(September 7, 2015 at 7:47 pm)MTL Wrote:(September 7, 2015 at 7:31 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: Were I an attorney, and I saw an atheist doing what she did in return, I would take the case of the theist who was harmed by the bigotry.
I gave kudos to your comment,
but this portion intrigued me.
Can you elaborate as to why this would be?
Because I am an American who believes in the Constitution, including the fundamental right to be free from government interference in religious practice.
The same tenet that (should) prevent them from harming us by their religion prevents us from harming them for it. In short, the moment anyone takes on a job that amounts to being the government, they must follow the law with absolute neutrality, regardless of their position on religion. That idiot clerk should have resigned, if she had an issue with homosexuals. There are many Christians, particularly Catholics, who feel (correctly) that the Bible prohibits divorce except in cases of infidelity or apostasy, but that clerk and her office issued divorce certificates on literally the same piece of paper [1] that she suddenly refused to sign when it came time for homosexuals to be granted the same rights everyone else possessed. That makes her a bigot, not a Christian martyr trying to uphold the Bible, and would not have been a justification for either act I just described in any case, since she was an agent of the government.
[1] Rowan County, Kentucky, Form VS-230, "Application for Marriage/Divorce Certificate": https://www.ecclix.com/pdf/marriagedivorce.pdf
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
