Forum Index            

SelectSmart.com®
Before you decide
Over 20,000 selectors

Share

This isn't complicated. 2020 is a referendum on Trump.

The job of the Biden campaign is simple, and Trump is helping.
Is your name welcomed below? Then you can post here. Otherwise, click "Log In" to post!
Welcome! » Log In » Create A New Profile

Liberty v. License

Posted by pb 
pb
Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 03:00PM
I've been wondering about the, essentially, phobic reaction of some in the country, and here, to the argument by others, me for one, on this board, that, in the United States, there is an absolute right for every citizen to practice their religion.

The President made that point, in effect, when he declared houses of worship to be essential.

Some people here went bonkers...and I don't think that it was merely their TDS.

It strikes me that liberals and progressives confuse liberty and license.

Simply because a person is free to do something is not to say that they will do it irresponsibly and to the detriment of others.

From what I can tell, no license was taken in churches on Sunday simply because Trump has declared houses of worship essential. In fact, around here, very little changed.

But, I'm thinking that libertarians and conservatives are very responsible about liberty and libs, probably especially progressives, aren't.

My guess is that progressives fear other people having liberty because, in their hearts, they know that they are prone to abuse liberty and use it irresponsibly.

The truth is that the first liberty in this republic has always been freedom of religion. And, that's worked very, very well.

Nothing untoward happened when the President declared houses of worship essential.

As it turns out, the tyranny and oppression of people of faith, advocated by progressives, is not necessary. Apparently only progressives consider liberty to be license.

Honestly, being a Christian who has little time for institutionalized church Christianity, it seems to me that institutional Christians tend to be bland and compliant. They're the very last people who need to be constrained. Read up on Germany in the 1930s and 1940s if you doubt that.

Progressives? Now, that's a different breed of duck.

I believe they favor the tyranny of big brother because, in their hearts, they know that a little tyranny is good for them. They know that they can't be free. It's dangerous for them to have liberty. They can't distinguish liberty from license. They don't trust themselves, so they don't trust others.

----------------

"You ain't black." --Demented Racist Joe Biden
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 05:08PM
As a non-Christian, I think the rabid attack on it is out of fear. I do find it interesting that progressives never include any other religion in their fear mongering. It's pretty well aimed at Christianity.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 07:11PM
You just fluked Liberty 101. I have recommended you read the seminal work on that in the past: "On Liberty" by John Stuart Mill."

Citing Trump is pathetically funny. A man who has great difficulty in understanding even the simplest and most basic concepts. Listening to his public performances about the pandemic will be something for the ages as the evidence of the most incompetent leader any nation has ever experienced. The psychology of history will keep hordes of future historians in business as they try to analyse what happened to the American people and to determine whether Trump was a Fascist or a fool

He epitomises one of my favourite axioms. "In politics, a fool is more dangerous than a villain and therefore must be treated as a villain." The man is both fool and villain.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 07:16PM
" Listening to his public performances about the pandemic will be something for the ages as the evidence of the most incompetent leader any nation has ever experienced. "

Sort of like listening to the Canadian govt at the beginning of the pandemic tell us how borders are ineffective and shouldn't be used to contain viruses and then doing an about turn once it had spread across Canada.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Build yourselves a wall of ships!" said the Oracle!
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 07:26PM
Generally speaking, laws aren't for the majority who tend to be law-abiding. I personally don't need any laws to do the right thing and be a good citizen. If we left it entirely up to populations to do the right thing, though, there'd be enough people that would do the wrong thing so as to make society a living hell for the rest of us.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 07:27PM
What is being attacked is the narrow-minded, sociopathic ignorance of congregating in large, indoor, packed together groups with everyone breathing on each other during a rapidly spreading pandemic. Not the freedom of religion.

Show me anywhere in the Bible where God's followers are commanded to help spread disease throughout the population.

Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 07:35PM
All of our rights that are enumerated in the First Amendment have restrictions.

...Freedom of speech and expression, therefore, may not be recognized as being absolute, and common limitations or boundaries to freedom of speech relate to libel, slander, obscenity, pornography, sedition, incitement, fighting words, classified information, copyright violation, trade secrets, food labeling, non-disclosure agreements, the right to privacy, dignity, the right to be forgotten, public security, and perjury. Justifications for such include the harm principle, proposed by John Stuart Mill in On Liberty, which suggests that: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."[4] [en.wikipedia.org]
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 07:41PM
Boom. There it is.

Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 08:05PM
What is the harm to others?
pb
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 08:16PM
Quote
Ponderer
What is being attacked is the narrow-minded, sociopathic ignorance of congregating in large, indoor, packed together groups with everyone breathing on each other during a rapidly spreading pandemic. Not the freedom of religion.

Show me anywhere in the Bible where God's followers are commanded to help spread disease throughout the population.

Po,

I think there's very little to none of what you describe going on.

The point that our President is making is that citizens have the right to practice their religion freely. Jefferson explained that right as the people building a wall of separation between church and state and the Supreme Court has always declared that the wall is high.

----------------

"You ain't black." --Demented Racist Joe Biden
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 08:52PM
Donna- so my question is; LEGALLY- what were the reason(s) states relented when DOJ told them it was a constitutional violation? If they had LEGAL STANDING, they would have told DOJ to piss off, but they couldn't show that places of worship are different than any other place where states were allowing large numbers of persons in. In these states, could they hold outside services? NO. The executive orders forbade it.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:03PM
"The point that our President is making is that citizens have the right to practice their religion freely." -pb

No freaking duh. But practicing their religious freedom shall not include being allowed to completely disregard and endanger public safety in the engaging thereof in a wantonly irresponsible fashion. Look, if you can't practice your "religious freedom" without helping to spread and contaminate the population of your community with a deadly virus, then your religion is in extreme need of a thorough reformation.

My point is that if these people are all into the idea that their religion demands or expects them to endanger the lives and health of themselves, their families, and their communities by congregating together and spreading a deadly virus amongst themselves to then go out and spreading it to them, let's see that precept spelled out in their religious texts. Not that they actually can or ever would.

I am so sick to death of religious zealots believing that their "religious freedom" gives them immunity to conduct any manner of socially despicable behavior they have a mind to commit. Even to the point where we are now of them recklessly and pointlessly killing members of their own families and communities.

Do these people actually believe that God will be upset with them and may even punish them if they don't all cram into a church to praise Him in an organized fashion every single Sunday? Do they think there is something Jesus said somewhere in the Bible that congregating to worship on-line on in their cars in the parking lot is a blasphemous act? I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that the vast majority of them aren't that ignorant. Not that they really deserve it.

So why do they so self righteously and obstinately insist on congregating is such a wildly risky manner then?

My guess is that it gets them off, egotistically speaking. They are feeding a personal and within their congregations a gregarious sense of superiority. They think, "HA! This'll show those atheistic know-it-alls how strong and great my religious belief is!". Such self-centered self-aggrandizement is about as un-Christian as you can get.

I believe that many of these people insisting on exercising their "rights" are doing so in the exact same spirit and frame of mind as those camouflaged morons toting AK-47s around to grocery stores do that. They're doing it because they believe their rights allow it and fuk anyone who thinks otherwise. They want to rub their rights in everyone else's faces. And fuk having any rational, real reason to do it in the first place.

Difference being, these religious zealots without the guns are the ones actually getting people killed.

Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:05PM
It's so sad that basic common sense has to be mandated legally before such a huge portion of the population will relent and begrudgingly consent to it.

Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:17PM
I don't know, od. In CA, places of worship are being opened up concurrently with other businessses. I haven't noticed any inconsistencies. I don't know about other states. You cited Michigan as being inconsistent in their opening of casinos but not places of worship, but I looked into that and found that that wasn't the case.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:21PM
The federal court just upheld Newsome in a 3-2 vote. In THIS CASE, the court felt how he is opening is the key. Barbershops, and the like, will not open until phase 3 when the churches do. I would have to take a look at the details, but it doesn't sound like a "bad" ruling given the circumstances. I'm thinking there is no appeal.

The other governors opened the barbershops, spas, tattoo parlors (really?), so they got caught on the church thing.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:29PM
I'm glad they were caught. That was blatantly inconsistent and discriminatory.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:31PM
"You cited Michigan as being inconsistent in their opening of casinos but not places of worship, but I looked into that and found that that wasn't the case."

As Of MAY 1
"HARRIS, MI – While non-tribal casinos have been ordered to remain closed through May 28 to curb the spread of COVID-19 coronavirus, at least one tribal casino in the Upper Peninsula will begin a phased reopening next week.

