In trying to be fair and resolve conflicts with TheProgressivePatriot, over how I misread previous complaints and likewise my own stated principles being taken wrong as well, This thread is to try to MORE ACCURATELY explain and clarify what we both mean. 1. I stand corrected that TPP DID NOT MEAN that GOVT should be used to police and punish people for their beliefs. That's what I see going on with interpretations of laws, such as penalizing Bakers with fines for not agreeing to provide services involved in "same sex weddings" that the business owners do not believe in. 2. What TheProgressivePatriot objects to is abusing the idea of "equal treatment of beliefs under law" as A. requiring or assuming all people will "agree and get along" B. failing to address beliefs that are harmful, such as abusive forms of discrimination, and should NOT be treated "equally" as beliefs that are NOT harmful, abusive or discriminatory Since TPP confirmed his viewpoint is NOT the argument I presented in the previous BR thread, I am using THIS thread to ALSO make similar corrections: My viewpoints and standards are also NOT what TPP is saying either. A. I ALSO agree that people are NOT going to agree on beliefs, and that is why I advocate protecting groups FROM EACH OTHER because they will NOT agree. That is why I propose to separate party beliefs and creeds so people DO NOT impose on each other. That's one correction I am TRYING to make. B. To clarify what I mean by Respecting people's choice of beliefs equally, but NOT assuming they are all the same and "ignoring" conflicts, I will offer THIS analogy: INCLUDING all instruments in an orchestra EQUALLY, even if they play different music in different keys DOES NOT MEAN LETTING THEM CLASH. The individual instruments, musicians and sections STILL MUST PLAY THEIR DIFFERENT PARTS CORRECTLY so that these DIFFERENT parts harmonize properly. Just because I am saying NOT to REMOVE or EXCLUDE different instruments or parts, but to include them EQUALLY, DOES NOT MEAN IGNORING CONFLICTS AND CLASHES BETWEEN THE PARTS. TheProgressivePatriot With different groups and beliefs, the problems CAUSING THE CLASHING can be resolved WITHOUT discriminating against that whole group for their beliefs or for conflicts with their beliefs THAT CAN BE SOLVED. Is this more clear? In the analogy comparing musicians playing their instruments with followers of a group exercising their beliefs, I find that if the members of a group CONTRADICT their own beliefs, this causes conflicts with OTHER groups as well. This is like when a musician FAILS to play the part IN TUNE, or in CORRECTING TIMING OR KEY, then this will CLASH with other instruments playing their parts. So it isn't because the INSTRUMENT or MUSIC is wrong, it's because the musician is playing their part wrong. And if that problem is corrected, then the DIFFERENT PARTS DO HARMONIZE. THEY DON'T HAVE TO CLASH when each part is played in tune, in the right key and timing. Does THIS analogy help explain what I mean? I'm saying don't just "kick the whole group out" because of conflicts. If a GROUP is experiencing or causing CONFLICTS WITH OTHERS, that means they have INTERNAL conflicts that need to be resolved FIRST. This can be resolved by working WITHIN that Group's organizations and policies. Fix that first, and then the other conflicts with other groups can be resolved in turn. NOTE 1: If these clarifications do not work, please advise. I gratefully appreciate help from TheProgressivePatriot and others to clarify what both of us mean by our objections, and what we do NOT mean that the other person was objecting to! Thank you for your help, Emily ==================================== ADDENDA NOTE 2: An exceptional type of cases that requires different treatment are cases of mental or criminal illness, abuse and disorders that are NOT the person's free choice, but due to mental conditions or addictions outside that person's control where they are not competent and/or become dangerous threats to themselves or others. After looking into spiritual therapy methods of diagnosing, treating and curing such conditions including Schizophrenia, I believe in taking a MEDICAL approach to diagnosis and treatment that would incorporate these effective methods of spiritual therapy, healing and cure. Because these areas involve spiritual beliefs and differences in beliefs, either these must remain free choice or medical research studies are required to PROVE the physical cause and effects follow a process, so that treatment can be developed scientifically and not rely on "faith." NOTE 3: If anyone else can PLEASE help resolve this conflicts in communication and perception of beliefs, between me, TheProgressivePatriot and other Progressives, Liberals, Democrats on here, I would like to propose a collaborative campaign to fix social problems and political conflicts with govt policy, by uniting forces with candidates such as Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, and Ami Horowitz, so we can bring together the DIVERSE approaches and voices within the Progressive Movement and Liberal Democrats. If we can resolve conflicts WITHIN OUR OWN RANKS that means we can solve conflicts with other groups (instead of projecting internal conflicts externally and blaming other groups for our own contradictions in policies).