Federal Texas Judge: Religious Businesses Protected From LGBT Discrimination Claims

There is nothing about theocracy in anything I’m suggesting, merely a return to the founding fathers and their/our constitution original intent on matters regarding the free exercise there of clause of the first amendment to the constitution.

 

You don’t know their original intents, you were not there.
At one point you’ll grow in knowledge and understand that the constitution is a ball and chain and not some mystical perfect document.

 

Repeal the first amendment, otherwise it is what it is.

 

Repeal? Lol... why not just apply it to everyone equally?

 

It explicitly states "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". No where therein does it say "except when gays want a wedding cake." This is the other half of the freedom of religion clause that has just never been fleshed out until now. You are seeing the constitution evolve as intended. Don't like it, then you are going to need to change it. Otherwise, enjoy the show. I personally think it is interesting as hell to see the courts wrestle with it.

 

Not sure why when I said 'we should stop trying to control people' you thought that was me advocating for people to be forced to sell wedding cakes to gays... I think Everyone should be free to do business or not with anyone else for any reason ...including non-religious people.

 

"Applying it equally" cannot be achieved since it is a protection for religion. Gay wedding cakes is one of a number of issues where courts are having to deal with it.

 

Is this is something I don't understand about this why is it against people's religion to sell people things that aren't prohibited by the religion?

For instance a baker selling a cake it's not against the religion to sell a cake like it would be a Jewish deli owner to sell ham.

I just don't understand the religious objection not that they should be forced to serve any customer.

 

Yes it can. One shouldn't need a religious reason to refuse service to someone else. 'I don't want to' would be good enough if we actually cared more about individual freedom than we did trying to force people to be nice to eachother. This is why the courts are having such a tough time with it. A religious reason is not more or less legitimate than any other reason and we're trying to make up why it is out of thin air.

 

And they pick out the Christians rather than the Muslims.

WOKE REAL ESTATE AGENTS ARE THE WORST: Realtors Group Hearing “Hate Speech” “Ethics Complaint” Against Pastor-Realtor. . . for saying “LGBTQ+” “Pride” message is “against our biblical doctrine.”

He's a pastor and a realtor, and his views expressed as a pastor were reported to the realtors group.

 

So back to the OP, the state of Illinois determined that all private adoption agencies must adopt to gay parents.

This was a direct violation of the principals of organizations like catholic charities. Why should they be forced to comply with mandates that violate the core of their beliefs?

In this case, they just got completely out of the adoption program which ultimately hurt foster kids.

It's kind of silly to say that government can not infringe on religion, or promote it, but then impose mandates that violate religious beliefs.

 

An "agency" is not a person. There is no excuse for government imposing beliefs on others. Should this agency have the power to deny a permanent, loving home, because the parents will not be indoctrinating their religious beliefs onto the child?

The person is welcome to believe that a child is better off in a group home than with gay parents. An agency is not a person and you could not show that parents looking to adopt changed their minds because this agency got out of the business.