JoeMyGod news and comments

 54 comments  

JoeMyGod  

 Login  



















 1






 Recommend 












⤤ Share






Sort by Best
























Avatar
Join the discussion…
















Media preview placeholder












































































 










Avatar
Todd20036  • a day ago 






It's about the First Amendment about as much as it was about bathrooms, as it was about drinking fountains 50 years ago, as it was about women being too emotional and dainty to vote 100 years ago.
Your side hates anything that takes away from white, male, Christian, straight privilege. No more, and no less.
 
40 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Wynter Marie Starr  • a day ago 






Would it be okay if a Muslim group wanted government money and planned on discriminating against Christians? They shouldn't have to "jettison" their religious beliefs, but in that case they shouldn't be entitled to taxpayer money.
 
32 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
StraightGrandmother > Wynter Marie Starr  • a day ago 






No it wouldn't be ok because one cannot be discriminated against based on their religion. So they want it both ways, "We won't accept discrimination against us based on our religious beliefs, however we would like to use our religious beliefs as justification to discriminate against sexual minorities.
See how they want it both ways?
 
26 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
Gustav2 > StraightGrandmother  • a day ago 






And no one ever asks the question in the cake decorator wars:
"If my wedding is in a ELCA church aren't they discriminating against my religion?"
 
10 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Wynter Marie Starr > StraightGrandmother  • a day ago 






I'm aware, SG. Sometimes forcing others to actually put on the shoes helps them to see more clearly. Not the rabid ones, but those who haven't reached that level of hatred yet. We absolutely need to add orientation and gender identity to the Civil Rights Act or get rid of the part that prevents discrimination based on religion. Replace LGBT with any other group and it's easy to see how disgusting their rhetoric really is.
By asking a simple question, (which only has one right answer) it makes it more difficult to justify their discrimination. We can't change the minds of a bigot like Perkins, but there is hope for others. I should know; I've been using this simple technique to change hearts and minds one question at a time as a straight ally for over a decade.
 
10 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
David Walker > Wynter Marie Starr  • a day ago 






Have I thanked you lately for that? And Straight-Grandmother and the rest of you, our straight allies? It feels so good to have you working with us and for us.
"Like a deserted bride on her wedding night,
All alone and trembling with fright.
With her brand new hubby nowhere in sight,
I simply cannot do it alone." -- Velma Kelly in "Chicago"
(Yeah, I know, guys, but just go along with it, K?)
 
4 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
Wynter Marie Starr > David Walker  • a day ago 






LOL, cute limerick, but also true. None of us are in this life alone and we must look out for each other.
 
5 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 


















Avatar
vorpal > StraightGrandmother  • a day ago 






Oh! Oh! I know how they defend against this one!
"Islam ain't no religion and don't git no religious protections. It's a political regime!"
The best, for me, is when they start waxing poetically about how special Christianity is compared to all the heathen faiths because Christianity isn't a religion, but a relationship. I tell them, then, that they won't mind sacrificing their first amendment religious protections if that's the case.
 
9 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
Falconlights > vorpal  • a day ago 






Got it in one. If I had a nickel for every time one of these fools claimed that Islam is a religion, but instead a political system, I would have a nice chunk of change to play with.
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 
















Avatar
Richard Rush > StraightGrandmother  • a day ago 






"No it wouldn't be ok because one cannot be discriminated against based on their religion."
That's why the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should be amended to remove the religion-category's protection from discrimination.
Why should it be illegal to discriminate against people based on beliefs unsupported by evidence, while it's perfectly legal to discriminate against people based on beliefs supported by substantial evidence?
 
7 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
David Walker > Richard Rush  • a day ago 






Realistically, I don't think religion could be stricken from the protected class. LGBTQ will be difficult, and may be a long time coming, but it's far more likely that we'll get our "special rights" along with The Truly Religious.
 
4 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
Richard Rush > David Walker  • a day ago 






Sadly, you are probably correct.
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 





















Avatar
Nic Peterson   • a day ago 






Dear Tony,
It's not 'supposed' discrimination, it's the real deal. Give up your protected class status and then let's have a little chat. Until then my offer of a large can of STFU stands.
Whiny little dick.
 
22 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
olandp  • a day ago 






The First Amendment does not guarantee the right to a government contract. If any group takes taxpayer money, they must serve ALL taxpayers.
 
