The Jeff Sessions "Religious Liberty Task Force"

[KevinM1]

Wait, how is the California bill censorship?

California already had a law prohibiting sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) from being performed on minors. The new/amended bill expands the SOCE ban to encompass everyone, and prohibits advertising of SOCE as a service (which makes sense since it's banned). That's it.

In any event, 'religious liberty' has become a dog whistle term meaning Christian privilege and superiority. There's a reason why it's a rallying cry for the alt-right. Hint: it's not to ensure that people of minority faiths are protected. Given that this comes from Sessions, it's all but assured it's going to be a Christian enforcement unit.

[robvalue]

I'm guessing all this shit is aimed at mainly older Christians, who will have lived though some big changes. They used to see Christianity doing whatever the hell it wanted; now it's been relegated to equality. I guess this feels like oppression, especially to people who might dislike the idea of secular governments and still see America as a "Christian nation".

[Amarok]

I don't think that it is an unreasonable question. 

Yes it is 

 If your so smart, perhaps you would like to answer it (shouldn't be difficult if it is as obvious as you claim).

To then have you continue to play dumb 

  I'm guessing that you won't though.

Because i already know you response and it's just more games

[Angrboda]

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.

Where are you getting your information from about California 2943 from? Briefly reading about it, it would do no such thing. This seems like an example of the fake claims of religious discrimination I was talking about. And while you're at it, let's have a source on the Texas claim. (ETA: Nevermind. I found your Texas case and it's not about censorship at all.)

California Assembly Bill 2943 does not mention the Bible, Christianity, or religion at all, so when Allen claimed that the legislation would “literally” prohibit the sale of the Bible, he was stating something that is demonstrably and clearly false.

In reality the legislation, which was introduced in February 2018 by San Jose-based Democrat Evan Low, enhances California’s already-existing prohibition on “sexual orientation change efforts” (SOCE), commonly known as “gay conversion therapy.” In 2012, the California Assembly passed Senate Bill 1172, which banned mental health professionals from performing SOCE on children under the age of 18. The law defines SOCE as: “any practices by mental health providers that seek to change an individual’s sexual orientation. This includes efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”

A.B. 2943, as it stood on 20 April 2018, would extend that earlier prohibition in the following ways:

• Prohibit SOCE from being performed on anyone, not only children under the age of 18
  
• Prohibit the advertising or sale of SOCE as a service

The bill also appears to prohibit SOCE from being performed by any individual, not just by mental health providers, but the Assembly Judiciary Committee’s analysis notes it is not clear whether the text of A.B. 2943 would amount to a blanket prohibition on any and all SOCE.

Snopes || Would a Proposed Law ‘Ban the Bible’ in California?
A Republican politician and a right-wing television station grossly misrepresented California
legislation that would amplify restrictions on "gay conversion therapy."

Houston city officials maintain the subpoenas are about determining the validity of the petitions seeking the recall of HERO and the manner in which signatures for them were gathered:

"The issue centers around a subpoena sent to some pastors actively involved in collecting petition signatures against Houston’s non-discrimination ordinance. The subpoena asked the religious leaders to turn over “all speeches, presentations, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession.”

"Pastors claim it’s an overly broad fishing expedition. “The city council and its attorneys are engaging in an inquisition designed to stifle any critique of its actions,” said a rep for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal firm. “Political and social commentary is not a crime; it is protected by the First Amendment.”

"But their complaints make it sound like the pastors are about to be tried for hate speech using the new law, which is far from the case.

"[City attorneys] were looking into what instructions pastors gave out to those collecting signatures for a referendum on the non-discrimination law. (What exactly the pastors said, and what the collectors knew about the rules, is one of the key issues in pending litigation around whether opponents of the law gathered enough signatures for a referendum.)

"Feldman said the pastors made their sermons relevant to the case by using the pulpit to do political organizing. That included encouraging congregation members to sign petitions and help gather signatures for equal rights ordinance foes, who largely take issue with the rights extended to gay and transgender residents.

"“There’s no question, the wording was overly broad. But I also think there was some deliberate misinterpretation on the other side,” [Houston mayor Annise] Parker said at a press conference. “The goal is to find out if there were specific instructions given on how the petitions should be accurately filled out. It’s not about, ‘What did you preach on last Sunday?'”

"To reiterate: The mayor’s office is not interested in what they preached, or how the pastors feel about Parker or her sexual orientation. (Those things are all well protected under the First Amendment, as they should be.) All officials want to know is what kinds of instructions the pastors gave out with respect to collecting petition signatures, and whether what they said agrees with what they’re arguing in court while appealing the referendum."

Snopes || City of Houston Subpoenas Pastors’ Sermons
Did the city of Houston, Texas, subpoena pastors' sermons as part of a crackdown on preaching against homosexuality?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Prohibiting the sale of Bibles would be stupid in any case - the Gideons will give you all you want for free.

Boru

[Amarok]

Assembly Bill 2943 of California 

Yeah that's not censorship 

Texas being asked to submit their sermons to the government. 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/houston-hustle/

Pure exaggeration and hyperbole 

In the masterpiece cake shop case, the supreme courts ruled largely against the lower governments bias towards the own

Isolated incident that was corrected and note the defendant was not found innocent of what he was originally accused of.If this is proof of a need to the Republican inquisition it's a weak one . And clearly motivated .

attacks on Mosques.

Some of which was carried out by the Christian right and Republicans pretending to care about Muslim rights .That's fucking hilarious .

---

legislation that would amplify restrictions on "gay conversion therapy."

And good thing to as it's Pseudo Medical Quackery and as far as i'm concerned abuse .

[Angrboda]

In the masterpiece cake shop case, the supreme courts ruled largely against the lower governments bias towards the owners religious liberties.

Yeah, I also read what it was based on and it was pretty thin. It seems the court chose to make a narrow ruling in order to duck the larger issue.

[Pat Mustard]

Well at least we have moved from the unconstitutional nonsense.

Good on you for admitting that a government organisation for the promoting of christianity is unconstitutional. Bringing up the idea that it wasn't was nonsesne, but everybody is entitled to be an idiot when not in possession of the facts.

[brewer]

Have you actually read what Sessions said? It's definitely slanted toward christians. (it's easy to see, count the number of times he refers to something christian)

https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attor...rty-summit

I see no need for a task force that is set out to protect the majority religion. I like what the ACLU has to say:

"As enshrined in the First Amendment, religious freedom includes two complementary protections: the right to religious belief and expression and a guarantee that the government neither prefers religion over non-religion nor favors particular faiths over others. " (read the yellow box thingies also)

https://www.aclu.org/issues/religious-liberty

And this article sums it up pretty good: https://www.pressherald.com/2018/08/03/r...s-liberty/

I fail to see how this is unconstitutional.   Do you have something specific?

It's right there.

[Mr.wizard]

This line from Sessions speech stopped me in my tracks "We don’t give up our rights when we go to work, start a business, talk about politics, or interact with the government." The president and his base have been all over the NFL to stop it's players from protesting at work, yet they are going to establish a special task force to ensure that religious rights at work gets special treatment?