Posted on Oct 28, 2016
Obama Threatens to Veto Military Bill Over Religious Liberty
2.09K
6
12
3
3
0
Obama Threatens to Veto Military Bill Because It Protects Religious Groups
Obama Threatens to Veto Military Bill Over Religious Liberty
Posted from dailysignal.com
Religion
DoD
CG-NAP13: Chaplains
Budget
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
If you delve deeper into the Russell Amendment, it becomes less "religious freedom" and more "anti-LGBT" with each reading.
This fight has been going on since April.
Freedom to choose, does not mean Freedom to discriminate (within the confines of American law). This amendment would (potentially) Protect discriminatory actions, which is counter to American philosophy.
This fight has been going on since April.
Freedom to choose, does not mean Freedom to discriminate (within the confines of American law). This amendment would (potentially) Protect discriminatory actions, which is counter to American philosophy.
(0)
(0)
SSG Ike Phelan
I want to say first everyone has the right to feel safe.
What kind of discrimination are you talking about. I am just curious because it seems like lately people are wanting to tell the church they have to change their teachings because our society has become more accepting (which is a good thing). I don think the church should change and I don't think they should be forced to accept anything that is out side their teaching. I think the church should be free to practice their religion as they have in the past.
What kind of discrimination are you talking about. I am just curious because it seems like lately people are wanting to tell the church they have to change their teachings because our society has become more accepting (which is a good thing). I don think the church should change and I don't think they should be forced to accept anything that is out side their teaching. I think the church should be free to practice their religion as they have in the past.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SSG Ike Phelan - Churches can teach what they like, but the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT must be neutral. This bill would shift things away from neutrality. If someone is CONTRACTING WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT they have to play by the Federal Anti-Discrimination rules. That's the trick. If you want Federal (the People's) Money, you have to adhere to Federal Rules.
Below is a decent explanation of why this is considered an issue.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/04/29/lgbt-groups-gird-for-battle-against-religious-based-legislation-they-say-could-erase-their-rights/
Below is a decent explanation of why this is considered an issue.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/04/29/lgbt-groups-gird-for-battle-against-religious-based-legislation-they-say-could-erase-their-rights/
LGBT groups gird for battle against religious-based legislation in Congress
Are state efforts to roll back anti-discrimination laws now moving to the federal level?
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google