Yes. And to both sides, which isn’t always easy.
An unsuccessful attempt at a weasel. “Protecting the rights of others” is an action taken in furtherance of a moral position; namely,that other people’s rights ought to be protected. IOW, you are attempting to impose your moral position on others.
Regards,
Shodan
Lame.
While it may seem innocuous to have special creation taught in place of/along with evolution, the long term results can be huge. By deciding that faith will come before rationality and evidence, the entire scientific pursuit of knowledge is put at great risk.
If the ability to conduct scientific investigations, establish modern banking systems, develop and use the best medical practices available, have competing political systems in place, and so forth are being retarded or denied, then you must evaluate the reasons for this…and in a number of cases this can be attributed to religious controls.
In some countries, religious beliefs do determine what goes on…it has been purposed that religion has slowed down the technological, economic, and social growth in countries that base their laws and education on religious restrictions.
So be wary, and look beyond the everyday obvious for the answer to your OP…even though you may not think that there is no actual effects in everyday life, religion can have an enormous influence on everything that you do.
I’m late to the party as usual, but wanted to toss out a couple of comments.
I recently heard a UU sermon purporting (convincingly IMO) that atheists are the most reviled minority in America. During the course of the sermon, the minister offered a definition of religion along these lines: Having religion is the adoption of a set of values, and acting in accordance with them.
I’m not sure I’m entirely comfortable with that, as it seems pretty firmly established to equate religion with the belief in some deity/supernatural. But it made enough impression upon me to have stuck with me for a few weeks. I also liked the idea that even one who professes membership in a particular faith is not “religious” if they do not act in accordance with their professed beliefs.
Regarding the OP, I personally think the strongest evidence of the encroachment of religious values on everyday life is the fact that numerous individuals and organizations have to exert so much continued effort to prevent increased encroachment. It seems to me unquestionable that countless religious gorups actively desire to impose their religious beliefs on society. Is there an atheist counterpart to Regent Law School - which apparently has found considerable support within the current administration?
I know this has met with disapproval around these parts in the past, but IMO freedom of religion necessarily implies freedom FROM religion as well. It is a fine stance for a believer to explain away the significance of references to “God” in the pledge, on money, public chaplains, presidential speeches, blue laws, etc. ad infinitum. But to one who does not share such sentiments, their unceasing existence brings to mind the concept of death by a thousand cuts.