Would a ban on all public religious representations and displays ease religious hatreds and violence

Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by GreatestIam, May 2, 2019.

  1. GreatestIam
    Offline

    GreatestIam VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    4,064
    Thanks Received:
    130
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +404
    Would a ban on all public religious representations and displays ease religious hatreds and violence?

    We have to end inquisitions and jihads of all kinds, including the less lethal ones like homophobia and misogyny.

    Some secular governments, led by the French of France and Quebec, are implementing bans on all religious iconography prayers and emblems and religious displays so as to ease religious tensions and violence. They call it laïcité, which translates to secularism. Laïcité - Wikipedia

    The general secular population seems to dislike the one-upmanship that the religious practice on other religions, as well as those who do not follow a religion; even though statistics show that the less religion in a nation, the more peaceful and law abiding it is. Conversely, if we look at the Christian nation of the U.S., as an example; we see perhaps the least peaceful and law abiding nation on earth. This last aside, an example of this one-upmanship, would be Christian signage that tells us to turn to Jesus or be condemned and Muslim head gear and face covering that say that the wearer is more chastely than those who do not cover their heads and bodies.

    Jesus said that we should pray in private so as not to be seen as trying to outdo each other in chastity, righteousness and other one-upmanship adjectives that you might think of. Yet most who say they respect Jesus do not follow his teachings of remaining private and insist on public displays of their perceived insult to others not of their brand.

    I see the secular world as following Jesus’ advice on this while the so called religious ignore Jesus.

    Thoughts?

    Regards
    DL
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  2. Pogo
    Offline

    Pogo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Messages:
    104,495
    Thanks Received:
    14,851
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Fennario
    Ratings:
    +51,883
    No. It would make it worse.

    When we isolate or taboo-ize a totem, we invest it with Power. When we expose it and overexpose it, we drain that Power.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. ding
    Offline

    ding Confront reality

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    59,273
    Thanks Received:
    2,302
    Trophy Points:
    1,855
    Ratings:
    +20,471
    My thoughts are I’m not surprised that you would openly propose restricting religion. You’re a socialist. A materialist. That’s what they do.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. progressive hunter
    Offline

    progressive hunter Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2018
    Messages:
    7,688
    Thanks Received:
    586
    Trophy Points:
    180
    Ratings:
    +3,795
    and what inquisitions need to end???

    I thought they ended centuries ago???
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  5. ozro
    Offline

    ozro Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Messages:
    713
    Thanks Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    180
    Location:
    Off-grid Apache County, AZ
    Ratings:
    +759
    lost any support from me at the word "ban"
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. Rambunctious
    Offline

    Rambunctious Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Messages:
    25,595
    Thanks Received:
    4,887
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +28,291
    Banning anything is an aggressive act...so one had better be sure to have a good acceptable reason for doing so....so banning drunk driving or murder and extortion is one thing but to ban religion is tyrannical and will make matters much worse....
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. Ringel05
    Online

    Ringel05 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Messages:
    54,911
    Thanks Received:
    10,366
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    Duke City
    Ratings:
    +33,294
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Apparently you've never read the First Amendment........
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. Pogo
    Offline

    Pogo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Messages:
    104,495
    Thanks Received:
    14,851
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Fennario
    Ratings:
    +51,883
    Well, the OP didn't specify where the ban would come from. I took it as a question of what the effect would be, assuming it were done --- on whatever level.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. BreezeWood
    Offline

    BreezeWood VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    8,397
    Thanks Received:
    390
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +958
    .

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...


    howabout the purposeful first line you ignored rather than the mundane disclaimer you chose as for the intent of the article.
     
  10. Ringel05
    Online

    Ringel05 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Messages:
    54,911
    Thanks Received:
    10,366
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    Duke City
    Ratings:
    +33,294
    Uummmm, because in this instance the government wouldn't be establishing a religion.......
    Now we could argue till the end of time if atheism and secularism are religions in their own right........
     

Share This Page