• Omega@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    My religion explicitly says that fetuses aren’t people until their first breath. Does that mean abortions aren’t murder as long as the mother is Christian?

    • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Its against my religion for capitalists to have rights, also I have a deeply held religious tradition called eating the rich (I expect this to be accommodated)

        • Confused_Emus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Oh! Check that out. It’s just Social Security and Medicare they don’t pay. Which seems fair since they seem to have their own community versions that they contribute to.

          In the US, as long as your religion is recognized by the IRS, the Church itself doesn’t pay income/property taxes. Once you get your first church set up, just make all your personal luxury purchases through the Church!

  • Alexstarfire@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    Let me guess, some religious freedom BS?

    EDIT: Yep! Forget laws that make things legal. Their fefes are more important.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Imagine having a job that you admit you are unable to do all of, and still keeping that job. And screwing others over just because of beliefs that YOU have. What a world that those believe in a sky daddy live in…

      Same things goes for pharmacists that think their beliefs should intrude on being able to just count out pills without butting into others’ lives.

    • GlendatheGayWitch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Probably more ammo, with a state Supreme Court comment allowing discrimination under guise of religious liberty. To have that opinion backed by the highest Court of a state somewhat legitimizes their case and may put more pressure on the conservative justices to allow sex-based discrimination again.

  • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Well, after a judge had married the first couple, you’d think it would get a bit awkward.

    How many people can a judge legally marry, anyway?