seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.
it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.
it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.
When you provide a service or product to the general public you loose some of your individual liberty right?
Hmmmm... i wonder... do you think that applies to ALL services provided to the general public?
What about.... oh i dont know...... social media?
i don't know if they do this any longer but back in the day they had a special section at an assembly sectioned off for dfed people who would have to wear a ribbon that said disfellowshipped.
do they still do this and what was the rules on dfed talking to dfed at the assembly?
Let me offer an alternative.. it seems you would have been pretty young and this was more than a few years ago... its very possible your confusing what was really going on having seen it through young eyes and now trying to make the memories fit your adult knowledge. Perhaps there was a df’d person who was wearing a ribbon by happenstance. Your mom warned you and it became a whole policy as you think back.
Edit: Damn just saw steve already suggested this along with official jargon.
seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.
it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.
it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.
And so the issue rears its head again. With the same baker and, he believes, the same “client”
http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/15/jack-phillips-sues-colorado/
what are you thoughts on this?.
i find this alarming because jones was very outspoken and had great guests on discussing topics most other media outlets wouldn't go near.. the fact that many have restricted him access to their medium what does this say on our freedoms of speech?.
So it would seem. A journalist named “luara loomer” posted it on twitter a few hours ago, she may have posted more on it
well today marks the beginning and biggest day of our protest at the london excel.. we believe it's a record number at around 100 exjws at the front door.. we spoke to lots of jw's and one young man studying who has quit after talking to us.
we've been approached privately by jw's who thanked us for coming and the security at the event treated us very well.. if anyone wants to see some clips they are available on my channel the great apostate.. thanks to all for the support and love..
I have no idea what you mean by ‘getting owned’. If you think dub made a point in his little self absorbed temper tantrum perhaps you didnt read it well enough. 2 days ago i addressed his same infantile antics where he made the same remarks about the same things and concluded by saying, to quote myself,
“Others dont need my permission to be themselves. They already are.”
i didnt see a need to repeat myself and was happy to dismiss him by pointing out his self absorbed rant was exactly what he accused what me of with a simple declaration of ‘morphs law’, but since you seem to have missed it, im happy to quote myself (the rare source of sanity on this self deluded circle fest thread) , as above.
But (again i repeat myself) keep up the good work! The vast (snicker) apostate army (lol) is have a uge (read in trump voice) impact!
Lets now turn our attention back to our chairmen, brother quixote
what are you thoughts on this?.
i find this alarming because jones was very outspoken and had great guests on discussing topics most other media outlets wouldn't go near.. the fact that many have restricted him access to their medium what does this say on our freedoms of speech?.
Mciness us gone altogether. Other people are reporting jones 7 day banning for discussing his banning from facebook. Looks like jack gave in to pressure
what are you thoughts on this?.
i find this alarming because jones was very outspoken and had great guests on discussing topics most other media outlets wouldn't go near.. the fact that many have restricted him access to their medium what does this say on our freedoms of speech?.
And now hes on a 7 day ban from twitter
well today marks the beginning and biggest day of our protest at the london excel.. we believe it's a record number at around 100 exjws at the front door.. we spoke to lots of jw's and one young man studying who has quit after talking to us.
we've been approached privately by jw's who thanked us for coming and the security at the event treated us very well.. if anyone wants to see some clips they are available on my channel the great apostate.. thanks to all for the support and love..
Whew, thanks man. We were all waiting for you to approve of our direct experiences or differing views. Glad you chose to allow us to be ourselves and not another version of you. We'll look for you on another thread to come in and straighten us all out. What we all need is to be more like you. It's something to aspire to, since you're clearly always right and the only one that sees the world clearly
Morphs law! (Close enough)
well today marks the beginning and biggest day of our protest at the london excel.. we believe it's a record number at around 100 exjws at the front door.. we spoke to lots of jw's and one young man studying who has quit after talking to us.
we've been approached privately by jw's who thanked us for coming and the security at the event treated us very well.. if anyone wants to see some clips they are available on my channel the great apostate.. thanks to all for the support and love..
i've heard this topic discussed before.. last night, psycho (1960) was the first slasher film, according to the guy i was listening to.. i think psycho was kinda the first 'modern' horror film, in that it was set in 20th century america - there were no vampires, castles and cobwebs.
the monster could live next door.
that's what people found really terrifying, i think.. the two kills in psycho definitely involve slashing but to me the film is mainly about tension, psychological horror, not slashing.
Im not sure there is a definitive “first” as so much in cinema builds on what came before in a sort of evolution, so that a specific origin is often obscured... but i might suggest the 1931 classic “frankenstien”. It had a lot of horror for its day and included what was, at the time, a graphic killing of a little girl. It set the stage for what followed.
