The Jeff Sessions "Religious Liberty Task Force"

[RoadRunner79]

I don't know anything about the marijuana issues.   But it seems unrelated.  Would you say this is more of a personal thing against Sessions (trust) than anything within the proposals for a Religious Liberty Task force?

Generally speaking, I advocate for religious liberty, so (on paper) a task force whose purpose was to ensure "the free exercise thereof" is no problem for me. 

So long as your religious rites do not harm others (ie unlike the Satanism example a few pages back), nobody should be allowed to infringe upon your ability to worship or profess your beliefs to others.


But let me ask my original question again: What contemporary issue concerning religious liberty is so pressing that it warrants a task force?

That there isn't a clear answer to that question is one of my main issues with the proposal.

So then your objection is just one of economy and not of principle then.   Would you agree?   That is, your not against, it, other than you just think it is unnecessary? 

I can understand if they are dumping a lot of money into this, and they are essentially doing nothing, where that may be of concern.  However I think that we are starting to see censorship Assembly Bill 2943 of California which would censor speech.   I've also heard of Pastors in Texas being asked to submit their sermons to the government.   And as was mentioned in the link that Mr. Brewer provided, attacks on Mosques.  In the masterpiece cake shop case, the supreme courts ruled largely against the lower governments bias towards the owners religious liberties.

I can understand the concern, if the argument is just that you think it's frivolous.  I wouldn't object to an audit of what they are accomplishing vs what they are spending after some time.

---

How about my assumption that this is just sophism to divert away from the topic.   And I would prefer to let you speak for yourself.  I may be wrong, perhaps you will go back and try to defend the unconstitutional claim again.

As usual, when called out, you resort to the dodge and evade tactic. How sad it is that you feel it necessary to make assumptions and then refuse to participate fairly.

Furthermore, if you wanted me to speak for myself, you would not have interjected your opinion about my thoughts. Instead, you would have asked rather than assume.

I'm done having a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

It was unimportant, and if you don't want to discuss your position further, that is fine.   All I said, was that I thought that post was closer to the real reasons than "it's unconstitutional"  which is a bad argument anyway.   If your just going to twist things to attack me and call me stupid, I'm probably not interested in talking with you anyway.

But this is the comment that I was referring to

and again, only furthers the Christian faith and it's agenda where this country is concerned.