Huckabee threatens to leave GOP over gay marriage

[Natural Citizen]

There are places in America where business owners can legally refuse doing business with a non-christian based solely upon their religious conscience. There are some threads around here specific to said states/counties and laws that are on the books. I'm not looking for them, though. This is just the first thread that I've read since logging on and so recalled the skullduggery.

 

[TheCount]

I do not believe for a minute that Christians ran the governments that passed them. Religious mores might have been an excuse to pass them, but they were progressive attitudes designed to control people.

How progressive do you think the Virginia legislature was in 1779?

 

[Brett85]

You have a very strange definition of forced.

I'm just explaining what some liquor store owners have said about the issue.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

There are places in America where business owners can legally refuse doing business with a non-christian based solely upon their religious conscience. There are some threads around here specific to said states/counties and laws that are on the books. I'm not looking for them, though. This is just the first thread that I've read since logging on and so recalled the skullduggery.

What's wrong with a private non-Christian citizen, refusing to do business with Christians?

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

You can blame it on relgious people all you want, but you cannot say that blue laws are anything other than an oportunistic and deliberate intrusion into the personal liberties of citizens. They are not the product of a Christian government because we have never had one. I do not believe for a minute that Christians ran the governments that passed them. Religious mores might have been an excuse to pass them, but they were progressive attitudes designed to control people.

Read a little deeper. I do not believe that personal liberties should be infringed. I think all law should be applied equally. Legal products should be legal every day.

In the meantime, manage life so the law doesn't get in the way and work to get the law changed.

So do you not consider the Plymouth colony a Christian ran Government? I'm certainly ameniable to the Christian anarchist folks and it is probably the correct interpretation of Jesus' teachings, but honestly, you doth protest a bit too much. Can't you just accept that at the very least it is people proclaiming themselves believers in Jesus doing it in his name and Bible, no? I get along just fine with Gunny. Unlike you, he knows I'm not talking about him when I talk about Christian Values folks in the GOP. You seem to think that any criticism of their behavior and morays are reflective of you. You also keep dismissing the fact that Paul did the absolute worst in the Bible Belt where these people come from. Yet, ungodly, hedonistic, NH and ME (and the Western States too mind you) Paul did the best in. In all of history, the books are more than clear - for the most part I'd rather be around the outlaws and pioneers, who have more often than not, not been Christians (certainly more-so the outlaws). Can you accept that your view and position is the minority - and help us fight together to rid us of those folks who give your religion a terrible impression and name, or are you going to reflexively defend them as if I am talking specifically about you?

 

[Natural Citizen]

What's wrong with a private non-Christian citizen, refusing to do business with Christians?

Shouldn't need the government to enforce personal bias via legislation in my view. They can do what they want as far as I'm concerned. But they don't need the government to enforce religious prejudice. Why do you tinker with me, Gunny Freedom? I just said I didn't feel like bumping those threads but now I kind of have to go and do that just so the issue , if it is to be debated, can be done so from within the more relevant context.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

So do you not consider the Plymouth colony a Christian ran Government? I'm certainly ameniable to the Christian anarchist folks and it is probably the correct interpretation of Jesus' teachings, but honestly, you doth protest a bit too much. Can't you just accept that at the very least it is people proclaiming themselves believers in Jesus doing it in his name and Bible, no? I get along just fine with Gunny. Unlike you, he knows I'm not talking about him when I talk about Christian Values folks in the GOP. You seem to think that any criticism of their behavior and morays are reflective of you. You also keep dismissing the fact that Paul did the absolute worst in the Bible Belt where these people come from. Yet, ungodly, hedonistic, NH and ME (and the Western States too mind you) Paul did the best in. In all of history, the books are more than clear - for the most part I'd rather be around the outlaws and pioneers, who have more often than not, not been Christians (certainly more-so the outlaws). Can you accept that your view and position is the minority - and help us fight together to rid us of those folks who give your religion a terrible impression and name, or are you going to reflexively defend them as if I am talking specifically about you?

Aye, I do however wish you would be more cognizant of the fact that despite calling themselves "Christians," gunpoint moralists are about as far from Christ as it gets. I call them "gunpoint moralists," "pharisees" or "pharicons" (for pharisee conservatives). We clearly recognize that a hyper-authoritarian is not 'libertarian' even if they should call themselves such, and we would not typically refer to that person as a 'libertarian' even if they claimed the title.

This is not a "no true scotsman" fallacy, because there are, in fact, "true scotsmen." However, a Korean is clearly not a Scotsman, even if he should call himself one. Recognizing that is not fallacious.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Shouldn't need the government to enforce personal bias via legislation in my view. They can do what thay want as far as I'm concerned. But they don't need the government to enforce religious prejudice. Why do you tinker with me, Gunny Freedom? I just said I didn't feel like bumping those threads but now I kind of have to go and do that just so the issue , if it is to be debated, can be done so from within the more relevant context.

It appeared to me in your post that you were complaining about Christian business owners who refused to do business with non-Christians. Such a thing doesn't bother me at all, and in an attempt to illustrate that I put the shoe on the other foot, to demonstrate that I have not problem with the reverse situation either, despite being Christian myself.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Aye, I do however wish you would be more cognizant of the fact that despite calling themselves "Christians," gunpoint moralists are about as far from Christ as it gets. I call them "gunpoint moralists," "pharisees" or "pharicons" (for pharisee conservatives). We clearly recognize that a hyper-authoritarian is not 'libertarian' even if they should call themselves such, and we would not typically refer to that person as a 'libertarian' even if they claimed the title.

