{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
originally posted in:Liberty Hub
View Entire Topic
8/4/2016 7:23:07 PM
18
Should Religious Liberty apply to all religions
Recently, there has been lots of controversy over how we should deal with members of certain religions, and whether or not generalizations should be made based off the actions of a few individuals.
Politicians like Ted Cruz are quick to endorse religious liberty for all Americans, and even push for America to be based off of Christian or Jewish values. He also wants stricter surveillance and possible restrictions on Muslims.
My question for you, users of offtopic, is this: should all groups be protected equally by the constitution, specifically the 1st amendment, and if not, should every amendment and other components of our legal system only defend certain groups?
Example: A pagan man kills 30 people with a gun, and he claims it's for his religion. Pagans make up a small percentage of Americans, so it's safe to assume that pagans are violent by nature. Should pagans have their right to bear arms taken away, and even have their religious liberty infringed upon?
The purpose of the post is to spark genuine conversation in a civil manner.[spoiler]haha right[/spoiler]
So can we be respectful and open to new ideas? [spoiler]if I have some glaring issue grammatically or informatively in the post, please notify me[/spoiler]
-
4 RepliesEdited by Stallcall: 8/4/2016 8:59:53 PMA religion is just a set of ideas. Some people make the mistake of thinking that "religious liberty" grants different rights to different religions. This is not the case. Religion is covered by rights - it is not an addition to them. Baptism, as an action, is not something that only Christians can do. A pagan could also dunk a willing person into a pool of water. The idea behind the action isn't relevant. I can dunk a volunteer into water because we both believe that it will further his relationship with God, or I can dunk a volunteer into water because we might have fun. In other words, there is no "religious liberty." There is just liberty. As for generalizing religions... When dealing with a single person, it's best to treat them as an individual. However, broad judgments can still be passed in some cases. Stefan Molyneux makes a good case for this. For example, the average height of a man in China is 5 feet and 7 inches. The average height of a Khampa (southern Slavs, tallest people in the world) man is 6 feet and 1 inch. Imagine I'm a basketball coach. My assistant says, "Hector, listen. I brought in a Chinese player. He's in the locker room right now. You have to see him in action. He's astounding." My response should not be, "Don't be ridiculous. We all know that the average Chinese man is five inches below the six-foot mark. Find me a Khampa." However, if I was sending out scouts to find me tall men to play on my team, I likely wouldn't send them to China.
