Stupid people full of fear because they have no understanding of the way things work.
Which is a significantly large portion of Humanity.
Um…you haven’t been keeping up with your SDMB, have you?
The point is that the law should not have any exceptions for religious beliefs. What if you were part of a religion that believed that murder was okay?
If not, then why does the First Amendment protect religious freedom? Did the founding fathers intend that any unelected bureaucrat in Washington should be allowed to meddle in internal decisions for any religious group in the country, and that this was somehow justified by bringing up the possibility of a religious group that supported murder? If so, they certainly chose an odd way to express it.
In any case, as I mentioned, the Supreme Court recently ruled 9-0 that there should be exemptions for religious beliefs.
??? You aren’t making sense here. The issue was that religious beliefs don’t permit one to violate the law. The constitutional protection of religion doesn’t go as far as to permit Thugs to strangle strangers, or worshipers of Moloch to immolate children.
Should sincere religious belief permit people to stone adulterers, or to vandalize shops that are open on Sunday? The First Amendment says nothing about that; what it guarantees are your rights to practice your beliefs in ways that do not violate most commonplace laws. You can’t have sex with children and claim it is a religious ritual. You can gather together, sing, pray, ring bells, even come to my door and try to persuade me. These are rights strongly protected by the First Amendment.
(Heck, the law did bend far enough to permit peyote use in some rituals!)
Your rebuttal has so little to do with what you appear to be rebutting that it led handsomeharry to wonder if you’re even reading these posts, and your last response leads me to wonder the same thing.
Robocop: “Dick, you’re fired!”
I don’t see why that’s an issue, since no one has claimed that religious beliefs permit anyone to violate the law. I brought up two issues: the Obama Administration ordering businesses to include all types of birth control and abortifacents in their insurance with no copay, and that same administration trying to meddle in hiring and firing decisions by churches. Neither you nor anyone else has made any attempt to defend what the Obama Administration did on those issues; instead, you apparently think that your best bet is to imply that I support murder, rape, and child molesting.
Stay classy, Trinopus.
It came from the mention of the guy who might have been violating zoning laws by having too many people over to his house to hold fellowship or worship.
In actual point of fact, churches get a lot of latitude from zoning commissions; it’s fairly easy for a church to get a special exemption for the height of their steeple, etc.
(In the city of Escondido, California, this power was abused, and a temple to Krishna was denied permission to build, for a very long time. I believe a court finally ruled that the zoners were using pettifogging objections which would never be applied to a Christian church. Equal Justice was being denied.)
I absolutely defend the administration on inclusion of birth control in insurance, even in mandated insurance. It’s the right decision, and it does not, in any way, infringe on anyone’s religious liberties.
(Any more than tax funding for nuclear weapons infringes on the religious liberties of people who, by their worship, are pacifists.)
Where, exactly, did I, or anyone else, say anything like that? I questioned whether you were actually reading this thread, and grotesqueries such as this do not go far in convincing me of your attention to detail.
I will try; I promise. I’ve got a lot of faults of my own, and I won’t pretend otherwise.
I think it is because their faith is weak,or they wouldn’t be worried about losing it. They want Freedom of religion if it means just theirs. They seem to want their religion to be the law of the land, but the wisdom of our founding fathers, who many lived under a State or Religion run country, found it to be a way of running peoples lives. so hence, the Separation of Church and State! A protection of the minority against the Majority!
Anti-bullying legislation is an attempt to oppress Chrisitans who express disapproval of homosexuality:
Well, because labor hiring/firing laws are legal issues, not religious ones.
And “abortifacents” are a health care issue, not a religious one.
If your religion has a problem with abortifacents, that’s YOUR issue, and your religion’s issue. Denying people health care because of your religious disapproval is persecution, not the other way around.
People should get beat up for stating their beliefs!
The Republican Party.
Next question.
Thre is no one in this country who is stopped from following their religion,no matter what they believe. Just the right to believe what ever one chooses. Christians think they are being persecuted because their religion is not the State religion. We have Separation of Church and State for a reason. Isn’t it strange that the first Christians managed to keep their faith, even though they were the minority for several centuries? Now, so many worry about losing their faith,but so many do not really live the faith they say they have! Too busy trying to live other’s lives…Why not trust in the God you say you believe in?
What abortifacients were required to be covered?
To me this is just plain silly, being different isn’t approving or disapproving anything. It is the norm for someone who is born different. The homosexuals aren’t doing the bullying, but the Christains who do are not doing as the Jesus they believe in, and is quoted as saying ,“Don’t judge”. If one took John as it is written when he wrote ,“I am the Apostle that Jesus loved”, that could be intrepreted that he was Gay. I wonder why some Christians are so worried about another’s(that they consider sinful), and don’t take care of their own sins, then when they are perfect, then maybe, just maybe, they can preach. Some ask,“What would Jesus do?'” Jesus didn’t condem the sinners, but he did fault the so called perfect keepers of the law..The one’s who thought they were the perfect ones and had the right to judge.
Think it would have equally been a problem if 80 people turned up to watch television in a building which violated codes.
Argh, who was it that made the joke about Jesus being freaked out when he sees all the instruments of his torture and execution when he comes back?