ACLU: Why we can no longer support the federal ‘religious freedom’ law

Washington Post ^ | June 25, 2015 | Louise Melling

[C19fan]

Iknoor Singh, a student at Hofstra University, thought he had found his calling when he attended a campus meeting of the U.S. Army’s Reserve Officers’ Training Corps. But when he tried to sign up, he was told that he would have to shave his beard, cut his hair and remove his turban. When he asked for a religious accommodation as a Sikh, the Army refused, saying that these articles of faith would undermine unit cohesion and morale, readiness, health and safety, and discipline.

.....................................................

Yes, religious freedom needs protection. But religious liberty doesn’t mean the right to discriminate or to impose one’s views on others. The RFRA wasn’t meant to force employees to pay a price for their employer’s faith, or to allow businesses to refuse to serve gay and transgender people, or to sanction government-funded discrimination. In the civil rights era, we rejected the claims of those who said it would violate their religion to integrate. We can’t let the RFRA be used as a tool for a different result now.

[C19fan]

The mask sure is coming off fast. The ACLU now views the 1st Amendment as the 2nd Amendment; it does not exist. ACLU was all gung ho about RFRA when applied to dope smoking Natives and other let us say non-Western traditions and practices but now when Christians want the protection they want to get rid of RFRA.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Up is down and down is up. Good is evil and evil is good.

[SkyDancer]

The ACLU wants to mandate its own religion and get rid of all others. Okay, they will want to keep Islam so they don’t get blown up.

[a fool in paradise]

But religious liberty doesn’t mean the right to discriminate or to impose one’s views on others.

Religious liberty doesn't mean the ability to codify what is or is not sinful behavior. Right.

Bow down to the Church of Big Government.

[Ohioan]

The ACLU was from the start a coalition of Marxist & Fabian Socialist activists, that used the First Amendment--among others--not really to vindicate religious liberty, but as a tool to undermine religious cohesion in local communities across America. It always selected cases for their effect in that direction.

For its role in the suppression of reasoned dissent in the 1950s, see Leftwing Word Games & Religious Freedom.

[Sherman Logan]

In the civil rights era, we rejected the claims of those who said it would violate their religion to integrate.

Here's the money quote. If we abhorred racism enough to force those with religious principles against it to integrate, which we did, we don't really have a logical reason to refuse extension of those same protections to other groups.

[Teacher317]

But religious liberty doesn’t mean the right to discriminate or to impose one’s views on others.

Unless your views are Liberal. Then you may use every avenue of government, media, social media, and anything else to impose your views on others.

[RckyRaCoCo]

Anyone want to guess what's next on the "progressive" agenda...?

Remove religious/traditional anything/everything from the public square?

Litmus test for everyone choosing careers in academia/media?

Pedophilia rights?

Dissolve sovereignty/individualism?

Orwell's Alinsky's 1984?

Sieg Heil Lenin style?

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Their motto: Civil liberties for me but not for thee.

[Norm Lenhart]

Posted earlier before this came out

---

To: campaignPete R-CT

By Monday, serious calls for regulation of faith. More gun control. Harsher penalties for anyone speaking against the blessed homosexual.

By August, a massive upswing in lawsuits based on the above and the beginnings of widespread voilence.

By September open violence with militants of every liberal stripe taking advantage of social media stirred hate for traditionalists.

Then things start getting bad.

92 posted on Saturday, June 27, 2015 5:31:31 AM by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

[umgud]

Will islam lose it’s tax exempt status if it doesn’t affirm that gay weddings can take place in in mosques? Will islam have to have gay teachers?, imams?

[mrsmel]

Sodomites are imposing their views on others when they try to force Christians into serving them in a way which explicitly supports sodomite unions. They initiate the contact, and they desire the transaction, not the Christians.

[Campion]

The ACLU was never about “civil liberties,” it was always about legal protection for Leftists and their friends and allies. It’s the standard communist tactic. The Bolsheviks in Russia were all for freedom of the press and dismantling the secret police, too ... until they were in power.

[bert]

ACLU lawyers have no right to live, to breathe, to exist

[RushIsMyTeddyBear]

Bump.

[Kickass Conservative]

If you don’t like the Rules, don’t Play the game.

As my Father told me many years ago, you can’t complain about a Job unless someone put a Gun to your Head and made you take it.

[ponygirl]

Be prepared for all churches to become State-Sanctioned Churches(TM). They will be required to post their IRS 501(c)3 at the front door with a placard that says “In Compliance.”

[Lurker]

It’s time for the people who file these lawsuits and the lawyers who represent them to start vanishing.

Forever.

L

[Viennacon]

The ACLU has always been a Marxo borg org. Time to lock and load.

[KosmicKitty]

religious liberty doesn’t mean the right to discriminate or to impose one’s views on others

Like forcing Christian Churches to perform gay marriages, right?