How Religious Freedom Became A Rightwing Assault On The Rule Of Law

[SassyIrishLass]

No one is advocating a national religion much less a secular national religion. Why don't you practice your faith and butt out of other people's business? They may practice another religion or none at all.

Bake that cake, you fcking hypocrite

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Once again you confirm what we know you are

Cry louder.

I like it.

 

[Correll]

So, four pages so far. I take it no lefty has given any example of the use of "religious freedom"?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Please tell us again why you are a shameless troll who is intent on using red herring logical fallacies to derail a topic rather than dealing with it like an adult.

Actually, I am responding TO the trolling.

This very thread is an obvious exercise thereof.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

So, four pages so far. I take it no lefty has given any example of the use of "religious freedom"?

I could post a link to leftists using religious freedom supporting abortion in Indiana. That's just sad

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

I could post a link to leftists using religious freedom supporting abortion in Indiana. That's just sad

Of course, their religion in raping and killing children and supporting only what gives them evil pleasure.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Of course, their religion in raping and killing children and supporting only what gives them evil pleasure.

Guess what, it's a satanic group.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So, four pages so far. I take it no lefty has given any example of the use of "religious freedom"?

See post 37

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Guess what, it's a satanic group.

Anyone REALLY paying attention since the sixties has known that.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Actually, I am responding TO the trolling.

This very thread is an obvious exercise thereof.

Bovine excrement! It is anything but a troll thread. The fact that you are triggered by it is an indication that it actually hits too close to home for you to deal with rationally.

 

[Correll]

See post 37

I see a broad claim, but no example. So, that's the best we got so far? I did not expect any more.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Bovine excrement! It is anything but a troll thread. The fact that you are triggered by it is an indication that it actually hits too close to home for you to deal with rationally.

Says one of the biggest trolls on the board!

 

[Correll]

Bovine excrement! It is anything but a troll thread. The fact that you are triggered by it is an indication that it actually hits too close to home for you to deal with rationally.

Except you have no examples.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

There's a saying that when Fascism arrives in the US it will be religion wrapped in the flag.

Yet here we have any number of anti-Amercan posters here like you who hate freedom of speech, hate freedom of religion, indoctrinate children into your totalitarian ideology as soon as you can get your clutches on them, consider some human beings "non-essential" and demand lock-step conformity so much that you seek to cancel any who do not submit.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I see a broad claim, but no example. So, that's the best we got so far? I did not expect any more.

If you do not see examples , you better get your eyes checked. How about this : Gay marriage

 

[Correll]

There's a saying that when Fascism arrives in the US it will be religion wrapped in the flag.

There's also a saying that a woman needs a good slap now and then to keep her in line. Do you believe that too?

 

[surada]

Bake that cake, you fcking hypocrite

How exactly have you been denied your freedom of religion?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Once again you confirm what we know you are

Yes, decent and sane.

 

[Correll]

If you do not see examples , you better get your eyes checked. How about this : Gay marriage

Good example.


Marriage has for centuries been about forming producitve family units so that children could be cared for and property inherited.

Gay couples, since they don't produce children, were not part of that. Naturally.


Also naturally as we as a society, became more tolerant of the gays, it would have been natural to have a discussion about expanding the institution or copying it, to include gays.


Instead, you people changed the meaning of the word and pretended that anyone that didn't immeditately agree with you,, were horrible bigots so that you would have an excuse to be offended and get hysterical. This was all fake of course.


The idea that not being for that expansion was religious based or an oppression is... nonsense.

 

[kyzr]

Two meanings of religious freedom/liberty:
1. Freedom of belief, speech, practice.
2. Freedom to restrict services, hate, denigrate, or oppress others.


1. The historical meaning of religious freedom:

This term relates to the personal freedom:
•Of religious belief,
•Of religious speech,
•Of religious assembly with fellow believers,
•Of religious proselytizing and recruitment, and
•To change one's religion from one faith group to another -- or to decide to have no religious affiliation -- or vice-versa.


The individual believer has often been the target of oppression for thinking or speaking unorthodox thoughts, for assembling with and recruiting others, and for changing their religious affiliation. Typically, the aggressors have been large religious groups and governments. Freedom from such oppression is the meaning that we generally use on this web site to refer to any of the four terms: religious freedom, religious liberty, freedom of worship and freedom to worship.

2. A rapidly emerging new meaning of religious freedom: the freedom to discriminate and denigrate:

In recent years, religious freedom is taking on a new meaning: the freedom and liberty of a believer apply their religious beliefs in order to hate, oppress, deny service to, denigrate, discriminate against, and/or reduce the human rights of minorities.

Now, the direction of the oppression has reversed. It is now the believer who is the oppressor -- typically fundamentalist and evangelical Christians and other religious conservatives. Others -- typically some women, as well as sexual, and other minorities -- are the targets. This new meaning is becoming increasingly common. It appears that this change is begin driven by a number of factors:

•The increasing public acceptance of women's use of birth control/contraceptives. This is a practice regarded as a personal decision by most faith groups, but is actively opposed by the Roman Catholic and a few other conservative faith groups.

•The increasing public acceptance of equal rights for sexual minorities including Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals, Transgender persons and transsexuals -- the LGBT community (); and

•The increasing percentage of NOTAs in North America. These are individuals who are NOT Affiliated with an organized faith group. Some identify themselves as Agnostics, Atheists secularists, Humanists, free thinkers, etc. Others say that they are spiritual, but not religious.


One interesting feature of this "religious freedom to discriminate" is that it generally has people treating others as they would not wish to be treated themselves. It seems to be little noticed among those who practice or advocate "religious freedom to discriminate" that this way of treating people is a direct contradiction to the Golden Rule, which Jesus required all his followers to practice. See Matthew 7:12, Luke 6:31, and the Gospel of Thomas, 6.

1. Most of #1 I agree with, except this:
The individual believer has often been the target of oppression for thinking or speaking unorthodox thoughts, for assembling with and recruiting others, and for changing their religious affiliation. Typically, the aggressors have been large religious groups and governments. Freedom from such oppression is the meaning that we generally use on this web site to refer to any of the four terms: religious freedom, religious liberty, freedom of worship and freedom to worship.
A. If you keep your religious beliefs private (personal) there are no repercussions.

2. I disagree with #2 (religious freedom is the freedom to discriminate and denigrate, to hate, to oppress, and to deny service to...)
Real religions do not denigrate, hate, oppress, or discriminate against anyone else. You need to put up linked examples instead of unproven allegations.
B. Catholic birth control is a private decision, not a legal one.
C. The Catholic church calls LBGTQ behavior a "sin".
D. NOTAs are not affiliated, call them secular. Used to be called "pagans".

3. Religious freedom to discriminate is a personal decision. Like if you had a religion, or NOTA group that ate shit. I would choose not to associate with them, and to exclude them as much as possible.