Author Topic: Equal protection and religious freedom  (Read 693 times)

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 19348
    • View Profile
Re: Equal protection and religious freedom
« Reply #30 on: June 23, 2022, 08:35:05 PM »
In a pluralistic society, can we accommodate both sides of the LGBTQ issues, or must society decide and discriminate against one side?

I used to think the answer to this question was obvious.  I fear I have overestimated the tolerance of those who love to demand tolerance from others.


There's quite a difference between tolerance of people with different views and intolerance of criminal behaviors. When people on the right or left commit criminal acts, I'll stand with you to prosecute them. Like Charles has said, if people feel so strongly about an issue that they are willing to break the law, they should also be willing to suffer the punishment for their criminal behaviors.


I was recently at a birthday party. It became clear that some of the folks there were very much opposed to President Biden. When they blamed him for the hike in gas prices, I asked how did he cause that? They answered, "The Keystone Pipeline." I responded, from my understanding, that crude oil was going to the gulf to be shipped overseas and wouldn't have made a difference in our gas supply. They asked, "Are you a Biden supporter?" I said, "Yes." We got along fine for the next couple days before we left. We talked about lots of other things, like Jeeps (he owns one) and off-roading. I both tolerated his views which are different than mine; and I respected his experiences in numerous branches of the military. He has knowledge about many things that I don't have. I felt that our views were also tolerated - and that we were willing to learn from them - and they from us. I would certainly invite them to dinner at our house.
So?

Everyone has friends or friendly acquaintances who disagree with them politically.

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 44421
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Equal protection and religious freedom
« Reply #31 on: June 23, 2022, 11:56:59 PM »
In a pluralistic society, can we accommodate both sides of the LGBTQ issues, or must society decide and discriminate against one side?

I used to think the answer to this question was obvious.  I fear I have overestimated the tolerance of those who love to demand tolerance from others.


There's quite a difference between tolerance of people with different views and intolerance of criminal behaviors. When people on the right or left commit criminal acts, I'll stand with you to prosecute them. Like Charles has said, if people feel so strongly about an issue that they are willing to break the law, they should also be willing to suffer the punishment for their criminal behaviors.


I was recently at a birthday party. It became clear that some of the folks there were very much opposed to President Biden. When they blamed him for the hike in gas prices, I asked how did he cause that? They answered, "The Keystone Pipeline." I responded, from my understanding, that crude oil was going to the gulf to be shipped overseas and wouldn't have made a difference in our gas supply. They asked, "Are you a Biden supporter?" I said, "Yes." We got along fine for the next couple days before we left. We talked about lots of other things, like Jeeps (he owns one) and off-roading. I both tolerated his views which are different than mine; and I respected his experiences in numerous branches of the military. He has knowledge about many things that I don't have. I felt that our views were also tolerated - and that we were willing to learn from them - and they from us. I would certainly invite them to dinner at our house.
So?

Everyone has friends or friendly acquaintances who disagree with them politically.


So, we know how to be tolerant of those who disagree with us politically, religiously, etc. We can be tolerant and not commit criminal or harmful acts against them. Tolerance is a goal that we can and have achieved. David seemed to express that it was an impossibility.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13356
    • View Profile
Re: Equal protection and religious freedom
« Reply #32 on: Yesterday at 07:11:51 AM »
In a pluralistic society, can we accommodate both sides of the LGBTQ issues, or must society decide and discriminate against one side?

I used to think the answer to this question was obvious.  I fear I have overestimated the tolerance of those who love to demand tolerance from others.


There's quite a difference between tolerance of people with different views and intolerance of criminal behaviors. When people on the right or left commit criminal acts, I'll stand with you to prosecute them. Like Charles has said, if people feel so strongly about an issue that they are willing to break the law, they should also be willing to suffer the punishment for their criminal behaviors.


I was recently at a birthday party. It became clear that some of the folks there were very much opposed to President Biden. When they blamed him for the hike in gas prices, I asked how did he cause that? They answered, "The Keystone Pipeline." I responded, from my understanding, that crude oil was going to the gulf to be shipped overseas and wouldn't have made a difference in our gas supply. They asked, "Are you a Biden supporter?" I said, "Yes." We got along fine for the next couple days before we left. We talked about lots of other things, like Jeeps (he owns one) and off-roading. I both tolerated his views which are different than mine; and I respected his experiences in numerous branches of the military. He has knowledge about many things that I don't have. I felt that our views were also tolerated - and that we were willing to learn from them - and they from us. I would certainly invite them to dinner at our house.
So?

Everyone has friends or friendly acquaintances who disagree with them politically.


