You are free to ignore such laws, and the law is free to punish you for ignoring them.
Freedom is such a wonderful thing.
Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands21700 Posts
November 26 2015 16:02 GMT
#51381
On November 27 2015 00:55 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Show nested quote + Republican presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) said in a video posted Tuesday that he believes people of faith should ignore laws that violate their religion. Rubio told the Christian Broadcasting Network that no law is "settled," making reference to Supreme Court decisions that legalized same-sex marriage. “In essence, if we are ever ordered by a government authority to personally violate and sin — violate God’s law and sin — if we’re ordered to stop preaching the Gospel, if we’re ordered to perform a same-sex marriage as someone presiding over it, we are called to ignore that," Rubio said. "We cannot to abide by that because government is compelling us to sin." “So when those two come into conflict, God’s rules always win,” he added. That rhetoric deviates a bit from when Rubio weighed in on defiant Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed because she refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, earlier this year. Rubio said in September that the clerk's office had the "governmental duty to carry out the law," but that there should be religious freedom protections for individuals working in the office. Source You are free to ignore such laws, and the law is free to punish you for ignoring them. Freedom is such a wonderful thing. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
November 26 2015 17:15 GMT
#51382
Leading scientists have accused a Republican-led committee of subjecting climate researchers to politically motivated “harassment” amid an increasingly fractious investigation into the activity of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa). Eight key scientific bodies have written to Republican congressman Lamar Smith, chairman of the House committee on science, to warn that the committee’s inquiry into Noaa could have a “chilling effect on the willingness of government scientists to conduct research that intersects with policy-relevant scientific questions”. The letter added: “Scientists should not be subjected to fraud investigations or harassment simply for providing scientific results that some may see as politically controversial. “Science cannot thrive when policymakers – regardless of party affiliation – use policy disagreements as a pretext to attack scientific conclusions without public evidence.” Concern has mounted among scientists as Smith has pursued Noaa over what he has called “prematurely rushed” climate data that he claims has been used to suit the policy agenda of President Barack Obama. Smith’s ire has focused upon research led by Thomas Karl and colleagues at Noaa, published in the journal Science in June. The research found there has been no “pause” in global warming over the past 15 years, despite previous claims that there has been a slowdown or flatlining in rising global temperatures. This finding has been backed by several other climate papers this year that dispute the idea of a warming hiatus. On Wednesday, the World Meteorological Organisation announced that 2011 to 2015 had been the warmest five-year period on record, with this year set to be the hottest year ever registered. This warmth had been driven by climate change, caused by the release of greenhouse gases from human activity. But Smith has used new subpoena powers to threaten the leadership of Noaa, demanding that the federal climate and weather agency hand over all internal correspondence between scientists to find out if there has been a grand conspiracy to alter or misrepresent the data. Source | ||
Deathstar
9150 Posts
November 26 2015 17:32 GMT
#51383
| ||
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
November 26 2015 17:34 GMT
#51384
In fact, the earth has been warming all this time don't you know. For the intellectually honest out there, it should bother you that global warming fact still requires the correction of errors that originated in the late 1990s/2000s and went on for over a decade. Just last year, you could say with backing from the scientific journals that anyone under 15 has not personally experienced global warming in their lifetime. Now the NOAA says different, but investigations into email exchanges are cast as political harassment. Right. If you're still having to issue new corrections over this long a period this far along in climate science, expect incredulity. | ||
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44368 Posts
November 26 2015 17:39 GMT
#51385
On November 27 2015 02:32 Deathstar wrote: At least Trump has secular appeal. Probably the only not-completely-idiotic thing about him is that he's not as religiously fundamentalist as many other candidates. That being said, he's still hardcore anti-Muslim and anti- everyone else. | ||
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44368 Posts
November 26 2015 17:44 GMT
#51386
