I suggest you look up mandated reporter laws for child abuse in your state. In something on the order of half of them, everyone is a mandated reporter.
Well, as much as I agree that justice delayed is justice denied, I also recognize that the wheels of law turn very slowly in the USA: it only took about 80 years for us to figure out that slavery didnât exactly agree with âall men are created equalâ, and another 100 years for us to admit that outlawing slavery didnât fix the problem of institutionalized racism. So having the Defense Of Marriage Act overturned in only 17 years is certainly a step up, and going from 41 states with marriage bans in 2009, to only 13 today (with an additional 8 overturned but on hold for appeals) is a pretty quick change of direction, I think.
I donât think Iâm being âcluelessly dismissiveâ as much Iâm trying to cheer everyone up by saying âwe can do this.â
1 Like
Personally I donât think these groups have the same kind of power as religion. They have the power to do things and a fair pile of cash, but they donât have power over people. No one is getting unicef or planned parenthood tattoos. No one is killing themselves, or others, for HRC.
Iâm not the one advocating for different rules for different groups, you are.
Most non-profits have a cause that is based in reality and contributors can determine whether the non profit gives them value for money. Thereâs no equivalent for religion since their expenditure is secret and the giver expects no direct results from their gift, apart from [jebusâ/insert chosen delusion hereâs] warm embrace . Religion is just bilking money from people for a cause that is demonstrably fake. I also find it amusing that you just wave away TheRizzâs extremely relevant point that their bookkeeping is legally kept secret. Thatâs the fucking definition of different rules. Also, you might be able to plead the fifth when the IRS asks you questions, but you canât plead the fifth when it comes to handing over your books.
So would a lot of other revenue generation measures that arenât designed to single out religious non-profits
You seem extremely desperate to cast religion as a non-profit when most mainstream religions are run exactly like businesses and for a profit. Do you have any fucking idea how much shit the catholic church owns?
In the United States- we have laws about that, and those laws protect anti-religionists just as much, if not more.
Do you care to elaborate or am I supposed to just take your word for it? Your contributions in this thread have been far below your usual standard. I feel from your staunch (and kind of feeble) defence of religious organisations that itâs obvious that you, or people you care about are religious or work for some religious group. Otherwise youâd have better reasons to back up your beliefs on the matter.
Really? The Vatican is bombing people?
They consistently and unrelentingly tell the African continent that the only way to avoid STDs is abstinence, not condoms. That fact alone kills more people than probably every terroristâs bomb set off, ever. It is for this fact alone that I despise catholics and tell them they and their religion is nonsense bullshit that only simpleton asswipes could believe.
This is a discussion about the American state in which I happen to live, involving the governor that (ostensibly) works for me.
Actually itâs a broader discussion of systematic homophobic discrimination, based around your state.
Amerocentrism (Ameri-?) can be annoying, but that isnât germane here.
Yes, itâs totally germane. The dude wrongly assumed two things about me while confidently telling me who I am and what Iâm doing, but both of those assumptions were totally incorrect. Both of those assumptions stem from exactly what I said: the guy is American and assumes I must be as well.
1 Like
The way I see it, there are four ways to have your rights recognized:
-
You can create a charter colony and start off by recognizing them. Unfortunately, this requires having somewhere to go, and entails all the difficulty of creating a new society.
-
You can have them enshrined by the existing power structure, which has the unfortunate side effect of legitimizing that power structure by admitting it had a say over those rights in the first place.
-
You can take them by force. This traditionally has itâs own side effects, not the least of which often involves merely inverting the power structure, rather than ending it. Also, if you even give the appearance of doing it this way, expect much resistance.
-
You can have them recognized through a gradual process of give and take, with steps forward and steps backward. Itâs working for African Americans, itâs working for gays. It has the full force of both law and public opinion- But it is painfully, unbearably slow.
Take your pick. They all work, but they all come with a cost. With the road we are on right now, that cost is time.
2 Likes
I think that distinction is a good one, Spunky. Just because I am happy to serve a Roman Catholic in my sandwich shop, shouldnât mean I have to provide a platter for her big anti-abortion shindig. Avoiding discrimination against individuals shouldnât mean that we can be compelled to provide services to a cause or Institution that we reject as a matter of conscience or conviction, should it?
1 Like
So, Gen Con isnât leaving for at least the next five years, as theyâre under a contract theyâre not willing to break or alter.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2486-So-Gen-Con-s-Not-Leaving-Indy!#.VRafCS40fL4
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
