Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Alex C.
Recently Ellen DeGeneres disinvited a guest to her show because the woman who is a preacher talked about homosexuality in her church. Ellen is on public airwaves in which her show lease from the government with renewals. That was a violation. You are ignoring the crimes of the liberals.

Again, wrong.

Being a guest on Ellen's show is not protected. That aspect of her show is not open to the public. It's invite only, it's got a long history of exclusivity, and it's expressive.

What she can't do is bar people from the audience on the basis of their race, class, gender, religion or sexual orientation. That part is open to the public, and anyone can attend.

Leasing air from the government has absolutely nothing to do with whom Ellen can invite on her show. They are already subject to FCC rules, which don't require hosts to invite certain types of guests.

I.e. if your claim was correct, then I could barge into Fox News and demand to be a guest on Bill O'Reilly's show. Not only is such behavior not protected, it's not even a good idea.

It may be impolite or even unethical to disinvite someone based on their religious views, but it certainly is not a violation of civil rights laws.

Yvonne wrote:
Alex C.
Recently Ellen DeGeneres disinvited a guest to her show because the woman who is a preacher talked about homosexuality in her church. Ellen is on public airwaves in which her show lease from the government with renewals. That was a violation. You are ignoring the crimes of the liberals.

Yvonne wrote:
Florist arrangements or creating a wedding cake is part of an art form.

How many artists refused to participate in Trump?s inauguration? Shouldn?t Trump sue because those artists discriminated against him?

He is in an unique classification as president so he has a case.

An artist also said on tv that he refused to design Mrs. Trump dress, isn't that another discrimination case?

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

CatDog wrote:
I guess if "President" is a sexual orientation or an ethnicity you would have a case. But it's not. So you don't. What a surprise that you lack even a basic understanding of the issue you're arguing about.

I looked up what is protected. Trump is older than Obama when elected, so he has age, his ethnic origin is different than Obama, there is also a class for physical or mental disability. Trump cannot control himself from attacking people. Trump has a case, he is being discriminated against from liberal Dems.

CatDog wrote:
I guess if "President" is a sexual orientation or an ethnicity you would have a case. But it's not. So you don't. What a surprise that you lack even a basic understanding of the issue you're arguing about.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Florist arrangements or creating a wedding cake is part of an art form. How many artists refused to participate in Trump?s inauguration? Shouldn?t Trump sue because those artists discriminated against him? He is in an unique classification as president so he has a case. An artist also said on tv that he refused to design Mrs. Trump dress, isn't that another discrimination case?

Are you calling Trump gay?

Yvonne wrote:
Florist arrangements or creating a wedding cake is part of an art form. How many artists refused to participate in Trump?s inauguration? Shouldn?t Trump sue because those artists discriminated against him? He is in an unique classification as president so he has a case. An artist also said on tv that he refused to design Mrs. Trump dress, isn't that another discrimination case?

CatDog wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
One reason why the USA is on this list. Did same sex activists say same sex marriage would not harm anyone?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/20/living/stutzman-florist-gay/

Their gay marriage did not harm anyone. The florist harmed themselves by refusing service to someone based on their sexual orientation. That's like saying a bully that got suspended for punching someone is being persecuted for his beliefs that he should be able to punch people.

Yvonne wrote:
One reason why the USA is on this list. Did same sex activists say same sex marriage would not harm anyone?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/20/living/stutzman-florist-gay/

Yvonne wrote:
One reason why the USA is on this list. Did same sex activists say same sex marriage would not harm anyone?

Yvonne wrote:
http://religionnews.com/2016/03/31/us ... lerance-and-whining-rise/

Yvonne wrote:
An international group that list the Hall of Shame of countries that persecute Christians has added the USA to the Hall of Shame list for the first time.
http://www.persecution.org/persecutio ... 20of%20Shame%20Report.pdf

On June 11, 2016, Omar Mateen, a US-based radical Muslim, attacked a gay nightclub in Orlando, killing 49 and injuring 53 more. In a call to 911, he clearly laid out his motivation. The attack was driven by his allegiance to ISIS and desire for retribution for attacks on ISIS. Incredibly, after the attack, numerous high profile media outlets blamed the attacks on what they perceive as the antiLGBTQ atmosphere that Christians have created.