16 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
abel > olandp  • a day ago 






And every church takes taxpayer money in that, whatever their earnings, they don't pay taxes. Biggest scam going.
 
3 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 
















Avatar
TheSeer  • a day ago 






"as the very sound of the phrase “religious liberty” strikes fear in the hearts of liberals everywhere."
You wish Tony, you wish. But those times are gone. No fear anymore, just disgust.
 
13 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Christopher  • a day ago 






Can't wait for this future!
 
Thumbnail
 
12 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
John Masters  • a day ago 






"liberals are raising a stink about what should be a non-controversial
(and unnecessary) amendment reaffirming the religious freedom of
faith-based government contractors."
No, you're the one raising a stink, Tony, because your friends can no longer get away with discrimination. (We won't forget your organization was founded using a KKK mailing list purchased, illegally, from Grand Pubah, David Duke, and there are plenty of photos of you speaking at meetings of white supremacist groups.) You still have all the religious rights you had before. You get to hate whoever you want, you get to pray to whatever deity you desire, and you get to go to whatever house of worship you'd like. None of that has evaporated.
What you don't get to do is use your First Amendment rights to discriminate against anyone else's rights. Sorry, we decided back in the '60's, we were going to do our best to rise above that. I know it kind of hurts your feelings, and makes you feel smaller, since you can't continue burning crosses and lynching people, but the rest of us have moved past it. You should join us Tony, the rest of us live in a better place, bless your heart.
 
10 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
greenmanTN  • a day ago 






Religion has no place in secular government, or vice versa. THAT is what the First Amendment really means. What Perkins and all his butt-buddies want is to make the USA into a theocracy.
 
10 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Ninja0980  • a day ago 






For the last time, this country isn't a theocracy so there is something wrong when agencies getting money from the government are pushing the viewpoint that we're sinful and deserve to be discriminated against.
 
9 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
JT  • a day ago 






Tony PerKKins, psychopath and supporter of genocide, needs some prescription meds or a padded room.
  
Thumbnail
 
7 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
popebuck1 > JT  • a day ago 






"Prospered by God"? Yeah, when people want an example of a powerhouse 21st-century economy, the first country they think of is Uganda.
Also, "prospered" is not a word when used like that. Cut it out.
 
9 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
JT > popebuck1  • a day ago 






So too with "raptured". Illiteracy and ignorance are their mainstays.
 
2 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 


















Avatar
geoffalnutt  • a day ago 






Religious Liberty = "I hate you." We all know this...and have for many, many years.
You need some new material, Tonetta.
 
7 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
abel > geoffalnutt  • a day ago 






Oh, no! They LOVE us. They just hate our "sin." Except they really do hate us. You are right. Religious Liberty = "I hate you."
 
 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 
















Avatar
Gerry Fisher  • a day ago 






I hope I live long enough to see him mired in some horrible scandal or suffering from some significant downfall. I can't think of a more deserving punk.
 
5 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Christopher  • a day ago 






Let's see what our founders thought...
 
Thumbnail
 
5 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Gustav2  • a day ago 






There is nothing controversial about the 1st.
What is unprecedented is your interpretation it a absolves you of all secular sins in a country with a secular constitution.
 
5 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
j.martindale  • a day ago 






Remember during the marriage debates that we decided that framing the name was important, and we went with "marriage equality" rather than "same sex marriage"? The right wingers have used "religious liberty" the same way. We need to rename their effort to point out that this is not a first amendment protection. Freedom to discriminate bills? Hate bills? Anything that seems to have the word "religion" in it wins points for their side, it seems to me. We have to find something we can uniformly apply to this legislation. Ideas?
 
4 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
SoCalGal20 > j.martindale  • a day ago 






Freedom to discriminate is to the point and exactly whay they mean.
 
4 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
TheSeer > j.martindale  • a day ago 






Straight supremacy bills
 
2 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Friday > j.martindale  • 21 hours ago 






The media lets them get away with Orwellian naming of things far too often, that's why I support the "Stop Naming Bills The Opposite Of What They Are Or We'll Slap You Really Hard In The Head Act. "
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 
















Avatar
Cuberly  • a day ago 






There it is again, using the "common sense" trope. Gee, where have we seen this used over and over...oh yeah, the Crazeee Cruz campaign uses it constantly. It's almost like it's a coordinated effort or something.
Vote blue people. Fucking Vote!
 