So, we know how to be tolerant of those who disagree with us politically, religiously, etc. We can be tolerant and not commit criminal or harmful acts against them. Tolerance is a goal that we can and have achieved. David seemed to express that it was an impossibility.
Tolerance is a two way street. Unfortunately, far too often those who demand tolerance for themselves or those they support are unwilling to be tolerant of those who disagree when they have power. This may be considered a corollary of Neuhaus' Law. It is particularly striking of the Left who loudly demand tolerance but is unwilling to extend it.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 44421
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Equal protection and religious freedom
« Reply #33 on: Yesterday at 07:44:26 AM »
In a pluralistic society, can we accommodate both sides of the LGBTQ issues, or must society decide and discriminate against one side?

I used to think the answer to this question was obvious.  I fear I have overestimated the tolerance of those who love to demand tolerance from others.


There's quite a difference between tolerance of people with different views and intolerance of criminal behaviors. When people on the right or left commit criminal acts, I'll stand with you to prosecute them. Like Charles has said, if people feel so strongly about an issue that they are willing to break the law, they should also be willing to suffer the punishment for their criminal behaviors.


I was recently at a birthday party. It became clear that some of the folks there were very much opposed to President Biden. When they blamed him for the hike in gas prices, I asked how did he cause that? They answered, "The Keystone Pipeline." I responded, from my understanding, that crude oil was going to the gulf to be shipped overseas and wouldn't have made a difference in our gas supply. They asked, "Are you a Biden supporter?" I said, "Yes." We got along fine for the next couple days before we left. We talked about lots of other things, like Jeeps (he owns one) and off-roading. I both tolerated his views which are different than mine; and I respected his experiences in numerous branches of the military. He has knowledge about many things that I don't have. I felt that our views were also tolerated - and that we were willing to learn from them - and they from us. I would certainly invite them to dinner at our house.
So?

Everyone has friends or friendly acquaintances who disagree with them politically.


So, we know how to be tolerant of those who disagree with us politically, religiously, etc. We can be tolerant and not commit criminal or harmful acts against them. Tolerance is a goal that we can and have achieved. David seemed to express that it was an impossibility.
Tolerance is a two way street. Unfortunately, far too often those who demand tolerance for themselves or those they support are unwilling to be tolerant of those who disagree when they have power. This may be considered a corollary of Neuhaus' Law. It is particularly striking of the Left who loudly demand tolerance but is unwilling to extend it.


Yes, some folks on the left can be intolerant; but some of the examples that are given, e.g., a bakery that won't bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, are about actions that are deemed illegal, i.e., discriminatory.


The fact that Charles and I remain part of this forum comes from tolerance and we only learn from those who have a different view on things. (We don't learn from people who agree with us.) The fact that folks from Lutheran Core are part of the ELCA shows that (at least some of us) are tolerant of those who are more conservative. I've defended their right to be part of the ELCA and express their opinions.


It's unfortunate that the extremes are usually the folks who end up in the news. I think that vast majority of us are like the example I gave, which, as Peter said, happens among friends all the time. 
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

David Garner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 7950
    • View Profile
    • For He is Good and Loves Mankind
Re: Equal protection and religious freedom
« Reply #34 on: Yesterday at 08:12:26 AM »
In a pluralistic society, can we accommodate both sides of the LGBTQ issues, or must society decide and discriminate against one side?

I used to think the answer to this question was obvious.  I fear I have overestimated the tolerance of those who love to demand tolerance from others.


There's quite a difference between tolerance of people with different views and intolerance of criminal behaviors. When people on the right or left commit criminal acts, I'll stand with you to prosecute them. Like Charles has said, if people feel so strongly about an issue that they are willing to break the law, they should also be willing to suffer the punishment for their criminal behaviors.


I was recently at a birthday party. It became clear that some of the folks there were very much opposed to President Biden. When they blamed him for the hike in gas prices, I asked how did he cause that? They answered, "The Keystone Pipeline." I responded, from my understanding, that crude oil was going to the gulf to be shipped overseas and wouldn't have made a difference in our gas supply. They asked, "Are you a Biden supporter?" I said, "Yes." We got along fine for the next couple days before we left. We talked about lots of other things, like Jeeps (he owns one) and off-roading. I both tolerated his views which are different than mine; and I respected his experiences in numerous branches of the military. He has knowledge about many things that I don't have. I felt that our views were also tolerated - and that we were willing to learn from them - and they from us. I would certainly invite them to dinner at our house.
So?

Everyone has friends or friendly acquaintances who disagree with them politically.


So, we know how to be tolerant of those who disagree with us politically, religiously, etc. We can be tolerant and not commit criminal or harmful acts against them. Tolerance is a goal that we can and have achieved. David seemed to express that it was an impossibility.

