(no subject)

[theweaselking]

Bush: Supreme Court *should* restrict people's freedom of religion if it's the WRONG religion

Comments

[eididdy.livejournal.com]

You know I'm the last person to support Bush, but where's it say that? You've got it in quotes, so I looked for the quote. No dice. The article itself doesn't have anything to do with the wrong religion as it does with the drug they're using. It's saying they want to restrict it based on that, not it being the "wrong religion."

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

#1:
The 10th Circuit's ruling is grounded in the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which protects individuals from governmental interference in the exercise of religion.

#2:
Under the RFRA, the government must show that it has a "compelling governmental interest" in restricting the religious practice and that the interest is fulfilled in the "least restrictive" way.
==============

This government is ALL about "freedom of religion" for Baptists - freedom to bash gays, freedom to oppress people their priests feel like oppressing, freedom to violate federal law and have the law rewritten to match them - but as soon as you're NOT a Baptist, your freedom of religion takes second palce to federal law.

But, you're right, the quotation marks don't belong there.

[ex-cerebrate131.livejournal.com]

Yeah, and I'm all pissed off that they won't let me sacrifice users to Shub-Internet.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

There are rules against cruelty to dumb animals.

[unnamed525.livejournal.com]

That's why you make the death quick and painless.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

That defeats the purpose of the sacrifice to Shub-Internet.