There is nothing anti-religious about politicians seeking to protect the health of their constituencies by limiting the number of congregants in a closed space during a pandemic; what’s anti-religious is to use God as an excuse for doing something that you know could harm people.

Nov 27, 2020 · 2:36 AM UTC

170
387
67
2,710
Load newest
Replying to @marwilliamson
👍🏻
Replying to @marwilliamson
When Jesus was approached about eating on the Sabbath because it was against the law, his reply reflected that the law was intended to serve man, man was not intended to serve the law. When times change laws must change.
3
Replying to @marwilliamson
They is also over each in the craziest way. If politicians were allowed to dictate health, what’s to stop them from dietary restrictions, exercise regimes, and limiting stress? Those would make a bigger difference in deaths/year. And also authoritarian beyond belief.
Replying to @marwilliamson
Preet Bharara needs to replace William Barr
1
2
Replying to @marwilliamson
Lmao humans have been using god as an excuse to rape, murder, and pillage for literally centuries. Maybe longer. America was built on "manifest destiny."
Replying to @marwilliamson
We already have reasonable restrictions on religious freedom. If your religion says it's okay to murder, no one would accept the religious freedom argument. I don't see reckless endangerment during a pandemic as any different.
2
4
Replying to @marwilliamson @schnorenjones
I'm proud to be anti religious what a compliment why deny this???
Replying to @marwilliamson
Um, have you not heard of The Cruisades? Or The Inquisition?
Replying to @marwilliamson
I think it’s a constitutional violation to limit the size of a religious gathering.
2
Load more