So, were all being sued /lgbt/... have you hired your lawyer

File: 34534534.png (523KB, 469x582px) Image search: [Google]

523KB, 469x582px

>>6721296
this sounds like "God's Not Dead" the third edition

is it possible she could succeed ?

File: a4eeb9dfe531a87ee5ee8c805107638b.gif (1MB, 250x443px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 250x443px

>>6721296
Why can't Christians or Muslims understand the concept of separation of church and state?

>>6721296
>Hm, didn't I laugh about this a long time ago?
>May 2015

Mentally Ill v. Mentally Ill

>>6722999
That doesn't even make sense.

If she loses, does that mean we can countersue every religion that demonises us? Fucking payday!

>>6721296
IS there even grounds to sue a group of people without individually naming them? I mean under what grounds is she suing?

>>6721433
Separation of church and state doesn't mean that laws aren't influenced by morality of religious origin.

>>6723353
So whats to stop someone from imposing sharia law on us all if they infiltrated the legislature?

Nothing about sharia law is moral.

>>6723430
That something is the inherent secularism and pluralism of the system, as well as the demographic makeup of the people who the laws are made for. What I'm mainly talking about is stuff like abortion or gay marriage, where I don't think the law - which involves ethical argument - should shut out religious voices. That's replacing pluralism with all-out secularism, mandating secularism as an end in itself instead of secularism being a way of providing the maximum amount of religious freedom that is feasible.

I don't think a secular legal code is something that needs to be universally implemented. If a society wants sharia law, let it have sharia law. I think you're wrong to say that "nothing about sharia law is moral", when I think we would both find a lot of very benign and agreeable moral/legal precepts within it. In the same way, secularism could be handwaved as being entirely immoral for the fact that the dwindling religious participation in the laws of the West has lead to widespread morally undesirable outcomes.

>>6723454
Sharia law is morally bankrupt it is literally the code of barbarism. I'd rather live in a morally bankrupt and free society than a corrupt and barbaric society that you find in shit holes like the middle east,

>>6723353
That's exactly what it means. Otherwise, there would be no separation of church and state.

>>6723495
No it means not having the church dictate the laws and politics of the state and, generally, vice versa. In the UK you don't have the same degree of separation of church and state as you do in the US, so the Anglican church is basically held accountable to the British government (partly why its a piece of shit now). Also stuff like that the ruling monarch has to be a member of the Anglican Church.

If your definition is correct, then where is the line drawn? And why should it only apply to religions, and not ideologies or codes of morality in general? This is where the democratic aspect comes into play, the laws are representative of the people. For the people.

File: Jerry Falwell.jpg (78KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 850x400px

>>6723495
Did you know that Jerry Falwell the founder of various different things as well as a place called Doc's Diner asserted that there was no such thing as separation of church and state.

He once had this interesting exchange with Jesse Jackson on tv...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UY71nzkZHKQ

>>6723492
>sharia law is morally bankrupt and barbaric.
>id rather live in a morally bankrupt society
>than a barbaric barbaric

Read your own text before you submit, please...

>>6723592
When a heterosexual's public life consists of nothing but them being a church meme, than they represent the church. When that happens to a politician, then they're representing the church, not the people who elected them, many of which are homosexuals and who deserve representation. The church does not, any more than corporations do.

Your lies don't fool gays.

>>6723749
I'm gay.

No one except actual church officials or people who are hired to work in the church should be considered public representatives of it. There are many "Catholic" politicians on both sides of politics who support things anathema to their religion, just to play the political game.

What I'm talking about is the average person, who votes, who pays taxes. When they vote, when they protest, they're acting on what they see as their moral obligations, their needs, and so on. Don't they deserve representation too, anon?

>>6723762
Wrong. When you espouse ideas, you're representing the origins, and the current leading authorities, of those ideas. Especially when you admit to doing so, which Christian politicians always do, and when others of your beliefs claim that you do, which all churches and voters who are evil enough to be Christian also do.

And you're straight. You're completely fucking worthless.

And no, evil people do not deserve representation, they deserve death.

File: ss+(2016-07-14+at+01.32.39).png (6KB, 1071x90px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 1071x90px

>>6723810
Oh, you're that mentally ill anon who made this post, aren't you?

File: 1471075239698.gif (1MB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x281px

>>6721296
Oh no, guess I better renounce the gay or she'll take my sheckels!

>status: dismissed
well at least I don't have to pay.

>>6723232
On the grounds that we're sinners

>>6723430
>So whats to stop someone from imposing sharia law on us all if they infiltrated the legislature?

Nothing, so don't let Muslims into your fucking country.

>>6723430

Read the constitution - freedom of religion, due process, and no religious examination all preclude Sharia law.

The Sharia law bullshit is a red herring, so you don't notice the Christian Taliban already in the US.

>>6723018
Christian fundamentalists = mentally ill
LGBT = mentally ill

>>6729840
>Christian Taliban
this is a stupid meme, muslims are much more violent towards gays than anyone else.

>>6723495
No, it means the state can have no officially recognized state religion. The people are allowed to make laws that they want to live by.
Also, the way things ought to be and the way they are are very different.
If the state put as much effort into supporting gay marriage as they did straight there would be no more children in healthy house holds. Gays would have marriage and straights would be cohabiting. We can not function as a society by pushing laws that make us feel good, they have to work in practice.