3 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Christopher  • a day ago 






Just saying...
 
Thumbnail
 
3 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
KnownDonorDad  • a day ago 






After their catastrophic losses with DADT repeal and the Obergefell decision, not to mention passage of the Shepard/Byrd Act, they know federal ENDA is their last battlefield in their efforts to keep LGBT people as second-class citizens; this is why they will scrape together as many cake martyrs and gin up as much poorly thought-out bathroom controversy as they can - and if you read through internet comments, it's easy to see that they're taking advantage of discomfort to outright hatred of trans people.
 
2 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
delk  • a day ago 






Religious Liberty is code for stupid people filled with hateful bigotry.
We are not stupid and you do not strike any fear in us.
 
2 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
oikos  • a day ago 






To override Obama's executive order, I believe he has to sign the bill. Something Miss Tonette has not thought of.
 
2 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
Todd20036 > oikos  • a day ago 






Or doesn't care. It's not like he gives a shit about half of what he spews, but he needs to grift the sheeple.
 
3 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Gustav2 > oikos  • a day ago 






next, it will be shoved into a budget bill.
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
oikos > Gustav2  • a day ago 






I figured it would be a poison pill. I don't think Obama has any fucks left to give so he will hopefully catch this and veto it.
 
2 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 


















Avatar
BeccaM  • 17 hours ago 






Only a congenital asshole would define his inalienable religious right as a special Christian fundamentalist privilege to make other people's lives miserable.
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
B Snow  • 18 hours ago 






What were they called? Sundown Towns? That's what "religious liberty" means now.
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Mark  • a day ago 






Well, Tonetta - if you and your ilk didn't take "religious liberty" to the dominionist extreme - maybe you wouldn't get so much fucking pushback. You've taken the inch - and stretched to wrap the planet at least 47 times. But, as it is, you want everybody to live only by your rules - and grant zilch to anybody else. Obviously you just don't get it that your sky daddy doesn't run the big tent - just the little ring you perform in.
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Baltimatt  • a day ago 






I certainly like my codes to be dressed.
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
K B  • a day ago 






My boyfriend has a wise philosophy..religion should come with a child's warning label. Do not subject kids to such an influential and subjective way of thinking until they are able to formulate their own thoughts and opinions about religious practices.
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
Amanda B. Rekendwith > K B  • a day ago 






...
 
Thumbnail
 
7 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 













Avatar
Christopher > Amanda B. Rekendwith  • a day ago 






...
 
Thumbnail
 
2 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
K B > Amanda B. Rekendwith  • a day ago 






Thank you for the enlightenment that it already exists. I have been saved.
 
1 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 


















Avatar
Derek in DC  • 19 hours ago 






Businesses have to grow by 3-7 percent a year or they go out of business. Inevitably, all right-wing Christian business owners will look at their revenue figures and decide, "I can sell widgets to LGBT folk and still be a good Christian. Who can pay the rent."
 
 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Friday  • 21 hours ago 






Except of course corporations aren't people,. much less people 'of faith,' ....and discrimination is discrimination. Which the American people should not bankroll.
 
 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 






−
⚑ 



Avatar
JustSayin'  • a day ago  






In one way he is right. Any religious group that discriminates against any American has no right to get taxpayer dollars. We do want them out of government contracting and elected positions
 
 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Jean-Marc in Canada  • a day ago  






There is but one word to describe this: iniquitous
 
 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Mike Thakar  • a day ago  






It would be news worthy if he didn't show his bigotry. No surprise, no news.
 
 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 















Avatar
Gaymurcan  • a day ago  






"FRC, AFA, Alliance Defending Freedom and Liberty Counsel," et al. should all be in JAIL BY NOW, and every self-respecting LGBT citizen who has been paying attention, knows it. Let's get it done and get on with our lives please.
 
 △  ▽ 
•
Reply
•
Share ›


 


















Also on JoeMyGod

 NY Daily News: Trump Has Killed The GOP 
 55 comments •
 an hour ago
  Avatar
Homo Erectus — It was first greatly weakened by religious zealots.
 

 BREAKING: Ted Cruz Calls It Quits 
 727 comments •
 12 hours ago
  Avatar
JoeMyGod — And Carly Fiorina goes down in US history for the shortest-lived VP campaign.
 

