The Jeff Sessions "Religious Liberty Task Force"

[RoadRunner79]

I’ll let you argue your own points.

Nope. You don't get to make an assumption about what I'm thinking and then back out when called out on it.

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.

[Amarok]

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.

Translation you have nothing and will ignore that the constitution issue has not been resolved

[RoadRunner79]

So it’s just a feeling then?

This is just a policy, it’s not changing any laws. I don’t see what there is to be afraid of.

His policy on marijuana demonstrates a lack of respect for people's private choices that they make in their own private lives. He resists measures taken by states via their own democratic processes to legalize a mostly harmless drug due to his good ol' boy mentality. He's shown America what he's about numerous times by pushing backwards policies.

It's not "just a feeling" to wonder if he's not going to carry that same backwards-minded mentality into his religious liberty task force efforts. It's a genuine concern. I didn't say he was going to use his "task force" to infringe upon nonbelievers, but given his attitude concerning numerous issues, I wouldn't be surprised if he did.

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?

[Amarok]

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?

It is related and projecting much

[RoadRunner79]

[Amarok]

So it’s just a feeling then?

This is just a policy, it’s not changing any laws. I don’t see what there is to be afraid of.

His policy on marijuana demonstrates a lack of respect for people's private choices that they make in their own private lives. He resists measures taken by states via their own democratic processes to legalize a mostly harmless drug due to his good ol' boy mentality. He's shown America what he's about numerous times by pushing backwards policies.

It's not "just a feeling" to wonder if he's not going to carry that same backwards-minded mentality into his religious liberty task force efforts. It's a genuine concern. I didn't say he was going to use his "task force" to infringe upon nonbelievers, but given his attitude concerning numerous issues, I wouldn't be surprised if he did.

But Vul your just biased against sessions and are not seeing the right trying to erode the separation were all just delusional ....

---

I fail to see how this is unconstitutional.  

Your ignorance is not a counter 

 Do you have something specific?

Now you play your game of "asking for specifics" AKA playing dumb

[vulcanlogician]

His policy on marijuana demonstrates a lack of respect for people's private choices that they make in their own private lives. He resists measures taken by states via their own democratic processes to legalize a mostly harmless drug due to his good ol' boy mentality. He's shown America what he's about numerous times by pushing backwards policies.

It's not "just a feeling" to wonder if he's not going to carry that same backwards-minded mentality into his religious liberty task force efforts. It's a genuine concern. I didn't say he was going to use his "task force" to infringe upon nonbelievers, but given his attitude concerning numerous issues, I wouldn't be surprised if he did.

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.

[RoadRunner79]

---

I fail to see how this is unconstitutional.  

 Do you have something specific?

Now you play your game of "asking for specifics" AKA playing dumb

I don't think that it is an unreasonable question.  If your so smart, perhaps you would like to answer it (shouldn't be difficult if it is as obvious as you claim).  I'm guessing that you won't though.

[Joods]

Nope. You don't get to make an assumption about what I'm thinking and then back out when called out on it.

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.

[RoadRunner79]