On November 27 2015 02:34 Danglars wrote: The 18-year global warming pause disappeared. It originally was well reported in secondary media sources. Some called it puzzling, others said models had predicted it somewhat (allowed for it), very few said it changed anything. Nope never happened--sorry we were wrong. In fact, the earth has been warming all this time don't you know. For the intellectually honest out there, it should bother you that global warming fact still requires the correction of errors that originated in the late 1990s/2000s and went on for over a decade. Just last year, you could say with backing from the scientific journals that anyone under 15 has not personally experienced global warming in their lifetime. Now the NOAA says different, but investigations into email exchanges are cast as political harassment. Right. If you're still having to issue new corrections over this long a period this far along in climate science, expect incredulity. Science is perpetually being corrected and updated. That's why it's so awesome; researchers are continuously working out nuances and analyzing data so that we can be better and better informed about our universe. Criticizing science for accepting and fitting in new facts is to misunderstand exactly what makes it so great. | ||
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
November 26 2015 18:44 GMT
#51387
On November 27 2015 02:34 Danglars wrote: The 18-year global warming pause disappeared. It originally was well reported in secondary media sources. Some called it puzzling, others said models had predicted it somewhat (allowed for it), very few said it changed anything. Nope never happened--sorry we were wrong. In fact, the earth has been warming all this time don't you know. For the intellectually honest out there, it should bother you that global warming fact still requires the correction of errors that originated in the late 1990s/2000s and went on for over a decade. Just last year, you could say with backing from the scientific journals that anyone under 15 has not personally experienced global warming in their lifetime. Now the NOAA says different, but investigations into email exchanges are cast as political harassment. Right. If you're still having to issue new corrections over this long a period this far along in climate science, expect incredulity. global warming is nominally a result oriented thing, the 'warming'. but it is actually just a bunch of warming processes. there are cooling and buffering processes, but the long term and equilibrium disrupting change is clearly the warming side. it may be that we have mini cooling episodes for a couple decades etc but if you release co2 the earth will warm up. this much is clear | ||
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
November 26 2015 19:37 GMT
#51388
On November 27 2015 00:55 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Show nested quote + Republican presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) said in a video posted Tuesday that he believes people of faith should ignore laws that violate their religion. Rubio told the Christian Broadcasting Network that no law is "settled," making reference to Supreme Court decisions that legalized same-sex marriage. “In essence, if we are ever ordered by a government authority to personally violate and sin — violate God’s law and sin — if we’re ordered to stop preaching the Gospel, if we’re ordered to perform a same-sex marriage as someone presiding over it, we are called to ignore that," Rubio said. "We cannot to abide by that because government is compelling us to sin." “So when those two come into conflict, God’s rules always win,” he added. That rhetoric deviates a bit from when Rubio weighed in on defiant Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed because she refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, earlier this year. Rubio said in September that the clerk's office had the "governmental duty to carry out the law," but that there should be religious freedom protections for individuals working in the office. Source Is Rubio trying to out-Huckabee Huckabee? Ah well, what could be wrong with people taking a little S̶h̶a̶r̶i̶a̶ er Christian-law into their own hands? We have Republican candidates telling us we need to close mosques. Or give muslims special IDs to track them with. And now we have a candidate telling people to ignore our country's laws and instead do whatever they feel their religion tells them to do. We now have someone electing to be our nation's leader, telling us to ignore our republic laws. I'm always wrong. George W. Bush was the lowest point I thought. Then they bring out Sarah Palin. And I thought, well, this can't get any worse. Maybe after this fiasco they'll try to start being serious again. But... it just keeps getting worse. The history of the Republican Party for the last 20 years is something straight out of a comic book. Whether or not any of these quasi-fascists win the election -- just the fact that they're legitimizing these terrible and blatantly undemocratic ideas to the general-public... is destructive to our democracy. What an informed and educated voting-block they must be, to spur on candidates like these. SMH, unbelievable. I literally have a hard time believing this stuff is real. Happy Thanksgiving, though. Enjoy your turkies, everybody. | ||
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
