Tweet
is that for some people, their "rights" are the right to discriminate against others they don't like (Usually LGBT).
Shorter University forced employees to sign a pledge denouncing certain lifestyles.
"Employees who sign the pledge promise to reject homosexuality, as well as premarital sex, adultery and other behavior the school says violates the Bible's teaching."
Now I know this is a private religious school and anyone willingly working with them should expect them to have some rather... outdated views, but seriously? Is this pledge really necessary? In fact, I'd say it's borderline discrimination.
Which brings up my next point, Michigan's anti bullying law. It apparently makes exceptions for those with "a sincerely held religious conviction" which isn't good for victims who are LGBT.
Now I don't know much about this law or anti bullying laws in general. In fact, I suspect that there is a bit of emotionalism and embellishing going on, but the fact remains that this bill makes exceptions for those who are religious. I don't know the extent, but I don't know why they felt the need the include that. What makes religious people any more right than non religious?
This is why so many people are fed up with the religious right. They cry persecution when they are forced to acknowladge "sinners" as people. They get on their high horse about how their rights are being violated, but they want to continue to violate the rights of others. Bullshit. Just because we're more open and accepting than before doesn't mean that Christians are being oppressed. The only Christians who are a minority are the fundamentalist nutcases, and considering that they have such backwards views, I think that's a good thing.
Shorter University forced employees to sign a pledge denouncing certain lifestyles.
"Employees who sign the pledge promise to reject homosexuality, as well as premarital sex, adultery and other behavior the school says violates the Bible's teaching."
Now I know this is a private religious school and anyone willingly working with them should expect them to have some rather... outdated views, but seriously? Is this pledge really necessary? In fact, I'd say it's borderline discrimination.
Which brings up my next point, Michigan's anti bullying law. It apparently makes exceptions for those with "a sincerely held religious conviction" which isn't good for victims who are LGBT.
Now I don't know much about this law or anti bullying laws in general. In fact, I suspect that there is a bit of emotionalism and embellishing going on, but the fact remains that this bill makes exceptions for those who are religious. I don't know the extent, but I don't know why they felt the need the include that. What makes religious people any more right than non religious?
This is why so many people are fed up with the religious right. They cry persecution when they are forced to acknowladge "sinners" as people. They get on their high horse about how their rights are being violated, but they want to continue to violate the rights of others. Bullshit. Just because we're more open and accepting than before doesn't mean that Christians are being oppressed. The only Christians who are a minority are the fundamentalist nutcases, and considering that they have such backwards views, I think that's a good thing.
Comment