{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
originally posted in:Liberty Hub
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]
-
Either treat all religions fairly or do away with them all.
-
1 ReplyAllow them all or ban them all
-
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.
-
1 ReplyBy law religious freedom and liberty does apply to all, as it should.
-
23 RepliesLoaded post. Yes religious freedom is a right. Survalence on muslima doesnt impede that especially because mosks arent churches for muslims theyer sharia courts. Banning muslims from coming here isnt banning the practice here iether
-
10 RepliesFreedom of religion. But with that being said, we should strip rights from Christians for bombing abortion clinics and groups like the westboro. The idea to restrict rights on one would be a stupid idea when the largest is the one with the most crazies. In the end Christianity would be the ridiculed the most out of all the relgions.
-
3 RepliesEdited by superassassin364: 8/5/2016 12:24:45 PM[quote]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.[/quote] These two things are incompatible with each other because doing the latter through legislation is the opposite of religious freedom.
-
2 RepliesAll religions should be equal. Just ask the Jews.
-
3 RepliesEdited by Ogma: Destroyer of Worlds: 8/5/2016 12:39:20 PMAny kind of liberty should only apply if said person isn't negatively affecting or trying to dictate others lives. The moment a person assumes an idea or ideology to be infallible or above scrutiny and criticism and even mockery, is the same moment they become a slave to it.
-
7 RepliesEdited by cynicalpsycho: 8/4/2016 9:16:15 PMArabs rivaled the Greeks in the golden age in everything from Philosophy to Astronomy. The backwards religion of Islam has held the middle east back in more ways than we will ever be able to perceive. Other religions have assimilated into modern culture of vastly different countries. One of the most troubling trends is promoting religions like Islam though positive multiculturalism whilst failing to see that it is incapable of assimilation.
-
1 ReplyWhat is religious liberty?
-
-
1 ReplyAll should be treated equally. It's when you start causing harm and violating the rights of others that you are a problem
-
4 RepliesI have no issue with anyone practicing his or her religion unless it is used to justify hurting others. That is where the line is drawn for "religious liberty".
-
1 ReplyEdited by Silent: 8/4/2016 9:02:09 PMGenocide. [spoiler]It's just a prank.[/spoiler]
-
Thought police? Good luck. Freedom of conscience is untouchable.
-
2 RepliesEdited by Olmeck: 8/4/2016 7:34:19 PMI like the idea of not adhering to a religion or believing God and not being persecuted. I'd be fuçked if some of these religious nut jobs had their way. Go ahead and do your thing. I'll do mine. Don't bother me and I won't bother you. Don't judge me and I won't judge you. We should approach it as individuals instead of group think and political talking points.
-
2 Replies[quote]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?[/quote]Just because this guy is a Pagan doesn't mean he can kill people. His right to religious freedom does not supersede the right of other people not to be killed. He still has the right to be a Pagan. He just can't kill people. Felons can't own firearms, either. So if you're a Pagan who hasn't killed anyone, by all means keep your guns.
