Religious Tests

Matt Walsh writes:
The answer is clear. We object to the baker or the photographer refusing to service gay weddings because we’ve deemed that expression to be anti-gay. And anti-gay expression is always wrong. Remember what we’ve said time after time: it has no place in our society. Churches are in our society, aren’t they?...

We force chapels to marry gays and bakers to bake cakes for gay weddings because we find Christianity abhorrent and detest the very thought of anyone attempting to live by its tenets.

That’s all. That’s it. That’s what everything comes down to. Nothing more, nothing less.

If we have banned people from practicing their faith in their private lives because we disagree with it, why wouldn’t we try and eradicate the hive itself?

If Christians are barred from running their private businesses according to their religious convictions, then haven’t we made a statement about those convictions? They’re unwelcome. Illegitimate. There’s no place in a civilized society for them.


E Hines said...

The oath taken by Federal judges and justices is

I, XXX XXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as XXX under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.

Federal court rulings of the type Walsh describes are clear violations of that oath, placing as they do, some groups of Americans above others, in violation of the 14th Amendment and of both the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses of the 1st.

This violation is itself a clear violation of Art III, Sect 1: The Judges...shall hold their Offices during good Behavior....

This is one of the things elections are for and one of the necessary consequences of elections. There are a potful of judges wanting impeachment and conviction.

Another reason for elections and elections and elections until we get a Congress and WH that's responsive to us.

Eric Hines

Tom said...

Interestingly, it is the 14th amendment that is the legal basis of rulings that are forcing states to recognize same-sex marriages.

I agree that a lot of judges need removing, but I don't think we'll find enough suitable replacements. We've ceded the training grounds for law, medicine, science, and the humanities to people who don't understand us and hate us. As long as the universities remain bastions of the left, the replacement judges will be cut from the same cloth as the ones we want out now. A hundred elections won't change that.

Ymar Sakar said...

Judges are just bumped up lawyers. The lawyer unions aren't going to be even dented by the weak pathetic political game Americans like to play.

Eric Blair said...

I warned friends of mine that ultimately this is what was going to happen. They did not believe me.

Now they don't know what to say.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

It is the competition between the old religion and the new one.

Some religions have some very bad pieces to them, and we make them stop. Still, it pays to remember that we ultimately replace one set of values with another.

Ymar Sakar said...

Now they don't know what to say.

When they listen to their Leftist Authorities tell them, then they'll know what to say.

The weakling pukes will remain as they are, always searching for a master, whether divine or demonic, to take care of them.