Yea but what about liberty and justice for all

Religous liberty is meant to protect each persons personal right to choose their own spiritual beliefs and participate in that faith. It is a shield for protection. Alito has converted that shield to a sword. A sword to lead a crusade that weaponizes religous liberty as a,tool to grant favor and power to Christians and force that dogma into our common law. The founders saw the destruction religion does to a government based on democratic principles and personal freedoms. They would be in opposition of Alito's religous war on the Constitution. Persecution of Christians does not exist in America. It is actually the most obsurd assertion one could put forth, even worse that an actual justice of SCOTUS is claiming this. Lends me to question his actual mental health. Religous liberty is worth protecting. It is hard to protect it from a SUPREME court determined to destroy actual religous liberty for all Americans, not just Christians . Alito asks do those things held sacred by others deserve to be seen as valuable as my sacred beliefs, nope. The hypothetical he put forth, of course each has the right to wear religous dress. The right and the action do not inany way force support of religion on other persons. That isnt the question in the cases being used to redefine religous liberty. I am actually offended that the justices involved in this obvious abuse see the American public as unable to identify their agenda and intent. When you step out into society you are free to live according to your beliefs, not to place all society under your religous dogma. Justice Alito we are not coming for your rights, we are coming for your priveledge.

Claim 3, i will use this point to highlight the error Alito is making in his line of reasoning. Freedom of religion or religous liberty are seperate from the actual intitution of religion. Each religion considers itself as,the truth and therefor rejects the tenants of other religions. Religous liberty is that concept that allows every individual in a society to choose their spiritual beliefs, to prevent persecution by members of one religion upon another and to keep tranquility in society. Alito mentions the persecution of Moormans, Jews and Catholics. The important part that he failed to mention is each of those groups was discriminated against by Christians. That is the effect of allowing a religous dominance, in place of religous liberty. If Christianity is promoted in government and public areas, it will prevent the freedom of religion protection upon non christians. This isnt a concept that is extremely hard to grasp. Freedom of conscious is a Constitutional right. No one can infringe on your right. This isnt what Alito is promoting. He is promoting religous dominance by one faith over all others. This is the exact opposite of what has protected our religous freedom for all this time and violates the Constitution. Freedom of religion cannot exist without freedom from religion.

Claim 2. Much good is done by religous people in society. True. Millionas of good people are,also people of faith. However some of the most heinous crimes even in modern times involved people of faith as well. Good people exist within religion, and bad people as well.

This absolutely slaps. I cannot be more proud of Alito after these past three years. He has not stopped defending religious Americans from discrimination, regardless of their standing as a majority or minorities.

Claim 1, the men and women of the abolition movement were religous. True. Almost all the slaveholders were as well and use the Bible to justify the owning of slaves. Nowhere in the Bible is slavery denounced.

God bless Samuel Alito

Well, a football team actually exists.

@numero8035

Жыл бұрын

facts