The Religion of the United States of America
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
genuineoriginal
New member
There is a difference between not having any objections about religious diversity and being overjoyed to see religious diversity.
genuineoriginal
New member
The Fourteenth Amendment says: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;"
According to the SJW NPCs, "A straight, white cisgender male has straight privilege, white privilege, cis privilege and male privilege."
It is therefore unconstitutional for a State to make or enforce any law that abridges (cuts short) straight privilege, white privilege, cis privilege, or male privilege.
Some people on this thread think that privileges are Constitutional Rights.
If that is so, then straight privilege, white privilege, cis privilege, and male privilege are all Constitutional Rights.
According to the SJW NPCs, "A straight, white cisgender male has straight privilege, white privilege, cis privilege and male privilege."
It is therefore unconstitutional for a State to make or enforce any law that abridges (cuts short) straight privilege, white privilege, cis privilege, or male privilege.
Some people on this thread think that privileges are Constitutional Rights.
If that is so, then straight privilege, white privilege, cis privilege, and male privilege are all Constitutional Rights.
As you now realize, the 14th Amendment requires the states to respect the rights listed in the first ten amendments.
Yes.
The primary author of the Privileges or Immunities Clause was Congressman John Bingham of Ohio.
This language closely tracked the existing language in the Privileges and Immunities Clause. On February 28, 1866, Bingham expressed his opinion that this draft language would give Congress power to "secure to the citizens of each State all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States in the several States", and he added that, "The proposition pending before the House is simply a proposition to arm the Congress…with the power to enforce the bill of rights as it stands in the constitution today. It hath that extent—no more…If the State laws do not interfere, those immunities follow under the Constitution".
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwcglink.html#anchor39
So the intent of the Amendment is absolutely clear, as the courts have repeatedly confirmed. As you now understand, the author of the clause intended it to apply the Bill of Rights to the states, and explicitly presented it for a vote on that understanding.
Nice try.
See above. No way to wiggle out of it.
Nice try. The courts have supported the intent of the people who drafted the amendment. Not much chance of you changing that with a new interpretation, is there?
Kit the Coyote
New member
So a US citizen does NOT have immunity from the state forcing religion on him or interfering in his religious beliefs?
He's just doing some wishful thinking. The author of the amendment was very clear about the intent. And courts have always upheld it.
genuineoriginal
New member
It appears that the Colorado baker does not have that immunity.
| Christian baker who won Supreme Court case in new cake-making legal battle When Christian bakery owner Jack Phillips won a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case in June over his refusal to make a wedding cake a gay couple based on his religious convictions, he thought his legal battles with the state of Colorado were over, according to a lawsuit. But now Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colorado, is facing a new court fight, this one involving a lawyer who asked him to bake a cake to celebrate the anniversary of her gender transition. Phillips filed a federal lawsuit this week accusing the state of Colorado of "anti-religious hostility" against him and asked the U.S. District Court in Denver to overturn a Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruling that he discriminated against a transgender person. |
Kit the Coyote
New member
We will have to see, my view in these cases is he should have the right as a person not to do anything against his faith, his business though is another matter as it is not a person or a religious institution.
It's true . More and more Americans have been leaving Christianity because they no longer believe in it . I didn't make this up . It's established fact and you can easily google it yourself .
genuineoriginal
New member
I am not laughing about people abandoning Christianity, I am laughing at you for thinking the founders would be overjoyed to see the kind of religious diversity we have today.
I think there would be a lot of objection, considering the religious affiliation of the founders.
|