• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Washington State Congressperson Introduces Bill to Prohibit Religious Registry

Acim

Revelation all the time
To me, this type of legislation is akin to "repeal Obamacare" without offering an alternative (to the idea that we are at war with no nation states, but are battling radical Islamic Jihadists).
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
First amendment. Its unconstitutional to discriminate based on religion, or stop and search. The founding fathers were avoiding religious persecution so they wrote this stuff in.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
To me, this type of legislation is akin to "repeal Obamacare" without offering an alternative (to the idea that we are at war with no nation states, but are battling radical Islamic Jihadists).
This isn't the holy wars, we are not in war with Muslims.
 

Sultan Of Swing

Well-Known Member
A Muslim registry wasn't even a campaign promise from Trump. He's clearly moderating on other issues, would be strange for him to push forward with this one. I'm pretty sure he'll drop it, if they are even pushing it to begin with.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It would a nice safeguard against possible future administrations.
It's not a safeguard when trumped by federal law.
But it sends a peremptory message.....just in case.
States wield some power, as we see with Obama's
stance on enforcing laws against MJ use, ie, he's
hands off where states legalized it.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic Bully ☿
Premium Member
It's not a safeguard when trumped by federal law.
But it sends a peremptory message.....just in case.
States wield some power, as we see with Obama's
stance on enforcing laws against MJ use, ie, he's
hands off where states legalized it.
It's the Federal Congress-critter introducing the Bill to the House, and it would apply to the Federal government and its branches and agencies. (Check the article.)
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It's the Federal Congress-critter introducing the Bill to the House, and it would apply to the Federal government and its branches and agencies. (Check the article.)
Oh, I see now.
Would you please slap me?
(Not as punishment, but so that I'll start firing on all cylinders.)
 
Top