 Bernie Sanders Wins Indiana Primary 
 779 comments •
 12 hours ago
  Avatar
Rebecca Gardner —  Doesn't matter. Hillary will win the nomination. Bernie should drop out rather than let Trump …
 

 BarbWire: Target Must Be Boycotted Into Bankruptcy 
 252 comments •
 14 hours ago
  Avatar
oikos — Welcome to the Perversion Lobby. May I be of assistance? https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws...

 
Powered by Disqus

✉Subscribe 




d Add Disqus to your site   
🔒 Privacy 







   


















































































 




 
Joe.My.God. 

  



Home
Categories






























Blogroll
Archive
About
Contact
Store
New RSS Feed
Facebook
Twitter
 



TonyPerkins2015LS1-660x330

Tony Perkins Applauds Effort To Override Obama’s Executive Order On Anti-LGBT Discrimination
May 3, 2016 Duggar, Hate Groups, Religion



Via press release:

What’s so controversial about the First Amendment? Plenty, these days, as the very sound of the phrase “religious liberty” strikes fear in the hearts of liberals everywhere. In the handful of days since the House Armed Services Committee marked-up the latest defense spending bill, liberals are raising a stink about what should be a non-controversial (and unnecessary) amendment reaffirming the religious freedom of faith-based government contractors.
In 2014, the president issued an order insisting that the government couldn’t partner with businesses or organizations for projects over $10,000 if they engaging in supposed “anti-LGBT discrimination against employees.” Of course, under the administration’s backwards understanding of “discrimination,” that could mean anything from a statement of faith to setting certainly hiring policies or even dressed codes! All this amendment would do is allow the Defense Department to continue contracting with “any religious corporation, religious association, religious educational institution or religious society” for services without the organization having to jettison their religious beliefs.
The reality is, the Left is never going to be satisfied if faith-based groups can contract with the government at all! They want to squeeze Christians out of government at the same time as they’re forcing them out of the marketplace, Public Square, and schools. Despite the Left’s vocal opposition, Rep. Russell’s amendment was approved 33-29. Bottom line, if you oppose this language, you must oppose the First Amendment! FRC will be doing its part to hold the line on these key, common sense protections when the bill hits the House floor in the upcoming weeks.
My original post on Russell’s bill is here.
  



Share
 
 



in
Share
.




 
Tags adultery Ashley Madison David Duke FRC hate groups Josh Duggar KKK molestation porn religion scandal



Previous
 SOUTH CAROLINA: Haters Sing “Yes Jesus Loves Me” To Silence Transgender Rights Supporter [VIDEO]«
Next
 ILLINOIS: Christian Protester Prompts “Massive Police Response” At Chicago-Area Target [VIDEO]»







 
by Taboola
Sponsored Links

You May Like









Forget Hillary, America Should Fear This Instead
Agora Financial












Only 1 In 50 Americans Can Name These Iconic Wome…
Topix Offbeat












Former Congressman: Get Ready For Financial…
Stansberry Research












What These 70’s Stars Look Like Now is Incredible
Definition












28 Actors Who Were Incredible Athletes
Your Daily Dish












Facial Redness Can Be Fixed From The Inside Out — Here'…
Gundry MD










































 
 




Like us on Facebook



 



Advertisement





    

 
 





Read more...
 






Read more...
INNdulge Palm Springs Naked Men in the Desert
Clothing is Forever Optional
Legendary Gay Resort
Read more...

Buy a Blogad!




Advertisement




 

 

Advertisement




 

 

Advertisement




 


 

 

Advertisement




 

 

Advertisement




 


 

   
.
 

 






Explore Joe’s Mighty Tags

2012 elections 2016 elections activism advertising AFA assholery Barack Obama bigotry California Catholic Church celibacy Christianists crackpots crazy people DADT Donald Trump education Florida gay artists GOP hate groups lawsuits LGBT History LGBT rights LGBT youth liars marriage equality Mitt Romney movies New York state NOM NYC pop music Proposition 8 religion Russia scandal SCOTUS Senate silliness sports teabaggers Tea Party television Tony Perkins
 
 



© joemygod.com 2016




http://www.joemygod.com/2016/05/03/tony-perkins-applauds-effort-to-override-obamas-executive-order-on-anti-lgbt-discrimination/