Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

senate Bill S. Joint Res. 58

Should Congress Express Support for the Freedom of Conscience?

Argument in favor

Freedom of conscience — which in the context of this bill can be understood to be interchangeable with freedom of religion — is enshrined in the First Amendment. From this, it follows that the government should neither try to decide what religious beliefs are “correct” or attempt to deny tax-exempt status to tax-exempt organizations that take specific public policy positions.

Bradley's Opinion
···
11/26/2019
This is one of our core rights and it must be protected.
Like (22)
Follow
Share
William's Opinion
···
11/26/2019
Vote yes. This is a commonsense approach. And organization should not be forced to provide services and/or support to organizations/persons that are counter to their beliefs.
Like (21)
Follow
Share
David's Opinion
···
11/26/2019
“The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states, ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.’ No religion, or its practitioners, can be suppressed or coerced by the state. When politicians threaten to use the power of the state to deliberately suppress some peoples because of their religious convictions, they violate the Constitution and one of America’s most sacred traditions. The First Amendment states that no matter one’s beliefs, no matter how one worships – if one worships – every American citizen may enjoy the rights enshrined to them in the Constitution, given to them not by the state but by God.”
Like (14)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Organizations that deny full human and civil rights to some people, or that oppose settled policy on issues such as race or sexuality, shouldn’t be allowed to maintain their tax-exempt status. The federal government previously held this view when it revoked Bob Jones University’s tax-exempt status over its interracial dating ban, which was upheld by the Supreme Court.