In short, Christians in the US are facing constant attacks in the media, where they are portrayed as bigoted, racist, sexist, and closeminded. The characterization in the media may be translating into direct attacks as well. The First Liberty Institute, the largest legal organization in the US dedicated exclusively to protecting religious freedom, documents such actions and reports that attacks on religion doubled between 2012 and 2015.

More importantly, Christians and all religious people are being marginalized through the law. From the case of a Christian football coach suspended for praying at the 50-yard line, to Christian business owners forced to pay a $135,000 fine for declining to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding, the number of troubling cases directed towards Christians has exploded.

In 2011, InterVarsity Christian Fellowship lost their official recognition as a student organization in all of their respective chapters across 23 California public colleges. This occurred because the Christian organization required their respective leaders to uphold a doctrinal statement of Biblical principles, which allegedly conflicted with California State universities? policies. After four years of embattled negotiations, InterVarsity regained their official recognition in June 2015.

In 2014, Eric Walsh was terminated one week after being hired by the Georgia Department of Public Health (DPH). The basis of termination was alleged undisclosed income from prior employment in California. However, the Georgia DPH knew that Walsh was a Christian preacher outside of work and went to great lengths to review and investigate the content of his sermons posted on YouTube. Georgia officials have even requested copies of Walsh?s sermons, despite prior statements that the termination had nothing to do with his religious views or affiliations. Walsh is currently suing the Georgia DPH for wrongful termination and religious discrimination.

The rise of these cases stems partly from a broad cultural shift towards secularism. The Pew Foundation found that those identifying as non-religious in the US rose by seven percent, to 23 percent of the total US adult population within just seven years (2007 to 2014).

Anti-Christian entities have been able to leverage the growing secularization of society and culture to their advantage, utilizing the courts as a preferred venue to gradually marginalize and silence Christians. Using the cudgel of ?equality,? secular forces in and out of the courts have worked to create a body of law built from one bad precedent after another. Claims of intolerance and inequality are used to fundamentally distort the clear intent of the First Amendment.

The Founders carefully and deliberately placed religious freedom as the first liberty because it encompasses several fundamental rights including thought, speech, expression, and assembly. The First Amendment explicitly grants freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. The essential aim is to protect the right of citizens to practice religion in the public square.

Decades of accumulated poor judicial decisions and precedents have twisted the First Amendment so that the courts, in defiance of the Founders, are pushing religion out of the public square, and into the small space of private expression. In essence, the courts are deciding that you only have full religious freedom and expression in the church and your home. In the public domain, your religious views and thoughts must be restrained and controlled. This trend is extremely worrying in the country that has long held the ideal of religious liberty.

While there is no comparison between the life of a Christian in the US with persecuted believers overseas, ICC sees these worrying trends as an alarming indication of a decline in religious liberty in the United States.

bill wrote:
Christians are pedophiles.

Mao wrote:
Sorry about the paragraphs! When I posted it refused to accept to then I cut and pasted onto Word and then recut and pasted it. It looked fine in Word but was a mess on the site. But if I edited it, I repeatedly got a message that I had timed out.

And, Whoelsecoulditbe, that is the exact time of snarky condescending quip that is evidence of what we're talking about. Would you make such anti Islamic statments? Or anti Jewish statements. Maybe- but probably not.

Mao wrote:
Sorry about the paragraphs! When I posted it refused to accept to then I cut and pasted onto Word and then recut and pasted it. It looked fine in Word but was a mess on the site. But if I edited it, I repeatedly got a message that I had timed out.

And, Whoelsecoulditbe, that is the exact time of snarky condescending quip that is evidence of what we're talking about. Would you make such anti Islamic statments? Or anti Jewish statements. Maybe- but probably not.

