Here's a link to the cases decided so far this year: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/06/21/us/major-supreme-court-cases-2022.html My point is that whether the cases involved a religious issue or secular issue, basically the same block of justices issued decisions that are originalist in character.
I'm not a fan of Christians who look to use the legislative branch of state or federal government to push laws that they believe are consistent with their view of scripture. I think that they miss the biblical call to be in the world but not of the world. That said, there's nothing in the Constitution that says that people with religious views aren't to be afforded the opportunity to participate in government. Separation of church and state is not a mandate to disallow religious people to participate in government. It simply says that laws can't be adopted that promote one faith over others. From what I've read, that's likely a good way to challenge the abortion ruling. Denying access to abortion would seem to promote a Christian view of when life begins that is not consistent with all religions.
State legislatures don't have the right to violate the numerous constitutional emendments necessary to restrict or enforce restrictions on abortions. They could possibly go after the doctor, but not the patient. The constitution doesn't even apply to anybody until they are born, according to the specific language in used in Section 1, Clause 1, of the Fourteenth Amendment, which reads Further, they overturned a SCOTUS ruling they all said (under oath) was settled law which should be respected. There can be no logic found here. They are doing this based on extremist beliefs. And if every other Christian sect wants to seperate themselves from this ruling and the catholics who voted on it they are welcome to do so loudly and publicly. Then once all the other sects of Christianity agree they are an extremist cult we can get their tax free status thrown out. But that groundswell of opposition by other Christian sects will never get started. Because they mostly agree with the catholics. Which is why they are being held just as accountable.
Abortion is the worst kind of child abuse. By your logic, allowing states to pass laws against child abuse is anti parent.
Data disagrees with you. There is far more abuse of children, including violent crime and murder when abortion is outlawed. The rates for all of these drop when abortion is legalized. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leg...te that crime fell,crime in the early 1990s."
I'm not vilifying them. I'm saying the natural result of this overreach committed (and largely supported) by followers of Jesus Christ is that they will be vilified harshly. As all Germans were because they didn't stop the Nazis before they became a problem.
I'm not defending the SCOTUS decision. I'm simply noting that the grounds on which the decision was made were that Roe v. Wade had no basis in the US Constitution. Obviously, a more liberal court found differently. The rest of your statement above is, frankly, pure gibberish.
Politics and religion are two topics that almost always result in nothing positive being resolved. I'm not surprised that so many people are angry about the recent SCOTUS decision. As I've said multiple times, I don't support that decision. That being said, I'm making my exit from this discussion.
I understand that, and appreciate the explanation. But that's just the excuse they used. Thanks. The "getting their tax free status revoked" part was sarcasm.
But you know that's BS, right? While "privacy" is not explicitly mentioned in the text of the Constitution, the Griswold Court (by a 7-2 margin) found that it's inherent in various amendments. "Griswold v. Connecticut protects the liberty of married couples to buy and use contraceptives without government restriction." The same constitutional rights that says you can use a rubber or other contraception so as to not impregnate a woman is the same right that says a woman can control her own body. Do you have that right? Yes. Does it make sense? Yes. It is constitutional? Yes. "No basis in the constitution" - speaking of pure gibberish.
Don't play the victim here. You are better than that. I appreciate your back and forth here. But right NOW. AS WE SPEAK, there are Christians in this nation, and a large group I might add, that are actively trying to turn America into a fascist nazi-esque authoritarian shit hole. They have taken over the national republican party. Is every Christian out there a part of it? No. Not even close. But I don't hear these decent thoughtful Christians making much of a fuss about these absolutely repugnant people representing them. And a large percentage of them will continue voting for them in local and national elections.
I'll add that once confronted with this, so far every good Christian I know has either walked away from the conversation or told me it isn't on them to correct the perception of Christians in our country. So, until some people step up, I'm going to keep calling them out. Not because I dislike you or them, but because you need to hear it. Best of luck to us all.
All right, Pruny. Let’s continue the conversation. I’m not sure where we’ll get to, but I’m willing to talk more. I can’t do it today because we’re taking grandkids to the beach for the day. I will leave you with this link for you to ponder regarding regional differences in religiosity in this country. I think the data shows that the Bible Belt is a vastly different place than the west coast and New England when it comes to the prevalence of church life in the population. I also think that there are significant differences in doctrine and culture that influence how people identifying as Christian view the world. The South is an area that once managed to pervert their faith to justify slavery. Much of what you find distasteful about “Christian politics” is still specific to that region. The notion that Christians from other regions are likely to make major inroads in changing the way those folks think seems to me dubious at best. https://news.gallup.com/poll/232223/religious-regions.aspx
I am also pretty busy at work at the moment. Making a mental note to come back and harass you further... ummm.... I mean uh... come back and read further to put critical thinking skills to use. Haha
I don't think other Christians need to change the way the the extremists think, just be vocal about how wrong they are. Very vocal. Similar to how DeSantis should be very vocal about not supporting, or wanting the support of, Nazis. Racists and bigots SHOULD be shouted down before they can cause harm. Again, if people do not condemn things they can be associated with, that association will be made. The greater the harm caused, the more harmful the association is likely to be.