This is not a "no true scotsman" fallacy, because there are, in fact, "true scotsmen." However, a Korean is clearly not a Scotsman, even if he should call himself one. Recognizing that is not fallacious.

Yeah, but that wasn't what I was aiming at. I'm going to refer to these people by what they self-identify as, even if it is egregiously not what they are. Just as I'd mock 'Libertarian' Bill Maher, I do so these folks. However, you have to understand that for most of Christianities history - that's what most of its adherents have done. Use force and the State as their bully stick. That was my point about how Paul has fared in the 'Bible Belt', and the booing of the Golden Rule. To say these people are our 'best ally' in the GOP is such a laughingstock as to render myself in complete state of humor hysteria (as what Tobis did). I'd much rather stake myself with the GOP folks in NH and ME for instance (if I absolutely had to) than to the folks in Alabama and South Carolina. Guess where there are more so-called 'Christian's' living and voting?

 

[Natural Citizen]

It appeared to me in your post that you were complaining about Christian business owners who refused to do business with non-Christians. Such a thing doesn't bother me at all, and in an attempt to illustrate that I put the shoe on the other foot, to demonstrate that I have not problem with the reverse situation either, despite being Christian myself.

Oh. Yeah, I wasn't complaining, per se. Was just a matter of fact kind of scribble there in my posting. Any more I'm just like screw it...whatever. Do you ever get like that?

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Yeah, but that wasn't what I was aiming at. I'm going to refer to these people by what they self-identify as, even if it is egregiously not what they are. Just as I'd mock 'Libertarian' Bill Maher, I do so these folks. However, you have to understand that for most of Christianities history - that's what most of its adherents have done. Use force and the State as their bully stick. That was my point about how Paul has fared in the 'Bible Belt', and the booing of the Golden Rule. To say these people are our 'best ally' in the GOP is such a laughingstock as to render myself in complete state of humor hysteria (as what Tobis did). I'd much rather stake myself with the GOP folks in NH and ME for instance (if I absolutely had to) than to the folks in Alabama and South Carolina. Guess where there are more so-called 'Christian's' living and voting?

Well, to be fair, an actual Christian would be Paul's greatest ally. Problem is only some 1-3% of nominal "christians" bear any kind of resemblance to Christ at all.

BOTH points are valid. The fact that an actual Christ-like Christian would be Paul's greatest ally is 100% true. The fact that the majority of those claiming the title "christian" are Paul's biggest enemies, is also 100% true. In order to arrive at the truth in this particular debate, it is important to distinguish between nominal christians and Christ-like Christians, otherwise you have two groups arguing without realizing they are arguing from different premises. That's an exercise in futility.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Oh. Yeah, I wasn't complaining, per se. Was just a matter of fact kind of scribble there in my posting. Any more I'm just like screw it...whatever. Do you ever get like that?

To be honest, not that I know of. I mean, sometimes I will interject salient facts that I am personally neutral on, but which I feel are important to the discussion at hand -- which may have been what you were going for -- but I just didn't perceive a fundamental relevance to statutory enforced morality in private market discrimination...except to say that laws banning private market discrimination are themselves a form of moral enforcement initiated by values arising from a philosophy other than Christian.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Wow. Just... wow. Really?

I know, right? Wow, you hit the jackpot! You'll probably even pick up a + rep or even two. This thread will go a long way to disguise your real intent of trolling on this board. Except that you'll continue to get neg reps from me. Wow!

 

[Ender]

I wish the liberty movement had the ability to co-opt the gay marriage movement and twist it into a "get government out of marriage" campaign. The political power that they have could be used for good instead of more government intrusion.

Exactly my POV.

Gov does NOT belong in marriage and what consenting adults do should be their business and not the government's.

 

[Christian Liberty]

My solution to the dilemma, is that I refuse to consider people who would hold a gun to someone elses head and demand that they behave according to their understanding of 'morality' are not Christians at all, they are pharisees. I have zero problem with Christians wielding influence in government. I have a HUGE problem with pharisees wielding influence in government.

My, this is bold. Where do you draw the line? How much statism can a so-called Christian support before they aren't one?

The biggest struggle I have WRT politics is whether people who are pro-war should be considered Christian. I have posted on this before. I've pretty much given up on actually expecting most people to think through the implicit violence behind "safety' laws and the like, even though its really obvious.

\

 

[Ender]

My, this is bold. Where do you draw the line? How much statism can a so-called Christian support before they aren't one?

The biggest struggle I have WRT politics is whether people who are pro-war should be considered Christian. I have posted on this before. I've pretty much given up on actually expecting most people to think through the implicit violence behind "safety' laws and the like, even though its really obvious.

\

Well, Jesus was an anarchist- so should be an easy answer.

 

[TheCount]

I know, right? Wow, you hit the jackpot! You'll probably even pick up a + rep or even two. This thread will go a long way to disguise your real intent of trolling on this board. Except that you'll continue to get neg reps from me. Wow!

The reputation system must mean a lot to you.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

The reputation system must mean a lot to you.

It must mean a lot to you when your sock puppet accounts rep one another.

 

[TheCount]

It must mean a lot to you when your sock puppet accounts rep one another.

Provably untrue. Please discuss it with the site staff; they have my permission to give you a list of all the people I've ever repped.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Provably untrue.

LOL.

Please discuss it with the site staff; they have my permission to give you a list of all the people I've ever repped.

Why don't you want to discuss it? You're not even sure if it's true or not.

I can help you if you'll let me.