|
FuturePastNow posted:If you speed too much (in my state, it's >15 over) or in an area like a school zone, it gets upgraded to Reckless Endangerment or something like that. But that's not really the same offense as "speeding" anymore. Yeah, this popped up not too long ago with a pharmacy school student I was precepting. We got a 10+ page fax from the university saying her background check had flagged positive along with descriptions of the relevant state law and university policy that we didn't need to precept this student if we were uncomfortable with her criminal record. Said criminal record was a single incident of driving 15+ over the speed limit 3 years ago.
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 20, 2024 10:06 |
|
|
Government, it's funding, regulations and services are pretty much unavoidable in modern society. Avoiding giving funds to religious groups for religious purposes is a good and possible goal, trying to limit every grant or subsidy from having any positive benefit on a religiously affiliated organization is impossible. The court's conclusion already mentioned that denying police or fire services to religious buildings would be ludicrous. Why would society not want a playground to be renovated by a grant established to promote greater safety, regardless of whether said playground is operated by a religious group? Either way you're presumably sending fewer children to the local ER for concussions or tetanus infections, which most would regard as being in the collective interest of our society. If this were a grant program to assist local buildings remove asbestos from walls or replace lead pipes would we also want to exclude religious buildings?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:The thing that gets me about the cake poo poo is that even if you are the sort of christian who believes that marriage is between a man and a woman only, and believes that this party those gay folks are having aint a real marriage in god's eyes, where in the Bible does it say that you can't bake cakes for other parties? Show me the verse where the bible says that cakes are for weddings only. His argument is surprisingly clever. He's claiming that since he custom designs his cakes, his cakes are actually works of art. Forcing him to produce a specific work of art that he has moral objection to is a violation of his freedom of expression. If anything his argument is better than Hobby Lobby's. Now that was a loving abortion of justice to which playgrounds and cake artists can't begin to compare.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 00:47
|
|