Mao wrote:
The anti Christian animus (and ignorance) exhibited by Brewster et al is, I think, the type of "soft persecution" of Christianity that the study means. It is is a bit of a stretch in a way- Christians in America certainly are not being beheaded as in Islamic countries, or put in internment camps as in Marxist states (N. Korea, China, Cuba, Venezuela). But the Enlighten critique of Christianity in many forms is now a sort of base prejudice.
The sexual abuse scandal is particularly interesting. While a few of the cases occurred under the pre Vatican II Church where a few notorious pedophiles flew under the radar and, as pedophiles do, were outsmarted based on institutional weaknesses, the overwhelming number of victims occurred in the new Church of Vatican II which largely tries to ape the larger world and accept its values. Chastity, virginity, penance- were forgotten and our shared values of concern for the poor, downtrodden, forgotten etc became all rather than only a part of the religion. Half celibates left for marriage. A certain portion that remained holy orders started watching TV and there were no longer any regulations- they could dress like laymen, travel on vacations etc. The habits of monks were denigrated. Is it any wonder that religious began acting out sexually?
In the early 1970s, the Catholic Traditionalist press, e.g. The Remnant, was apoplectic that certain priests were predatory homosexuals seeking to seduce adolescent boys. Cardinals and bishops were implicated, e.g. Cardinal Bernadine, Bishop Hubbard, etc. Letter writing campaigns were organized. Press conferences were called. Nothing happened! Instead, the press lionized these churchman who were all arch liberals. That is why Spotlight, the movie, and the like, is such BS. Yes, the Times did a service bringing light to the victims- but it was after years of being complicit in the cover-up. Moreover, when people began to put 2 + 2 together so that they saw that this was a homosexual phenomenon, not a pedophile phenomenon, the NY Times et al, got very defensive and skittish.
This continues today. Pope Francis is an enable of predatory homosexual priests of the first order. These degenerate men are now in power all throughout the Church and are engaged in a Stalinist campaign to destroy anyone who tries to stop them.
Francis ' household is run by Monsignor Ricca a convicted predatory homosexual and patron of gigolos. The famous "who am I to judge" statement of the Pope was made when reporters asked how he could have such a man run his household. Think of it. Ricca controls everyone who comes and goes at the Casa Marta. He is also in charge of the Vatican Bank. Other high profile predatory homosexuals (or protectors of same) include Cardinals McCarrick, Daneels, Mahoney, Kasper, Marx. LOL, Cardinal Daneels is on video tape haranguing a young man for the temerity to bring criminal charges against his uncle who as bishop had sodomized him as a teenager! The MSM will not talk about this because all of these church men deny Christ and everything Christ means. They are the trojan horse that has destroyed the church.
Penultimately, just for context, Stalinism killed many times more people than were victims of any Christian persecution. http://waitbutwhy.com/2013/08/the-dea ... comparison-breakdown.html

A respected estimate of the vicitms of the Spanish Inquisition is 30,000. His work on The Spanish Inquisition is published by Yale University Press (Fourth Edition, 2014). Kamen?s research has led him to conclude: ?We can in all probability accept the estimate, made on the basis of available documentation, that a maximum of three thousand persons may have suffered death during the entire history of the tribunal? (p. 253). Kamen?s estimates may be too low, but they represent the general perspective of contemporary scholar. On the other hand, Stalin is estimate to have had 20 million victims. http://www.nytimes.com/1989/02/04/wor ... as-victims-of-stalin.html. Now the most recent stats I can find for Christians is 2013 1,123 Christians were reported to have been killed during the 12 months ending Oct. 31, 2013. https://www.worldwatchmonitor.org/2014/01/2935607/
Finally, on the sexual abuse of minors, it is all so curious. Our culture does all it can to destroy the innocence of children. The very idea of what psychologists used to call the latency period, or period after infantile sexual development and before adolescence is now ridiculed. Children, we are told, will decide their own sexual ethic and parameters among themselves. Along the way, they will be surrounded by hypersexualized models (Disney princesses) and play with dildos mandatged middle school sex ed. The age of consent is being lowered to 14!https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2 ... cia-hewitt-age-of-consent Our heads spin at homosexual sex scandal after scandal- from Sandusky (who actually was probably a true pedophile), to Canadian Youth Hockey, to pro football in England (soccer), to American Little League, etc.
Anyway, this is pissing into the wind because the antichristian have an incredible inability to admit their prejudice.
For anyone interested in more on the homosexual infiltration of the Catholic church consider Saint Damian's The Book of Gommorah, and, more recently, Randy Engel's Rites of Sodomy and Goodby Good Men by Michael Ros