No I didn’t. What I expressed was my observation that people who fancy themselves as tolerant (usually upper income white suburban liberals) are actually very intolerant.

Your continued pretense that legality equals morality is of a piece. You pretend to be nice. But you aren’t. You’re eager, in fact, to use the power of the state to punish people for merely disagreeing with you.

That is, you are intolerant.
Orthodox Reader and former Lutheran (LCMS and WELS).

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 14871
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Equal protection and religious freedom
« Reply #35 on: Yesterday at 08:36:42 AM »
Mr. Garner:
Your continued pretense that legality equals morality is of a piece. You pretend to be nice. But you aren’t. You’re eager, in fact, to use the power of the state to punish people for merely disagreeing with you.

Me:
Yours is an unfair characterization of people you consider liberals. You can’t even grant us the slight idea that maybe we’re interested in using the power of the state to help people and to protect people. Do you think we want to “punish“ people for “merely disagreeing with us.“What would be the point of that?
I did not intend that the Gallatin morality. But legality is still legality. And some of us may consider something legal that  others consider immoral. .
Retired ELCA Pastor. Iowa native. Now in Minneapolis. It is now clear that the election of 2020 was not stolen. But we see now how it was nearly stolen after the balloting. Some of our top officials assisted by corrupt lawyers, attempted to steal the electoral college. Some true patriots saved us.

David Garner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 7950
    • View Profile
    • For He is Good and Loves Mankind
Re: Equal protection and religious freedom
« Reply #36 on: Yesterday at 08:42:46 AM »
Mr. Garner:
Your continued pretense that legality equals morality is of a piece. You pretend to be nice. But you aren’t. You’re eager, in fact, to use the power of the state to punish people for merely disagreeing with you.

Me:
Yours is an unfair characterization of people you consider liberals. You can’t even grant us the slight idea that maybe we’re interested in using the power of the state to help people and to protect people. Do you think we want to “punish“ people for “merely disagreeing with us.“What would be the point of that?
I did not intend that the Gallatin morality. But legality is still legality. And some of us may consider something legal that  others consider immoral. .

I do think that. And I further think you have demonstrated it here time and again.

What would be the point? Coercion to adopt your view of things. As ever.
Orthodox Reader and former Lutheran (LCMS and WELS).

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13356
    • View Profile
Re: Equal protection and religious freedom
« Reply #37 on: Yesterday at 09:10:10 AM »
NYC Cardinal Timothy Dolan published an excellent opinion piece on Fox https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/violent-threats-against-people-faith-are-opposite-human-rights.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 44421
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Equal protection and religious freedom
« Reply #38 on: Yesterday at 06:51:53 PM »
In a pluralistic society, can we accommodate both sides of the LGBTQ issues, or must society decide and discriminate against one side?

I used to think the answer to this question was obvious.  I fear I have overestimated the tolerance of those who love to demand tolerance from others.


There's quite a difference between tolerance of people with different views and intolerance of criminal behaviors. When people on the right or left commit criminal acts, I'll stand with you to prosecute them. Like Charles has said, if people feel so strongly about an issue that they are willing to break the law, they should also be willing to suffer the punishment for their criminal behaviors.


I was recently at a birthday party. It became clear that some of the folks there were very much opposed to President Biden. When they blamed him for the hike in gas prices, I asked how did he cause that? They answered, "The Keystone Pipeline." I responded, from my understanding, that crude oil was going to the gulf to be shipped overseas and wouldn't have made a difference in our gas supply. They asked, "Are you a Biden supporter?" I said, "Yes." We got along fine for the next couple days before we left. We talked about lots of other things, like Jeeps (he owns one) and off-roading. I both tolerated his views which are different than mine; and I respected his experiences in numerous branches of the military. He has knowledge about many things that I don't have. I felt that our views were also tolerated - and that we were willing to learn from them - and they from us. I would certainly invite them to dinner at our house.
So?

Everyone has friends or friendly acquaintances who disagree with them politically.


So, we know how to be tolerant of those who disagree with us politically, religiously, etc. We can be tolerant and not commit criminal or harmful acts against them. Tolerance is a goal that we can and have achieved. David seemed to express that it was an impossibility.

No I didn’t. What I expressed was my observation that people who fancy themselves as tolerant (usually upper income white suburban liberals) are actually very intolerant.

Your continued pretense that legality equals morality is of a piece. You pretend to be nice. But you aren’t. You’re eager, in fact, to use the power of the state to punish people for merely disagreeing with you.

That is, you are intolerant.


Where have I talked about using the power of the state to punish people for merely disagreeing with me? I certainly have talked about the power of the state to punish people who break the law.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]