Trump MAGAthread VI

[Thermodolia]

Do you want your local church supporting an anti-porn bill?

THEY. WANT. WHAT!?

Well a few republicans plan on introducing a national anti-porn bill so...

[Alvecia]

That's technically not allowed, but the IRS is a bitch about it.

I know one Church got a ton of shit for that.

One Church in Sacramento area I think once got shut down because of spreading a hateful political message, too, as that was also not allowed (Or, the people that were in charge of the property weren't a fan of their church being used for hate)

Plenty more don't. Brag about it even.
They have a day specifically for telling the IRS to go fuck themselves

[Gauthier]

How would the Muslims get in trouble? The order also allows them to donate and become more politically involved as well.

Well, no, I'm pointing-out Gauth is perpetually waiting for people to go after Muslims. I understand the bit you're speaking about.

Or pointing out Republicans would readily scrap their own religious favoritism laws the moment it became apparent Muslims were using them as well.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Prison overcrowding is much more easy to fix and has nothing to do with abortions or orphanages.

What a silly counter argument.

Okay, then, what is the solution to prison overcrowding?

Stop arresting people for Non-violent drug offences and pardon those who are already half way in to there sentience.

[Galloism]

Well that's not unconstitutional, not unconstitutional at all.

some churches tell their congregation who to vote for, same shit i suppose.

In past times, those churches could lose their tax exempt status and become for profit corporations. Five year lookback on that as well.

This order is a bad omen.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Some (not all) Jehovah's Witnesses deny Medically necessary procedures for there own children.

This is a sticky wicket. Balancing physical life against a chance at eternal life.

And they shouldn't be allowed to do that, just like Catholics shouldn't be able to deny medically necessary abortions.

Sadly, "medically necessary abortions" has been expanded to mean any degree of mental health. Here's a link to what a former abortionist says about the subject. http://www.liveaction.org/news/former-abortionist-abortion-is-never-medically-necessary-to-save-the-life-of-the-mother/

Lots of people do stuff they are not allowed to do. They do it anyway.

Like setting up a private server and forwarding classified info to Anthony Weiner.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/03/politics/james-comey-hearing-huma-abedin-forwarding-classified-information/index.html

1. From the states point of view, religion has no place in politics. So, give little Timmy that blood transfusion or child protective services will do it for you.


2.Except when it does save the life of the mother.

Also, I doubt that news source is neutral. They have a story on "Abortion reversal pill" working.

But that doesn't mean they work safely sometimes.

3.I did not say the name "Hillary Clinton". This thread is not about her. This discussion is not about her. She has absolutely nothing to do with anything I just said.

[Galloism]

Do you want your local church supporting an anti-porn bill?

The odd thing here is most churches I know of are already against porn, and many members of many Christian churches already protest at Pro-Life rallies and whatnot already, sooo...I don't understand why this part, again, is needed? Are people going to stand-up in church now and testify to how Trump has changed their lives?

The Johnson Amendment has been eroded for years.

In essence, the only part that was (or perhaps, used to be) left was no telling people who to vote for or to vote for/against certain referenda. They could give a firebrand antiporn speech in general at anytime, even in run up to election, but not tell their parishioners to vote for Dick Johnson, who is against porn, or vote on the referenda to ban porn.

If they did, hypothetically they could lose their tax exempt status. Usually they just got a stern warning though.

[Corrian]

I'm actually expecting it was kind of a joke, Gauth. You really don't help anything.

This dude gets it^

Apart from me saying "he's done some decent things" (in my opinion of course) none of those were serious answers.

Also, Gauth, we're both from Washington. Washington doesn't even have party affiliation. So registering Republican is kind of impossible anyway.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

As far as I can tell, nobody has touched on the Maslenjak v. United States oral arguments heard the other day:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_argum ... 9_b97c.pdf

Basically, the United States' Solicitor General argument is, paraphrased and rather simplified "If you lie, misinterpret, or say anything wrong in your citizenship application, you can be stripped of your citizenship, but don't worry, you'll just go back to being a Permanent Resident".

[United Muscovite Nations]

Well that's not unconstitutional, not unconstitutional at all.

Which part? I don't think it's unconstitutional for Churches to have political positions.

[Neutraligon]

Well that's not unconstitutional, not unconstitutional at all.

Which part? I don't think it's unconstitutional for Churches to have political positions.

The part where non-profits push specific political opponents or parties.

[Lady Scylla]

Well that's not unconstitutional, not unconstitutional at all.

some churches tell their congregation who to vote for, same shit i suppose.

Grandmother's told all the women to write a letter showing their support and admiration for Trump.

[Washington Resistance Army]

As far as I can tell, nobody has touched on the Maslenjak v. United States oral arguments heard the other day:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_argum ... 9_b97c.pdf

Basically, the United States' Solicitor General argument is, paraphrased and rather simplified "If you lie, misinterpret, or say anything wrong in your citizenship application, you can be stripped of your citizenship, but don't worry, you'll just go back to being a Permanent Resident".

