# If a religious beleif infringes on your rights as a person... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 14, 2002, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673 "2002-11-14T03:58:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/21 "2002-11-19T01:41:38Z")
Of course that sort of thing would never come up if people would just build their statues of Jesus on private property to begin with. I’m pretty sure McDonald’s always buys the land _before_ it puts up the Golden Arches. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/22 "2002-11-19T02:12:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Eulogy \* > \*\*Jehovas don’t allow serious medical treatment. Blood transfusions and what not. \*\* And that infringes on my rights how? Their religion does not infringe on anyone’s rights-unless they’re talking about minor children. If a person chooses not to have blood transfusions because of their religious beliefs-they’re not infringing on anyone’s rights. It’s their RIGHT to refuse to have a transfusion. ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/23 "2002-11-19T02:45:57Z")
is that, those who experienced the JW “truth” but rejected it & died would go into non-existence & never be resurrected; while those who never really experienced the “truth” of the JW faith will be resurrected to have that opportunity & then if they reject what will be obviously true, they will be put out of existence. an adult JW who willingly takes a blood transfusion or OKs one for a child risks never being resurrected. a JW, child or adult, who gets a transfusion w/o their consent should be exempt for any penalty. I don’t agree with any of this - just explaining. ---
**Author:** ![Devil\_s\_Advocate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Devil\_s\_Advocate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Devil_s_Advocate)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/24 "2002-11-19T04:27:26Z")
I imagine that the statue of Jesus would offend many Christians as well. You know, idolotry, and all that. ---
**Author:** ![Blivit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/90ced4/32.png) [@Blivit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blivit)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/25 "2002-11-19T05:07:13Z")
If your religion says “anyone who drives a motorcycle is a heathen and an abomination” and you spread the word to others that I am a heathen, haven’t you slandered me ? This kind of thing goes on all the time. Wouldn’t that be infringing on my rights? I have the right to not be called names don’t I? ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/26 "2002-11-19T05:48:13Z")
> [@](#): > > I have the right to not be called names don’t I? Not really, no. Libel and slander are legally actionable, but are also pretty narrowly defined. IANAL, but I know that the truth cannot be a libel. Saying “So-and-so will burn in the lake of fire for all eternity” or “So-and-so’s actions are displeasing to Almighty God” are statements the truth or falsehood of which cannot (fortunately) be decided in any secular court. I think this is really to the advantage of us heathens and other religious minorities, as I’m pretty sure it would be the unpopular opinions which would be on the short end of the lawsuit more often than not if courts were permitted to meddle in such matters. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/27 "2002-11-19T05:51:07Z")
“Heathen” wouldn’t really be slander, it would be more an expression of that person’s opinion. It would be different if the person were spreading around that you were a rapist or child molester or had a loathesome disease, things that were not subjective opinions and had no basis in fact. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/28 "2002-11-19T05:56:55Z")
D’oh! Beaten again. **MEBuckner** came at the question a little differently, but still pretty much right. “Heathen” can’t be determined to be true or false. It’s like “jerkwad”. “But your honor, truth is my defense! The plaintiff is, in fact, a jerkwad!” ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/29 "2002-11-19T06:01:33Z")
“Your honor, if you will consult Exhibit A, a dictionary of the English language, you will see that the entry for ‘jerkwad’ is in fact illustrated with a picture of the plaintiff. The defense rests.” ---
**Author:** ![Eulogy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7993a0/32.png) [@Eulogy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eulogy)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/30 "2002-11-19T12:47:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Guinastasia \* > \*\*And that infringes on my rights how? > Their religion does not infringe on anyone’s rights-unless they’re talking about minor children. \*\* Which I am, a few years ago, a girl died as her parents wouldn’t allow the doctors to give her a blood tranfusion. Then sometime last year, a religious couple (I’m not sure if they were Jehovas or not) had siamese twins, I don’t recall the exact place they were joined, but considering they had to be seperated, I’m guessing it was the spine, or they were sharing a heart. Anyways, the surgeon said they had to be seperated for one to day, or else they both would. The couple said both had to die because it was God’s will, but some court ruling had the surgeons seperate them. ---
**Author:** ![Jerevan\_Somerville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@Jerevan\_Somerville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jerevan_Somerville)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/31 "2002-11-19T17:54:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kalt \* > While most courts don’t use the “Mature Minor” principle, I think it’s a great idea. It will result in less religious fanatics reproducing, as the “mature minors” will most likely die (from their own refusal of medical care) before they reproduce. It’s a good balancing between saving the lives of children of religious fanatics versus weeding out religious fanatics from the human race. I’m with **Guinastasia**. It strikes me as contradictory to promote the concept of the “mature minor” as a means of eliminating children who have been “brainwashed” into “religious fanatics”, so that they don’t reproduce, repeat the process, and risk other children’s lives. If a child has been “brainwashed” by her parents into a particular belief, how can she be considered to have the free will and understanding to make a mature, adult decision? If we are willing to allow a “brainwashed” child to die for a religious belief – whether to save us the trouble of dealing with her as an adult later on, or for some other reason – how are we different from the parents we would condemn for risking her life because of that belief? ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/32 "2002-11-19T18:12:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Eulogy \* > \*\*Which I am, a few years ago, a girl died as her parents wouldn’t allow the doctors to give her a blood tranfusion. Then sometime last year, a religious couple (I’m not sure if they were Jehovas or not) had siamese twins, I don’t recall the exact place they were joined, but considering they had to be seperated, I’m guessing it was the spine, or they were sharing a heart. Anyways, the surgeon said they had to be seperated for one to day, or else they both would. The couple said both had to die because it was God’s will, but some court ruling had the surgeons seperate them. \*\* Cite, please? Most of the time, courts will rule that a parent cannot deny routine medical treatments to minors because of religious reasons. That doesn’t mean, however, that excessive or non-routine procedures can’t be denied. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2002, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/33 "2002-11-19T18:28:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Eulogy \* > \*\*Then sometime last year, a religious couple (I’m not sure if they were Jehovas or not) had siamese twins, I don’t recall the exact place they were joined, but considering they had to be seperated, I’m guessing it was the spine, or they were sharing a heart. Anyways, the surgeon said they had to be seperated for one to day, or else they both would. The couple said both had to die because it was God’s will, but some court ruling had the surgeons seperate them. \*\* It happened in Britain. The parents were Catholics from Malta. Here’s a story from CBS about it. (The story erroneously states that the oarents were Eastern European. Malta is not in Eastern Europe.) [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/09/07/london/main231318.shtml](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/09/07/london/main231318.shtml) ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2002, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673/34 "2002-11-20T19:17:32Z")
How would the Pat Roush case fall with ‘religious beliefs interfering on rights’? American citizen marries Saudi Arabian citizen, marriage produces two daughters, marriage dissolves. An American court (where the divorce occurred) grants sole custody to the American citizen, but the daughters are taken to Saudi Arabia by the non-custodial parent and have not (to date) returned to the U.S. due to the Islamic law of Saudi Arabia. Does this mean that religious belief which is commingled with Saudi Arabian law has denied the daughters (both of whom are American citizens) their right to return to the U.S.? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-religious-beleif-infringes-on-your-rights-as-a-person/136673.md?page=1)