Topic: Hobby Lobby wants a Christian theocracy
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 years ago #105,359
lol
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 32 minutes later[^] [v] #1,184,551
Okay? Why should I care?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,552
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
Because you live in a country where many forces are pushing for a theocracy, including some in Congress.
Because you live in a country where many forces are pushing for a theocracy, including some in Congress.
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 7 minutes later, 43 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,553
@previous (A)
I never shop at Hobby Lobby though. Not because I care about theocracy or whatever but simply because I have no need for any of their wares. I don't sew, I don't care about home decorations, and I don't do crafts. So why should I care if some store I don't shop at anyway is closed on Sundays?
I never shop at Hobby Lobby though. Not because I care about theocracy or whatever but simply because I have no need for any of their wares. I don't sew, I don't care about home decorations, and I don't do crafts. So why should I care if some store I don't shop at anyway is closed on Sundays?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 12 minutes later, 56 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,554
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 21 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,559
@previous (A)
It would be like if you told me Forever 21 wants a communist dictatorship. This is reprehensible but what can I do? I can't boycott their stores even if I wanted to because I don't shop there. Even if I did want to start shopping there just so I could start boycotting them, I can't because they don't sell anything that would fit me anyway.
It would be like if you told me Forever 21 wants a communist dictatorship. This is reprehensible but what can I do? I can't boycott their stores even if I wanted to because I don't shop there. Even if I did want to start shopping there just so I could start boycotting them, I can't because they don't sell anything that would fit me anyway.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,561
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
If Congresspeople and several other parts of society also wanted that, it would concern me.
If Congresspeople and several other parts of society also wanted that, it would concern me.
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,562
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 36 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,563
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,566
@previous (A)
If a large and increasing part of society wants a theocracy is it really so surprising that elected representatives (who are supposed to, you know, represent their constituents) are trying to accommodate this?
If purple shoes became the hottest new fashion trend would you really be puzzled and shocked that Nike and Adidas came out with new lines of purple shoes for the purple shoe people to buy?
It's very simple: if people want something they will buy and/or vote for it. You focusing on Congress and Hobby Lobby is trying to treat the symptom, not the cause. Hobby Lobby doesn't cause evangelical Christianity. Rand Paul doesn't cause anti-abortion sentiment.
If a large and increasing part of society wants a theocracy is it really so surprising that elected representatives (who are supposed to, you know, represent their constituents) are trying to accommodate this?
If purple shoes became the hottest new fashion trend would you really be puzzled and shocked that Nike and Adidas came out with new lines of purple shoes for the purple shoe people to buy?
It's very simple: if people want something they will buy and/or vote for it. You focusing on Congress and Hobby Lobby is trying to treat the symptom, not the cause. Hobby Lobby doesn't cause evangelical Christianity. Rand Paul doesn't cause anti-abortion sentiment.
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,568
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
They are supposed to represent their constituents within the limits of the constitution and the laws.
They are supposed to represent their constituents within the limits of the constitution and the laws.
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 19 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,569
@previous (A)
The constitution is a scrap of paper written by people who thought it was okay to own other people. I wouldn't put much importance on it. It means whatever nine senior citizens think it does at that moment. Segregation is okay today, unconstitutional tomorrow. We discovered in 2015 that the founding fathers really wanted a constitutional right to gay marriage all along since back in 1789 but somehow no one had figured this out in the intervening 226 years. Abortion is a constitutional right yesterday and it isn't today. That's why this shit changes and "constitutional rights" are discovered and discarded with such rapidity.
The constitution is a scrap of paper written by people who thought it was okay to own other people. I wouldn't put much importance on it. It means whatever nine senior citizens think it does at that moment. Segregation is okay today, unconstitutional tomorrow. We discovered in 2015 that the founding fathers really wanted a constitutional right to gay marriage all along since back in 1789 but somehow no one had figured this out in the intervening 226 years. Abortion is a constitutional right yesterday and it isn't today. That's why this shit changes and "constitutional rights" are discovered and discarded with such rapidity.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 10 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,570
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 35 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,571
@previous (A)
> Fine, but we still have laws. Congress must work within them.
And as meta said, "(insert word here) is a constitutional right yesterday, and isn't today."
Why have laws when the government or SCOTUS changes them constantly?
> Fine, but we still have laws. Congress must work within them.
And as meta said, "(insert word here) is a constitutional right yesterday, and isn't today."
Why have laws when the government or SCOTUS changes them constantly?
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,592
@1,184,570 (A)
> Fine, but we still have laws. Congress must work within them.
Who do you think writes the laws? I hope you understand paper laws aren't the same as natural laws. Congress must work within the laws of physics. We're not getting faster than light travel no matter how many senators vote for it or what the Supreme Court has to say on the subject. On the other hand, there's nothing stopping Congress from either making abortion illegal in all fifty states or making it legal in all fifty states. Either one could happen tomorrow if enough geriatrics in the capitol sign onto it.
> Fine, but we still have laws. Congress must work within them.
Who do you think writes the laws? I hope you understand paper laws aren't the same as natural laws. Congress must work within the laws of physics. We're not getting faster than light travel no matter how many senators vote for it or what the Supreme Court has to say on the subject. On the other hand, there's nothing stopping Congress from either making abortion illegal in all fifty states or making it legal in all fifty states. Either one could happen tomorrow if enough geriatrics in the capitol sign onto it.
(Edited 34 seconds later.)
boof joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,594
the chapter about the European witch craze is a fright -- not only were there fanatics bringing wholly unnecessary misery to the accused, but there were opportunists who collected the properties of people they ratted out as witches
boof double-posted this 3 years ago, 44 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,595
this book, I meanchurch and state: gotta keep 'em separated
boof triple-posted this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,596
also most of the middle east governments really suck
and the taliban are fags
and the taliban are fags
dw !p9hU6ckyqw joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,601
@1,184,563 (A)
> It shows that more and more parts of society want a theocracy.
you think that having stores closed on sunday is theocratic??
> It shows that more and more parts of society want a theocracy.
you think that having stores closed on sunday is theocratic??
boof replied with this 3 years ago, 42 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,608
I have no probs for a business to choose to be open or closed as it chooses
that's a freedom, witha captitical FUCK
that's a freedom, witha captitical FUCK
dw !p9hU6ckyqw replied with this 3 years ago, 46 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,613
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,614
How come OP's hot takes are always at least half a decade late? 🤔🤔🤔
Killer Lettuce🌹 !HonkUK.BIE joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 18 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,617
Who is Hobby Lobby? A Republican Senator?
I swear, Americans, some of you have the strangest names...
I swear, Americans, some of you have the strangest names...