On Wednesday, May 6, Island Resort and Casino in Harris, which has been closed since March 21, will reopen its slot machines, select to-go food service, some bars, bingo and retail, according to an announcement on Friday, May 1. On Friday, May 8, its golf courses will open. Its hotel will reopen on Wednesday, May 13."

As of today, it's a mute point. She relented by lawsuit.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:38PM
Right, but as I cited before, MI opened up some churches when the opened up some tribal casinos.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:40PM
"What is being attacked is the narrow-minded, sociopathic ignorance of congregating in large, indoor, packed together groups with everyone breathing on each other during a rapidly spreading pandemic. Not the freedom of religion."

As Lead and I have both said repeatedly (that means over and over and over and over and over, etc), 1. there aren't many people there. 2. The churches ARE social distancing. There is a continuation of televised and online availability. Your statement shows an unwillingness to look at any fact because "it's how I feel."

FACTS
More important
Than your “feelings"
pb
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:41PM
No freaking duh. But practicing their religious freedom shall not include being allowed to completely disregard and endanger public safety in the engaging thereof in a wantonly irresponsible fashion. -po

I know many people who are deeply involved in institutionalized Christianity. None of them are doing that. In fact, among the tens of millions who groove on the church very little of that is taking place anywhere.

And, of course, that famous wall is real.

I am so sick to death of religious zealots believing that their "religious freedom" gives them immunity to conduct any manner of socially despicable behavior they have a mind to commit. 

Stop being silly. That almost never happens. And, when it does, it's illegal.

Do these people actually believe that God will be upset with them and may even punish them if they don't all cram into a church to praise Him in an organized fashion every single Sunday?

Okay, po. Your bigotry is showing. Most KKKers don't talk about Jews and blacks with this much prejudice. You're too good of a person to believe what you're saying. It's hate speech.

----------------

"You ain't black." --Demented Racist Joe Biden
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:41PM
no it didn't. When the UP casino opened and she allowed it, she was in violation. She opened up churches as of today.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:43PM
"Okay, po. Your bigotry is showing. Most KKKers don't talk about Jews and blacks with this much prejudice. You're too good of a person to believe what you're saying. It's hate speech."

agree
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:53PM
Accirding to this [www.fox2detroit.com] the opening up of churches started on May 19. As of the 29th they were all opened.
pb
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 09:57PM
Quote
Donna
Accirding to this [www.fox2detroit.com] the opening up of churches started on May 19. As of the 29th they were all opened.

And thousands of people were congregating in small room French kissing, then rushing outside to blow in the faces of innocent atheists, according to po!
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 10:00PM
According to this [www.fox2detroit.com] the opening up of churches started on May 19. As of the 29th they were all allowed to open.

And according to this [www.mlive.com] Gov Whitmer ordered all tribal casinos closed until May 28th. At least one tribal casino owner ignored that order and opened up in early May on the grounds that tribal casinos aren't under the governor's jurisdiction.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 25, 2020 10:09PM
Quote
OldeDude
"Okay, po. Your bigotry is showing. Most KKKers don't talk about Jews and blacks with this much prejudice. You're too good of a person to believe what you're saying. It's hate speech."

agree

How do get bigotry out of pondy's phrasing? There is nothing implied that is mostly bigoted. It is like the Cornwall declaration of the Alliance Church that says baldly that God will be angry if "we" don't burn all the fossil fuels.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 26, 2020 03:23PM
Because you start out as a racist.
pb
Re: Liberty v. License
May 26, 2020 03:48PM
Quote
OldeDude
Because you start out as a racist.

Exactly!

A fellow bigot sees bigotry as the norm.

----------------

"You ain't black." --Demented Racist Joe Biden
Re: Liberty v. License
May 26, 2020 08:31PM
You are a pitiful pair. I bet you wree both the champions of the schoolyard at name calling.
pb
Re: Liberty v. License
May 26, 2020 08:41PM
I think that we both call em as we see em.
Re: Liberty v. License
May 26, 2020 08:59PM
Quote
pb
I think that we both call em as we see em.

You mist definitely do that! Through your warped lenses. The critical thinking part is foreign to you.
pb
Re: Liberty v. License
May 26, 2020 09:07PM
Quote
meagain
Quote
pb
I think that we both call em as we see em.

You mist definitely do that! Through your warped lenses. The critical thinking part is foreign to you.

In the words of Pee-wee Herman, "I know you are, but what am I?"

----------------

"You ain't black." --Demented Racist Joe Biden



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2020 09:08PM by pb.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login



Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!