Posted on 10/09/2008 5:52:42 AM PDT by kindred
The bill, SB200, doesn't "ban the Bible." And it's not new, either -- the bill "adds prohibitions against discriminating on the basis of sex, marital status, disability, age, national origin, ancestry, and religion, as necessary, for consistency in antidiscrimination laws."
It's certainly not a good bill, but WND in its inimitably stupid way chooses to go for the sensational yet false headline.
No -- those guys draw their satire from reality. This story is from WorldNet Daily, which draws its reality from its rectum.
I believe the pro-Obama lady who you encountered must be one of those hypocritical religionists called CINOs by devout Catholics who are committed to the Church's position on moral issues. Sorry to say, we protestants also have more than our share of that same type in our midst.
The "good" people of Germany stood by and watched Hitler slaughter 6 million innocent Jews without any meaningful effort to stop the carnage, and we "good" Americans have stood by and watched American liberals kill over 8 times that many innocent unborn children in our own ghastly holocaust. Now it seems very likely that those same Americans are going to elect a man to the highest office in the land who has been one of the most ardent proponents for allowing babies to be killed even after having been born if they happen to be imperfect in any physical or mental way. The German people paid a terrible price for their Fuhrer's horrible crimes against humanity, and they had no effective way to stop the slaughter. Imagine what price we Americans will eventually pay for tolerating the slaughter of at least 50 million unborn human beings when we have the ability to stop most of the killing through the ballot box. One more originalist justice on the SCOTUS would probably lead to overturning Roe v Wade and returning the issue to the states to decide, but that won't happen if Obama's choices fill the next one or two vacancies.
OK, after reading your two posts we get it, you don't like WND and I agree that many of it's articles are based on scanty and often sensationalized details of the actual events.
But can you deny that the CO law is an outrageous assault against the 1st Amendment's guarantee of a free press and free speech? If the law prohibits the free expression of ideas whether good ideas or bad ideas, it is clearly unconstitutional if the 1st Amendment means anything at all. I for one appreciate the original poster for bringing this to the forum, otherwise I would never have thought that CO would enact such an outrageous law.
No. As I said above, it is NOT a good bill. It is, in fact, probably unenforceable even by its own tenets, given that it also bans discrimination against religion and creed, in addition to literature concerning sexual orientation.
Which has nothing to do with the fact that WND is, as usual, worse than useless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.