November 26 2015 19:40 GMT
#51389
| ||
GreenHorizons
United States23246 Posts
November 26 2015 20:44 GMT
#51390
On November 27 2015 00:55 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Show nested quote + Republican presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) said in a video posted Tuesday that he believes people of faith should ignore laws that violate their religion. Rubio told the Christian Broadcasting Network that no law is "settled," making reference to Supreme Court decisions that legalized same-sex marriage. “In essence, if we are ever ordered by a government authority to personally violate and sin — violate God’s law and sin — if we’re ordered to stop preaching the Gospel, if we’re ordered to perform a same-sex marriage as someone presiding over it, we are called to ignore that," Rubio said. "We cannot to abide by that because government is compelling us to sin." “So when those two come into conflict, God’s rules always win,” he added. That rhetoric deviates a bit from when Rubio weighed in on defiant Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed because she refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, earlier this year. Rubio said in September that the clerk's office had the "governmental duty to carry out the law," but that there should be religious freedom protections for individuals working in the office. Source Looking forward to when a reporter asks "Should only Christians ignore laws in conflict with their religion or should Muslims ignore them too?" An honest response might sound a little like "no I only meant Carson/Cruz supporters, can't you see I'm trying to win a primary, I don't actually believe this crap, check my record!" | ||
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
November 26 2015 20:59 GMT
#51391
| ||
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
November 26 2015 22:18 GMT
#51392
On November 27 2015 05:59 Nyxisto wrote: I always thought this law / religion question is a silly one. Pretty much any person would put their moral convictions above the law, no matter whether they're grounded in religion or not, and that's not unreasonable. What's not unreasonable? All of society ignoring laws they personally disagree with? | ||
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
November 26 2015 22:28 GMT
#51393
| ||
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
November 26 2015 22:31 GMT
#51394
On November 27 2015 07:18 pure.Wasted wrote: Show nested quote + On November 27 2015 05:59 Nyxisto wrote: I always thought this law / religion question is a silly one. Pretty much any person would put their moral convictions above the law, no matter whether they're grounded in religion or not, and that's not unreasonable. What's not unreasonable? All of society ignoring laws they personally disagree with? That when your moral beliefs and the law may be at odds you rather follow your moral compass. Laws aren't passed down by the god-king any more, I think it's a little hypocritical to paint this as a "religious people disrespect state authority" thing, nobody follows the law like a robot. | ||
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
November 27 2015 01:24 GMT
#51395
On November 27 2015 07:18 pure.Wasted wrote: Show nested quote + On November 27 2015 05:59 Nyxisto wrote: I always thought this law / religion question is a silly one. Pretty much any person would put their moral convictions above the law, no matter whether they're grounded in religion or not, and that's not unreasonable. What's not unreasonable? All of society ignoring laws they personally disagree with? You follow all laws to the T? Just because something is a law doesn't make it right. | ||
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
November 27 2015 02:05 GMT
#51396
On November 27 2015 10:24 heliusx wrote: Show nested quote + On November 27 2015 07:18 pure.Wasted wrote: On November 27 2015 05:59 Nyxisto wrote: I always thought this law / religion question is a silly one. Pretty much any person would put their moral convictions above the law, no matter whether they're grounded in religion or not, and that's not unreasonable. What's not unreasonable? All of society ignoring laws they personally disagree with? You follow all laws to the T? Just because something is a law doesn't make it right. The point is if someone who is running to head our nation's Executive Branch of government should be telling people that they're right to ignore laws in lieu of individual religious beliefs. Having this discussion with you on an internet forum is completely moot to hearing it in an interview with a serious Presidential candidate. This is becoming a personal, philosophical discussion, where we were talking about a political interview... I'll agree, here, as a meaningless, anonymous internet-poster, that one's own moral code can be more important than the laws of the land (although we live in a secular-republic society, so it's good to be mindful that these laws are what the majority of people have mandated). But we're talking philosophy now, when we should be talking politics, specifically our future political leader. It's like when people criticize Obama over his rhetoric on some issue, without taking his position