Is this the beginning of tyranny?

Well then, let’s put the burden back on you. Every one who is conservative knows this. It would be highly beneficial and easy for the Left to destroy this point if it is false. Where are the headlines contesting this claim? They are silent, because it’s embarassing.

This isn’t top secret, nor is it rocket science, Obama himself proudly announces his own policy just days ago, criticizing Trump for reversing his own slipshod policies:

“When I hear folks say that, well, maybe we should just admit the Christians but not the Muslims; when I hear political leaders suggesting that there would be a religious test for which a person who’s fleeing from a war-torn country is admitted, when some of those folks themselves come from families who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution — that’s shameful. That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.”

He’s admitting that he took out the test, (and a lot of other tests too), but particularly the religious test cause it’s more likely Christians would be fleeing religious persecution than Muslims in a Muslim country, especially those likely to having terrorists. But anyone, even terrorists, could just say they are fleeing religious persecution, and we couldn’t delve or check into that, but that’s what makes our vetting procedure tight and safe.

You were called on your fake news. Repeating rubbish on the internet doesn’t make it true.

Take it like a man.

Obama signed fewer executive orders per year than any president since Grover Cleveland. But each time he signed one (most of which had positive results), the Republican wailed and whined that he was acting like a dictator. Now Trump is EO-happy, signing EOs that take away freedom and create global chaos, and the Republicans worship him like his farts are made of gold dust.

My mind is just completely blown by the number of Americans who support this psycho. It’s chilling.

3 Likes

Hope and Change, Part Deux. A new Light Worker riding in on a new unicorn. Only this one comes with a track record of getting things done. And America has always been shovel ready.

Yeah, the worship is over the top. They have not learned from the biggest mistake of the other side: worshiping a secular savior.

If he delivers, he’ll be another Reagan. In every respect. If he doesn’t, he’ll be another Obama.

No one has any complaints at all about number of executive orders. The protest is when you use them inappropriately, taking power from other branches of government.

Obama has lost more of his orders to the Supreme Court than any modern President. Obama’s orders have been beaten back 44 times by the supreme court UNANIMOUSLY, which means his own appointees, compared to around 30 for Clinton and Bush.

In total, he has only won 45% of orders litigated in the Supreme Court – less than half. Bush won 60%, Clinton won 63%, Bush Sr. 70%, Reagan 75%.

Not only that, Obama’s are the most restrictive, and have more pages and content than his predecessors who have many more orders. Obama is at 1086 pages, Bush at 922 pages, and Clinton at 781 pages in total. So taking this as a measurement, he’s got more to implement, or at the least similar to other presidents. Even so, it’s the inappropriateness of the orders that makes Obama’s stand out.

If you have any doubts about the aims of this Administration, pleas read this article.

Leaked Draft of Trump’s Religious Freedom Order Reveals Sweeping Plans to Legalize Discrimination

If signed, the order would create wholesale exemptions for people and organizations who claim religious objections to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and trans identity.

One of the most fundamental concepts of liberty is “My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins.” That is, we do not have the right to violate the rights of others; or, we can do whatever we wish as long as it does not harm others.

What is proposed in this bill is not what religious freedom means.

The first thing you need to understand here is the difference between facts and interpretation.

From there, go on to trying to appreciate that not everyone buys into your interpretation.

Then you will understand why people laugh at you when you get upset.

Are you saying doctors should be forced to perform abortions in the name of liberty?

I’ll take that vanishing act as a ‘yes’.

I don’t get involved in abortion debates, but your two posts are just 17 hours apart. That’s less than the standard time to cancel a doctor’s appointment. :2cents:

More than enough time to answer a fair question about a point made though.

No. :rolling_eyes:

(Fair question? Seriously? I can’t imagine what would prompt such a bizarre, non-sequitur question.)

I’ve been out and about in the real world doing stuff, and threads like this sometimes get buried, so I didn’t see it until now.

Not forced, but allowed, in the name of liberty. Being forced to perform an abortion is not an option in a democracy. This is not like a baker saying he doe snot want to bake a cake for a gay couple. There are many bakers. No one stops you from going to another baker. But what if it is forbidden at all? Problem is we already have problems worldwide, not only in the US, because of this religion thing interferring with teh science of life thing, meaning living for this world and not for an afterlife. Appliying 4000 year old rulings to modern problems.

Problem with this is we already have thousands of people who die each year because they refuse blood transfusions on religious grounds, only comparable to the comeback of contagious diseases because we are losing herd inmunity duie to people believing vaccines are some kind of population control Illuminati killing weapons. Same difference. It is a right to say no.

We have women being jailed in Central America because they had a miscarriage. The doctors there are NOT allowed to do the proper clenaing after miscarriages for fear of being accused of aiding abortions. So it is jail or horrible death by septic poisoning. Same with not allowing raped 8 or 9 year olds to have abortions. Life finds a way and rips them from within. But that is God’s will. Is it?

Last time we had this kind of thinking led to the Dark Ages. Demonizing women by making us all supprters of abortion. Yes, it si so selfish to want to live. Deny access to contraceptives, deny rights in cases of rape, go back to the kitchen you original sin maker. That is the bottom line.

When I go to a Catholic hopsital, I know they believe in certain things and hece services like ovule freezing are not offered., That is why we have secular clinics. But if the government prohibits that, we have no choice … but to go abroad. Life finds a way.

Like if in the name of liberty and religion they turn a blind eye to poligamy in the US -as long as it is males- but gay marriage is blasphemy and abortion is a civil contention only comparable to racial issues. But that is a checker board divided country, is not unexpected. Bigger problem is exporting this mentality of hate. Those groups have even rached Taiwan. Who knows what emboldened religious bullies will do next and where? I know my history, when the slave traders tried to expand into Central America. First the mentality, then the emboldened expansion. That is why the world cares and fears.

Finally a joke: why is the Pope so happy about Trump being elected? He’s got everyone praying.

1 Like

You can’t imagine what would prompt such a bizarre, non-sequitur question?

"Leaked Draft of Trump’s Religious Freedom Order Reveals Sweeping Plans to Legalize Discrimination

If signed, the order would create wholesale exemptions for people . . . who claim religious objections to . . . .abortion . . . ."

Can you give an example of what you meant by "wholesale exemptions for people . . . who claim religious objections to . . . abortion . . . . "? How is being exempt from having to provide abortions a violation of someone else’s rights? .

Under what logic Obama’s ban for 6 months of immigrants’refugees from a specific country was perfectly constitutional, while a judge has ruled Trump’s 90 days ban to be against the contitution?

Did the US contitution change recently?

1 Like

You’re merely observing Politburocracy in action, a system of government in which one branch of democracy slowly swallows the other two whole until one day it declares that it’s unconstitutional for the other two to function as independent bodies.

I am pretty entertained by the hypocrisy of the Democrats. They are getting their knickers in a knot over this order. Israel`s national airline, El Al, has been vetting for decades and is regarded as the safest airline in the world.

Many Democrats criticizing Trump have some pretty dirty linen in their closet hahahaha. In 1975, Jerry Brown complained, that the federal government wanted to “dump Vietnamese on” California. “We can’t be looking 5,000 miles away and at the same time neglecting people who live here.” In fact, then Senator Joe Biden complained about the Ford administration’s move to bring Vietnamese refugees to the U.S., saying the White House “had not informed Congress adequately about the number of refugees.” Liberal presidential icon (and supposed Food for Peace humanitarian) George McGovern told Newsweek, “I think the Vietnamese are better off in Vietnam.”

Why I love the God Emperor.

He who calls his critics out on their hypocrisy risks looking like a whiner. He has to do it, but it will be tricky.