Possible BFD
24 Likes
Those tour stories from Jan 5th didn’t come from nowhere, just went quiet while investigations played out.
19 Likes
Whether or not Gosar, Brooks, Biggs or Sessions actually lead Capitol tours is not as significant as their actual stated intent of overturning the results of the election through disruption of the certification process.
They clearly intended to make war on legitimate Democracy.
21 Likes
Yes, but if they also gave tours to people they knew intended to attempt to stop the certification, then they have gone much further than just voting No and can rightfully be considered to be complicit in the insurrection.
23 Likes
Expand the damned courts.
4 Likes
Hey, maybe there’s still a buck in it for them.
Sure, they can’t outright sell the babies anymore or use the young mothers as unpaid labor, but surely there’s a buck in it somewhere.
6 Likes
9 Likes
IANAL, but, in that event, it seems like it’d be reasonable to charge them as co-conspirators, with all of the liability that brings.
6 Likes
That may be true, but as the author noted the concern over this case is not raised by the Court’s decision, it lies in the dissent: “three of the conservative justices – Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas – signed separate opinions agreeing with the outcome but arguing that the protections of religious rights should have been even stronger.” Alito laid the groundwork for the supremacy of religious beliefs with his majority opinion in Hobby Lobby. The Notorious RBG saw the risk in her dissenting opinion: There is an overriding interest, I believe, in keeping the courts “out of the business of evaluating the relative merits of differing religious claims,” or the sincerity with which an asserted religious belief is held. Indeed, approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be “perceived as favoring one religion over another,” the very “risk the Establishment Clause was designed to preclude.”
The LGBT community has long been a target of religious fundamentalists, and LGBT is not a protected class under the Civil Rights Act. In that regard, see:
4 Likes
Three members of court do not a majority make.
3 Likes
No, they don’t, but we don’t know how far two of the other three are willing to go and this decision doesn’t offer any guidance. Again, as the author notes, the recent trend is clear, the only question is how much deference the Court will grant to religious freedom.
4 Likes
BINGO - and there you have one of the giant boulders standing in the way of any GOP support for a methodical & in-depth investigation of the January 6th insurrection … they know who was complicit, who aided and abetted … and who actively assisted … by sharing critical information with those plotting the attempted coup.
10 Likes
Republicans are living proof that Democrats are much smarter.
7 Likes
The metaphor of carefree GOPer-pols in the face of a coming deluge of charges is logical if one assumes
-
mind-numbing sycophancy on the part of minions, pols and operatives
-
an illogical assumtion of a rescue from a defeated ex-president
-
an authoritarian tendency of Republicans to assume the personality of the person being worshiped
-
Trump is not the only person reading from the Roy Cohn playbook
2 Likes
How, indeed?
4 Likes
More like they never should have had tax exemption to begin with. It literally requires a government recognition of what are religions, in violation of the first amendments first goddamn line: ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion’
3 Likes
Black Forest ham, specifically.
https://www.bar-s.com/food-for-thought/learn-your-deli-meats!-a-brief-history-of-black-forest-ham-and-other-favorites
“Look bad”?? Sometimes black skin looks most beautiful, not spoiled or cursed.
2 Likes
Happily we are living in the era of the great dismantling of the Catholic Church in America. Their continued sexual depravity and decades-long abuse of children has cost them hundreds of millions with no end in sight. Older congregants die off each day, and are not being replaced by younger people who find the church abhorrent.
Sit back and let these demons finish themself off, and I say this as a confirmed Catholic.
1 Like
Yup, as a gay citizen, I have proclaimed long and hard that inexplicably allowing “trans” under our umbrella would prevent gay and lesbian people from equality legislation which it has.
This is especially difficult because straight, white “progressives” have decided the badge of progressivism sine qua non, is the adoption of the demands of the Gender Identity Movement, something which I feel at its core is unscientific, homophobic and misogynistic.
In my mind, the larger question is what establishes the definition of a “religion”. Think about it. The sky is the limit on what people, and groups of people will choose to believe, all in the name of making themselves feel better. How many religions are deemed cults in the name of whatever deity they choose to believe? What establishes the difference between a cult and a religion? If my religion is opposed to paying taxes, i should therefore be granted a religious exemption from paying into a system that violates my religious beliefs. That’s what Hobby Lobby was all about. If we keep allowing religious beliefs to exceed to the rule of law that apply to the rest of us, what then is the value of a government who’s existence is based on rules of law? At what point, then, do we begin basing our laws on religious beliefs because not doing so violates the religious beliefs of our elected lawmakers? This is an extremely slippery slope. Personal religious beliefs cannot be allowed to outweigh the common good and the welfare and security and the pursuit of liberty of the whole. Exceptions to the rule make those rules meaningless, and presto! We have no nation of laws because they all violate someone’s religion.
5 Likes