Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Dr. Strangelove]

If they had no religious justification for it I would imagine they'd be treated like any player who refused to wear a Jackie Robinson patch or who refused to stop writing rap lyrics on their shoes or altered their uniform against league rules. Fined, slap on the wrist, whatever.

[iam416]

I'd be curious how someone would be treated if they chose not to participate but didn't use their religion as the reason. IOW, if they just said "I don't want to be used as a prop in some virtue signaling nonsense".

Yeah, I think that's a matter of contract. But, it's a good question. I mean, it shouldn't be any different than your boss telling you to cosplay at a Star Wars convention even though it's not in your contract. Your free time is your free time. If you want to virtue signal, godspeed. If you don't then godspeed.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Wise words from the G.O.A.T. of comedy...

[Dr. Strangelove]

Rightwing media outlets feuding. Populist sentiment was initially on Crowder’s side but turned against him after Daily Wire revealed they had offered him a $50M four year contract, with 4 weeks vacation and every Friday off to boot. An offer Crowder called insulting and tantamount to slavery.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Congressman Greg Steube (R-FL) fell off a ladder 25 feet while cutting tree branches. Currently in ICU. Considered to have serious but not life-threatening injuries.

Not sure if House Republicans actually did eliminate proxy voting but if so that's one less vote they can count on for a little while.

[lineygoblue]

The short answer is NONE. The Flyers' player was respectful in his dissent. The coach supported his dissent. The Flyers organization and NHL, to date, have not penalized him. In other words, it was actually a model for religious dissent.

For now, yes. The Flyers organization has not given in to the calls for the player to be traded, released, suspended, etc. The key is, he's being accused by progs of a 'hate crime' for simply exercising his constitutionally guaranteed rights. "Don't hide behind your religion". The move is on to classify situations like this as a hate crime.

Those who oppose homosexuality thru religious convictions are already considered mentally ill (homophobia), so the next shoe to drop will be to consider it a crime.

[THE_WIZARD_]

So.much for religious freedom...

[Mike]

Oh wow. Just saw that Alec Baldwin will be charged with Involuntary Manslaughter for that movie set shooting. In New Mexico it's only an 18 month maximum sentence, tho. Sounds like up to 4 people will be charged due to the obvious negligence involved.

He should have to serve 18 months just for his abhorrent Trump impersonation on SNL.

[Da Geezer]

That is yet to come.

Progs want to make laws to limit the freedom of religion. For instance, if your pastor, minister or priest stands in the pulpit and tells you that the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination to God, then they want him (or her) charged with a hate crime. "Don't hide behind your religion" is the key phrase here.

It may take some time, but I believe that is one of the next rights on the slippery slope that will fall.

So it will be framed as "defining" what religion is, and then a government litmus test will be applied to disallow anything that is considered 'hateful'. If its 'hateful' it will not be allowed as a religious practice.

Love wins, right?

China and Russia did the same thing. All official religions have to meet government requirements. Its coming here.

Correct.

In addition to charging a pastor with a "hate crime", the IRS will revoke the 501(c)3 status of the church. I know several Christian organizations that are planning for this eventuality.

Another thing to be on your radar is the phrase "free exercise of religion" in the Constitution being replaced by "free to practice their religion" or some such phraseology. The goal here is to relegate religion to churches or synagogues. Believers are to be quarantined.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Utah drifting towards laws that would effectively ban minors from using social media w/o parental permission.

Teens and tech: Why is Big Tech like Big Tobacco? | Opinion - Deseret News

Not addressed in the article is that this is open to some pretty big 1st Amendment challenges and governments that have tried to impose age-verification systems on both porn (the USA) and violent video games (California) have consistently lost in the past.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Correct.

In addition to charging a pastor with a "hate crime", the IRS will revoke the 501(c)3 status of the church. I know several Christian organizations that are planning for this eventuality.

Another thing to be on your radar is the phrase "free exercise of religion" in the Constitution being replaced by "free to practice their religion" or some such phraseology. The goal here is to relegate religion to churches or synagogues. Believers are to be quarantined.

Just so everyone here agrees first that the hockey player who protested has suffered absolutely no harm and is not being "persecuted" in any way. Once you and Liney agree, you can then feel free to carry on speculation about non-existent, hypothetical laws.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Here are the two cases I meant to reference above

1997's [Janet] Reno v. ACLU decision which blocked the govt from requiring all websites to verify the user was 18 before allowing access to certain content (pornography)

Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union - Wikipedia

2011's Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn decision which struck down a law that banned the sale of violent video games to minors.

Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association - Wikipedia

[Mike]

you can then feel free to carry on speculation about non-existent, hypothetical laws.

You DO realize this is exactly what you did literally 6 minutes before posting this?

[Dr. Strangelove]

You DO realize this is exactly what you did literally 6 minutes before posting this?

I mean...there's actual Utah legislators crafting legislation (that's likely to pass) that would ban the use of social media by minors without parental consent.

I am not aware of any laws currently being drafted that would jail a pastor for calling homosexuality a sin or that priests will soon be FORCED by LAW to perform gay marriages.

One of these two things is in the actual process of happening and is far more realistic than the other.

[Mike]

I am not aware of any laws currently being drafted that would jail a pastor for calling homosexuality a sin or that priests will soon be FORCED by LAW to perform gay marriages.

I don't know about jailing pastors but I am reasonably certain that actual legislation will not be used to keep the church in it's place. That will fall, like far too many things, to our benevolent administrative state. Regulatory rules written by unelected bureaucrats pose a greater danger than anything Congress could ever get passed.