as President into consideration. "Why doesn't he criticize Islam?" The answer is: because he's the President. Maybe he does have criticisms about subjects such as Islam in his personal life. But on the public stage, as the figurehead of this country, he should absolutely disassociate Islam from our enemies as much as possible. What someone says on the public stage compared to what we say in our everyday discussions have different standards, for good reason. Marco Rubio telling people, not as a philosopher, but as a candidate, that "In essence, if we are ever ordered by a government authority to personally violate and sin — violate God’s law and sin — if we’re ordered to stop preaching the Gospel, if we’re ordered to perform a same-sex marriage as someone presiding over it, we are called to ignore that. We cannot abide by that because government is compelling us to sin. So when those two come into conflict, God’s rules always win." This is deplorable. On so many levels. He is undermining the very Republic he wants to reside over. We elect people to create laws that reflect our values. Not his values. And not his fucking "God's" values. The Executive Branch enforces the laws we create, and he's essentially telling us he doesn't have to. We don't matter as much as his "God", is really what Rubio's statement boils down to. The Executive Branch may as well not exist. Maybe the Legislative as well. All we need is Church. His Church. I know it's cliche, but it's also true: this stuff is un-American. Anyone who can stand by Rubio's comments either doesn't value secular representative government, or doesn't understand it. | ||
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
November 27 2015 02:17 GMT
#51397
Conservative Solutions Project, an outside group promoting Republican Marco Rubio's presidential campaign, has spent nearly $8.5 million in TV ads -- making it the second-biggest advertiser in the 2016 Republican race so far. But the group's apparent support for a single presidential candidate has raised questions about the advertisements' legality. The ads, which have aired in the early nominating states of Iowa and New Hampshire, have featured Rubio denouncing the Iran deal and delivering one of his early political speeches in 2015 -- months before Rubio's own campaign started running its first TV ad this week. And unlike a Super PAC, Conservative Solutions Project doesn't have to disclose its donors because it exists as a tax-exempt social welfare group under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code. But it's precisely that tax-code designation that has campaign-finance watchdogs alleging the Conservative Solution Project ads are illegal -- because they are benefitting an individual presidential candidate rather than advancing the social welfare. "I think they're breaking the law," Paul S. Ryan of the Campaign Legal Center tells NBC News. Earlier this month, the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21, another campaign-finance watchdog, asked the Justice Department to launch an investigation into Conservative Solutions Project. "The publicly available facts indicate that Conservative Solutions Project is little more than a single-candidate 501(c)(4), with no other mission than to advance the presidential aspirations of Marco Rubio," the Campaign Legal Center said in its statement calling for an investigation. The statement added, "501(c)(4) 'social welfare' groups by statute must [promote] the common good and general welfare of the people of the community as a whole' rather than an individual candidate for political office." | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
November 27 2015 02:23 GMT
#51398
re: the rubio/religion issue it'd be ok if he said that you can ignore the government law, but accept the legal consequences of so doing, civil disobedience style. I also note that the examples he cites are kinda dumb: "if we’re ordered to stop preaching the Gospel, if we’re ordered to perform a same-sex marriage as someone presiding over it" as the government would never order you to stop preaching (generally speaking); and you can only be ordered to perform such a marriage if you're a public official, not a clergyperson. | ||
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
November 27 2015 02:31 GMT
#51399
| ||
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
November 27 2015 02:37 GMT
#51400
| ||
| ||
![]() StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Stormgate Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games Organizations |
Replay Cast
LiuLi Cup
Online Event
BSL Team Wars
Team Hawk vs Team Sziky
Online Event
SC Evo League
Online Event
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
CSO Contender
[BSL 2025] Weekly
[ Show More ] Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Summer Champion…
SC Evo League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL Team Wars
Team Dewalt vs Team Bonyth
Afreeca Starleague
Sharp vs Ample
Larva vs Stork
Wardi Open
RotterdaM Event
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
JyJ vs TY
Bisu vs Speed
WardiTV Summer Champion…
PiGosaur Monday
Afreeca Starleague
Mini vs TBD
Soma vs sSak
WardiTV Summer Champion…
Replay Cast
The PondCast
WardiTV Summer Champion…
|
|