You wrote "The argument we're discussing is his, so he gets to add qualifiers; that doesn't mean you get to add them too.)". Wow, you really will say anything to deny the obvious.
I didn't say you can't; I said Gospel's justification for doing so doesn't apply to you.
Coming from the master, that is high praise.
The disgrace started when Christians forced the city council to enact the ordinance.
Given how bad shit crazy the UK has become, that result surprises me.
This is why conservatives have such a reputation for being sore winners... why should anyone ever concede anything to you, when you're just as angry whether or not you get what you asked for?
Arrested for prayer. You really think that’s a good thing? Punishment for thought crime?
There was no punishment.
Because they were acquitted. The process is the punishment.
Conservative-land is so confusing. The police should be allowed to execute people in the street without trial if they "feel threatened", but not to peacefully detain people who are causing public disruptions. Having your fair hearing in court "is the punishment", even if the case is decided in your favor. I do not wish to live in the nightmarish country you people would create given the chance.
What is this blabber? They were arrested and charged because of a law disfavoring a political and religious viewpoint. Why would any atheist/agnostic/freethinker support such a law?
The law doesn't disfavor a viewpoint. It places limits on how disruptive people be in a clearly defined area.
She was praying in her head. If she had been Muslim making a daily prayer to Mecca she would have been fine. But because she’s Christian, she gets arrested. If she’d been blocking a clinic entrance, you’d have a point.
You're making, or perhaps simply repeating, an appeal to emotion. It's not rational and it's not supported by the video of the arrest.
Well in the first place, when do progressives ever concede anything, whether your outgroups show gratitude for the indulgence and tug our forelocks at you or not? And in the second place, is that how you think people should decide to make concessions? By whether it will make opponents less angry? People should ever concede anything to conservatives because from time to time conservatives are right.
You are being too literal.
The woman is a well-known leader of anti-abortion group. She is known for protests. Her religion is not relevant.
And the reason for the ordinance she decidedly flouted was years of antisocial behavior at that very spot.
Yes, sometimes. In this case probably not -- the process was the price of getting to manipulate her opponents into forfeiting the moral high ground and making themselves look like authoritarian jackasses. From her point of view, probably worth every minute and worth every penny.