Missed that one because I've been more focused on Kolbe and Peruta.

From a quick skim of it the Solicitor Generals arguments seem a tad silly.

[United Muscovite Nations]

This is a sticky wicket. Balancing physical life against a chance at eternal life.

Sadly, "medically necessary abortions" has been expanded to mean any degree of mental health. Here's a link to what a former abortionist says about the subject. http://www.liveaction.org/news/former-abortionist-abortion-is-never-medically-necessary-to-save-the-life-of-the-mother/

Like setting up a private server and forwarding classified info to Anthony Weiner.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/03/politics/james-comey-hearing-huma-abedin-forwarding-classified-information/index.html

1. From the states point of view, religion has no place in politics. So, give little Timmy that blood transfusion or child protective services will do it for you.


2.Except when it does save the life of the mother.

Also, I doubt that news source is neutral. They have a story on "Abortion reversal pill" working.

But that doesn't mean they work safely sometimes.

3.I did not say the name "Hillary Clinton". This thread is not about her. This discussion is not about her. She has absolutely nothing to do with anything I just said.

No one is denying that abortions can be medically necessary; however, the vast majority of abortions are not done for medical necessity.

[Galloism]

Which part? I don't think it's unconstitutional for Churches to have political positions.

The part where non-profits push specific political opponents or parties.

That's actually not unconstitutional.

Stupid, yes, but unconstitutional.

[Galloism]

some churches tell their congregation who to vote for, same shit i suppose.

Grandmother's told all the women to write a letter showing their support and admiration for Trump.

I would totally have reported that to the IRS.

[Lady Scylla]

Grandmother's told all the women to write a letter showing their support and admiration for Trump.

I would totally have reported that to the IRS.

I thought about it, but I don't have any of the letters and don't go to the church anymore. Otherwise I would have recorded it.

[Thermodolia]

This dude gets it^

Apart from me saying "he's done some decent things" (in my opinion of course) none of those were serious answers.

Also, Gauth, we're both from Washington. Washington doesn't even have party affiliation. So registering Republican is kind of impossible anyway.

Same here in Georgia. According to the state I'm an independent.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Which part? I don't think it's unconstitutional for Churches to have political positions.

The part where non-profits push specific political opponents or parties.

Maybe that, yes, but political positions should be allowed, because many people base their political opinions on their religious belief.

[Galloism]

I would totally have reported that to the IRS.

I thought about it, but I don't have any of the letters and don't go to the church anymore. Otherwise I would have recorded it.

Youd still get them a stern warning from the IRS, even if they can't prove it enough to strip status.

[Salandriagado]

Do you not have that data? I mean, unless you're guessing that only a select few people would be huge jerks...

It's completely unreasonable to suggest that, in the modern age, there is widespread desire to discriminate among major service providers (not including bakers and whatnot).

No it isn't.

[Salandriagado]

That continues to be completely fucking irrelevant to a discussion of the US government.



Yeah, no. That's just not even remotely defensible.

Doop. I was speaking about that one part of your answer, concerning the Body of Christ. Apologies if it turned into a thread-jack.

How so? I can say that if you're smoking, you're hurting yourself. However, I can't say you're doing it because you're a purely self-destructive person, if perhaps you actually have an anxiety disorder and you smoke to handle your anxiety. See the difference? And furthermore, if people are not allowed to tell people what they are doing is wrong, why do we have laws in the first place?

Inb4 someone says I'm comparing being gay to smoking, I'm not. I'm explaining the idea of judging someone's actions versus judging someone's person.

Erm, no. "Smoking harms you" isn't a judgement, it's a statement of fact.

[Salandriagado]

Oh this lie again. The employer is not paying for a woman to have an abortion. The insurance provider is covering it.....well part of it.......

'Covering' and 'paying for it' are pretty close definitions.

But "insurance provider" and "employer" are not, unless you happen to work for your insurance company.

[Galloism]

'Covering' and 'paying for it' are pretty close definitions.

But "insurance provider" and "employer" are not, unless you happen to work for your insurance company.

It is worth noting that most large employers are, in fact, self-insured. They just contract an insurance company to process the claims and such because they already have the infrastructure and procedures.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

1. From the states point of view, religion has no place in politics. So, give little Timmy that blood transfusion or child protective services will do it for you.


2.Except when it does save the life of the mother.

Also, I doubt that news source is neutral. They have a story on "Abortion reversal pill" working.

But that doesn't mean they work safely sometimes.

3.I did not say the name "Hillary Clinton". This thread is not about her. This discussion is not about her. She has absolutely nothing to do with anything I just said.

No one is denying that abortions can be medically necessary; however, the vast majority of abortions are not done for medical necessity.

Except WhatsamattaU was just arguing that by giving me the news story "Former abortionist: Abortion is never medically necessary to save the life of the mother"