jimK's Opinion
···
11/26/2019
Another misleading title. This is the “freedom of religion to endorse political positions, freedom of religion for businesses to deny otherwise public services to public clients or customers based upon disagreeing with their customers beliefs” bill. This bill legalizes discrimination by refusing public services to anyone that happens to have any different beliefs. Any business or religion can gather and practice their legal beliefs. No business or religion can act to oppress the legal beliefs of ‘others’ or deny otherwise public business services to ‘others’, since the ‘others’ are provided all of the same protections and rights under our law. Publicly licensed businesses are obligated to comply with the rules that govern the public irrespective of their own political beliefs. Religious organizations that interject themselves into political processes or decisions are lobbying for special treatment for their own political belief’s to force their beliefs upon others- and therefore, represent special interests lobbying for political change and should not qualify for tax exemptions otherwise afforded religious institutions. This legislation is a bad idea and can readily be abused in many, many ways.
Like (156)
Follow
Share
Sylvia's Opinion
···
11/26/2019
Nooooooo. Freedom of religion is NOT the freedom to justify acts of hate, violence, segregation based on religion. Congress shall make no law favoring any religion, that means people are protected from the dogma of a religion that is not theirs. THAT is what freedom of religion is.
Like (88)
Follow
Share
Hillary's Opinion
···
11/26/2019
This is a thinly disguised attempt to trick people into accepting businesses discriminating against people they think are beneath them. If any religious institution endorses political positions they should pay taxes. If they discriminate against others they should be closed.
Like (66)
Follow
Share
    This is one of our core rights and it must be protected.
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    Another misleading title. This is the “freedom of religion to endorse political positions, freedom of religion for businesses to deny otherwise public services to public clients or customers based upon disagreeing with their customers beliefs” bill. This bill legalizes discrimination by refusing public services to anyone that happens to have any different beliefs. Any business or religion can gather and practice their legal beliefs. No business or religion can act to oppress the legal beliefs of ‘others’ or deny otherwise public business services to ‘others’, since the ‘others’ are provided all of the same protections and rights under our law. Publicly licensed businesses are obligated to comply with the rules that govern the public irrespective of their own political beliefs. Religious organizations that interject themselves into political processes or decisions are lobbying for special treatment for their own political belief’s to force their beliefs upon others- and therefore, represent special interests lobbying for political change and should not qualify for tax exemptions otherwise afforded religious institutions. This legislation is a bad idea and can readily be abused in many, many ways.
    Like (156)
    Follow
    Share
    Nooooooo. Freedom of religion is NOT the freedom to justify acts of hate, violence, segregation based on religion. Congress shall make no law favoring any religion, that means people are protected from the dogma of a religion that is not theirs. THAT is what freedom of religion is.
    Like (88)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a thinly disguised attempt to trick people into accepting businesses discriminating against people they think are beneath them. If any religious institution endorses political positions they should pay taxes. If they discriminate against others they should be closed.
    Like (66)
    Follow
    Share
    Religious beliefs do not belong in government. Our nation is founded on the rule of law. Religion does not belong in government under any circumstances.
    Like (45)
    Follow
    Share
    ... Freedom to force children into marriage... freedom to mutilate girls genitalia... freedom to torture children with conversion “therapy”... freedom to beat women and children because as the head of the house you own them... freedom to murder for honor... NO. Religion has killed more people in human history than any disease. Our government is secular. Keep it that way. Don’t allow discrimination based on religion. That is NOT what the constitution means.
    Like (41)
    Follow
    Share
    This is another attempt to allow discrimination based on religious beliefs.
    Like (41)
    Follow
    Share
    I don’t equate freedom of religion with freedom to oppress. Neither should anyone else.
    Like (29)
    Follow
    Share
    Organizations that deny full human and civil rights to some people, or that oppose settled policy on issues such as race or sexuality, shouldn’t be allowed to maintain their tax-exempt status. The federal government previously held this view when it revoked Bob Jones University’s tax-exempt status over its interracial dating ban, which was upheld by the Supreme Court.
    Like (29)
    Follow
    Share
    You can name this Freedom of Conscience and make attempts to allude it somehow holds up the First Amendment Rights, just like you can call a duck a cow. However, I believe if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks and smells like a duck...it’s a duck! What it truly means is the right to deny civil liberties or human rights to others based upon your religious beliefs! The “right” not to provide medical services, such as abortion or sterilization procedures, because doing so would be contrary to the individual’s religious beliefs or moral convictions. The right not to provide services, such as baking a cake, because the couples’ gender preferences are not in your religious wheelhouse. The right to not issue marriage licenses to a same sex couple, because of your religious beliefs. The right to endorse and fund raise for candidates through the church because that candidate lines up with church ideals...all while maintaining tax-exempt status. Some of my Christian friends are peeing your pants right now, because this sounds so good, right? Right!!! Will it sound good to you when the Hindu grocery clerk refuses to allow you to buy the sirloin steaks you picked up for dinner? Or the Jewish person in the quick-care waiting room turns off the TV everyone is watching because it’s Saturday morning and it’s Shabbat. Are you good with every child in the Second Grade classroom sitting through the Pledge of Allegiance because the teacher happens to be a Jehovah’s Witness? These examples are of other major religions. I could share examples of minor religious groups and cults, too. Some that believe in mutilating genitalia, in polygamy, in covering women from head to toe and gang raping her for minor indiscretions...enough said. Bottom line, there is a very clear intelligent reason our forefathers kept Religion and State separate. We are NOT a Christian nation. We have many faiths and for some, none at all. Our laws protect all the people, not just the ones your religion picks and chooses.
    Like (24)
    Follow
    Share
    Why is it as religious believes decline that they try harder to mandate federal regulation for religion? Religion is about belief, if religion fails to get people to believe then so be it.
    Like (23)
    Follow
    Share
    This is just a way for people to cherry pick which laws they want to follow
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    Vote yes. This is a commonsense approach. And organization should not be forced to provide services and/or support to organizations/persons that are counter to their beliefs.
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    If freedom on conscious translates to discrimination based on race, sexual orientation, etc, then the answer is a decided NO. While I support the right of all people to believe however they wish, even to not believe, what I don't support is allowing people to force their beliefs upon others who don't share them. I further don't support allowing those who are in establishments that serve the public and/or work in public positions to refuse to serve individuals who they don't agree with those individuals beliefs and/or lifestyles. You can practice your religion, but don't force those practices on others.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Boo. We have the Bill of Rights
    Like (19)
    Follow
    Share
    Call it what it is, legal discrimination.
    Like (18)
    Follow
    Share
    Let's just go with the entire reason that this Bill is a NO GO. Organizations that deny full human and civil rights to some people, or that oppose settled policy on issues such as race or sexuality, shouldn’t be allowed to maintain their tax-exempt status. The federal government previously held this view when it revoked Bob Jones University’s tax-exempt status over its interracial dating ban, which was upheld by the Supreme Court.
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    You republicans need to stay in your lane! If we choose not to have religious beliefs as citizens. What business is it of yours? You are not responsible for my soul. You all need to be more worried about your own souls. HELL is going to be LIT with all of you!
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    Organizations that deny full human and civil rights to some people, or that oppose settled policy on issues such as race or sexuality, shouldn’t be allowed to maintain their tax-exempt status. The federal government previously held this view when it revoked Bob Jones University’s tax-exempt status over its interracial dating ban, which was upheld by the Supreme Court.
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    Organizations that deny full human and civil rights to some people, or that oppose settled policy on issues such as race or sexuality, shouldn’t be allowed to maintain their tax-exempt status. The revoking of Bob Jones University’s tax-exempt status over an interracial dating ban was upheld by the Supreme Court.
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE