Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (793161)	7/2/2014 2:57:33 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1575706

But, what if they are like you, and sincerely believe in a fake religion? Due to assiduous, constant self-deception?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (793161)	7/2/2014 3:20:38 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575706

For example, you should know better than I would about people trying to dodge the draft because they "suddenly found religion" after receiving their draft notice. Why would I know better than you? None of this should invalidate those who have legitimate claims to religious beliefs. There you go again, Tenchu. I never said anything close to that. None of this is an excuse to run right over the 1st amendment just because you want to force someone to pay for someone else's contraception or morning-after pill. And another straw man strides onto the field. It is not running over 1st amendment rights to expect someone to comply with the law. There is nothing in the Bible about contraception or abortions. That didn't enter Christianity until the Catholic church started preaching about it in the wake of the Black Death. There was a shortage of people at the time and the survivors were demanding higher wages as a result. Can't have that, that was against God's will. But you say, they did adopt that as canon. The methods in question don't cause abortions, especially IUDs, so you then have to change the definition and the science of what constitutes abortion and pregnancy to get it to work. That no one has the right to do. I suppose that you can make the claim that their religion has adopted as canon that those methods cause abortions in the eyes of God. That I have a real problem with. So should you. It isn't in Scripture. I suppose you can claim that someone had a vision that an angel descended from Heaven and gave them a golden tablet written in an unknown tongue and magic spectacles so they can read it. I'd have to see those items, first. Law is not a cafeteria where you can pick and choose. Especially if only select groups get to do that. In this case, they decided to hire other people. They should follow the same rules as everyone else.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (793161)	7/2/2014 4:18:38 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575706

"...draft because they "suddenly found religion" after receiving their draft notice." This is where I have some empathy for the left wing argument. (CJ: "Especially if only select groups get to do that.") A person may very well hold strong beliefs which present a conscientious conflict of values or principles, while they may not be a card carrying member of a religious club. As you know some people can claim life long membership in a religion, while only having a fringe understanding of the doctrines and very little heart felt commitment to core beliefs. There should be at least the perception of fairness to all, without the loop hole of group membership. How is that achieved?