people is disgusting, but why force someone who hates you to service you?
If don't want customers? Good. Hopefully they'll feel it in their wallets!

Now, if its services like a hospital or something, i think it should be illegal for them to act on their religious believes. But a bakery? It must not be so hard to find another who will gladly make a beautiful wedding cake for you.
 
What do you like about it? It might be nice to actually post something of a real opinion instead of reactionary semi-trollish threads.

Well, I symphatize with the victims of LGBT activists. Bakers, Firefighters, etc. who lost their jobs and livelihood just becuase they didn't bake the same-sex marriage cake or wrote a book im their free time proclaiming their beliefs.

Also, I want sex-change to be not a legal right. In some countries like Aus, they subsidize gender change for as young as 15 yr olds. I don't want other countries to follow their lead.
 
Yeah, i actually agree. I think the opinion those extremist Christians have on gay people is disgusting, but why force someone who hates you to service you?
If don't want customers? Good. Hopefully they'll feel it in their wallets!

Now, if its services like a hospital or something, i think it should be illegal for them to act on their religious believes. But a bakery? It must not be so hard to find another who will gladly make a beautiful wedding cake for you.

exactly,

I myself think executing gays just because the Bible says it, is ridiculous

however, gays must also accept that not everyone likes them

people should be able to express opinion of gays, especially if asked, without getting crucified once they tell the truth
 
View attachment 3512

Agreed. Stop letting other people think for you and write something of your own true value. Just like the idiots on FB that can't think for themselves and do that copy/paste bullshit from someone else's status. (no offense to anyone who does, but really, have some original thought)

you're basically saying that someone who shares a music video is an idiot for appreciating music, and not creating it himself.
 
I watched the video and found it devoid of meaningful content.

It basically amounted to "yay religious freedom" without explaining what the executive order would practically do, or how we didn't have religious freedom previously.

you can easily inform yourself on what this topic is about by reading the other posts. Most of them have understood what the video is all about.
 
Last edited:
It was a little ambiguous, but in context of the events from the past four years and Trump's campaign promises to the religious-right wing of the Republican Party (Evangelicals), it is talking about allowing business owners the right to refuse service to gay customers based on religious beliefs.

There were a couple high profile court cases that involved a bakery shop refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding. There was another case that involved a florist refusing to deliver flower arrangements to a gay wedding.

It is basically only an issue that Southern Baptists care about.

Most gay folks I know wouldn't be patrons at a bible thumping bakery or flower shop in the first place.

However from the standpoint of LGBT activist groups, they are solidly against any legislation or executive order that would allow the denial of services to a gay person.

In other words, it is an "election season issue" that was whipped into a much bigger deal than it really was.

While I couldn't see the source of that video because it is embedded, my guess is that the video was produced by an evangelical group to in an attempt to get Trump to fulfill his campaign promise to push for a "religious freedom" act that allows business owners to deny service to gays based on their religious beliefs.

Trump over promised his ass off during the campaign and the group that made that video is trying to rally evangelicals to go to Whitehouse.org to pressure him into keeping his promise to them.

My guess is that Trump won't follow through on this.

It is a classic example of playing to the emotions of an extreme wing of a political party.

The evangelicals got played as chumps, which isn't surprising since they are gullible enough to believe the ridiculous shit in the Bible.

the video wasn't created by an evangelical group. It was created by Alliance Defending Freedom, which is made up of lawyers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.