CDZ Religious freedom

[Tommy Tainant]

Does religious freedom extend to Sharia Courts ?

If you have the freedom to refuse service because of your beliefs should others have the freedom to manage their affairs in accordance with their religious beliefs ?

Is religious freedom absolute or just for your religion ?

My own view is that we live in secular states and that the laws protect all of us. Religious freedom stops when it washes up against this. Whatever the religion. The law is the thing and if you dont like the law vote to change it.

 

[JGalt]

Knowing that you live in the UK, you don't have anything equivalent to our American First Amendment right of freedom of religion or the prevention of religion influencing your political system.

All I can say is, enjoy the Sharia Law that's going to overtake your country. Just be sure to call us if it gets too much for you. We bailed your asses out twice already in WW1 and WW2, a third time would be easy-peazy.

 

[Penelope]

religion influencing your political system.

That remains to be seen and I live in the US.

 

[JGalt]

religion influencing your political system.

That remains to be seen and I live in the US.

Honestly, hatred of religion is far more influential in your party, than the Christian influence is in mine. We're not running around insisting that God be present in all aspects of our government, near as much as the left is insistent on removing all references to Him.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

religion influencing your political system.

That remains to be seen and I live in the US.

Religion is no big deal in the UK. Its not something that people are comfortable discussing , and those that do so are considered a bit odd.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Does religious freedom extend to Sharia Courts ?

If you have the freedom to refuse service because of your beliefs should others have the freedom to manage their affairs in accordance with their religious beliefs ?

Is religious freedom absolute or just for your religion ?

My own view is that we live in secular states and that the laws protect all of us. Religious freedom stops when it washes up against this. Whatever the religion. The law is the thing and if you dont like the law vote to change it.

For religious freedom to thrive, ALL Religious Laws must be trumped by dynamic, agreed upon Civil Law whenever the two conflict.

`​

 

[sparky]

We've freedom of, not from religon Tom , the only hedge against our courts being thrown down some religmo rathole is our constitution declares gub'mit secularism

Even though we've sorts that'll claim it's morality is a celestial manifesto

~S~

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Does religious freedom extend to Sharia Courts ?

If you have the freedom to refuse service because of your beliefs should others have the freedom to manage their affairs in accordance with their religious beliefs ?

Is religious freedom absolute or just for your religion ?

My own view is that we live in secular states and that the laws protect all of us. Religious freedom stops when it washes up against this. Whatever the religion. The law is the thing and if you dont like the law vote to change it.

In the United States, as is the case with all other rights, the right to religious expression is not absolute; and religious dogma is not justification to ignore or violate necessary, proper laws and measures.

Consequently, in the United States there is no such thing as ‘sharia courts’ – all civil matters are addressed by state courts pursuant to state contract law. Elements of sharia ‘law’ are allowed provided they comport with state contract law; elements that are not will be disallowed by state judges and magistrates.

 

[well named]

To the extent that laws like the RFRA lead to some patchwork of religious exemptions to other laws, I think that framework runs the risk of becoming incoherent at some point, even though I think the original intent of the law to protect various Native American practices was good. The law certainly creates some ambiguities: what is the criteria for determining that some practice legitimately constitutes the free exercise of religion? What are the criteria for determining which government interests may compel compliance with a law despite its burdens to some religious practice? The answers are always going to be somewhat arbitrary. I feel like there's at least some benefit to having a single unified secular legal order, and some cost to having (somewhat) separate legal regimes for people of differing religions, at least in the extreme.

On the other hand, in practice the application of the RFRA so far is not really that extreme, and it seems serviceable enough, despite those potential drawbacks. I disagreed with the ruling in the Hobby Lobby case but I'm not sure that's enough to want to throw out the entirety of that law. I'm mostly OK with the way the US courts go about evaluating the questions I asked about legitimate religious practice.

Also, there's a certain entertainment to be had in observing the way conservatives and liberals tend to apply similar principles in different contexts, and I'm not immune to that too re: my hesitation about RFRA. So in other contexts (like immigration) I tend to celebrate multiculturalism and I think there is a lot of value in a pluralistic, multi-ethnic society. I also tend to approve of the courts acting as arbiters of constitutional values in ways that go beyond textualism. Both of those should predispose me to approving of RFRA. On the other hand a lot of conservatives will emphasize the importance of assimilation and cultural homogeneity in the context of immigration, and are generally skeptical of the kind of role that the court plays with the RFRA in other contexts (other Civil Rights cases). But conservatives are now champions of the RFRA (which enshrines a certain multi-cultural requirement in the law, requiring a fairly vaguely defined type of judicial oversight) and secular liberals are skeptical of the law, mostly because we disapprove of the particular religious culture represented by Hobby Lobby. So I do enjoy that cognitive dissonance.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Does religious freedom extend to Sharia Courts ?

If you have the freedom to refuse service because of your beliefs should others have the freedom to manage their affairs in accordance with their religious beliefs ?

Is religious freedom absolute or just for your religion ?

My own view is that we live in secular states and that the laws protect all of us. Religious freedom stops when it washes up against this. Whatever the religion. The law is the thing and if you dont like the law vote to change it.

No it does not. The Constitution is the supreme law of our nation. Freedom does not override the Constitution. This is the root of the problem with Islam in America.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

We've freedom of, not from religon Tom , the only hedge against our courts being thrown down some religmo rathole is our constitution declares gub'mit secularism

Even though we've sorts that'll claim it's morality is a celestial manifesto

~S~

Wrong.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment affords Americans freedom from religion – where religious doctrine and dogma may not be codified into secular law all must obey; where government is prohibited from establishing a sanctioned state religion; and where government is prohibited from seeking to promote or advance religious dogma in preference to other religions or being free from religion altogether.

The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment affords Americans freedom to practice a given religion or practice no religion at all; government is prohibited from rendering a religion illegal, or subjecting religious adherents to criminal prosecution, or compelling the observation of a particular religion through force of law.

 

[Picaro]

We've freedom of, not from religon Tom , the only hedge against our courts being thrown down some religmo rathole is our constitution declares gub'mit secularism

Even though we've sorts that'll claim it's morality is a celestial manifesto

~S~

Wrong.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment affords Americans freedom from religion – where religious doctrine and dogma may not be codified into secular law all must obey; where government is prohibited from establishing a sanctioned state religion; and where government is prohibited from seeking to promote or advance religious dogma in preference to other religions or being free from religion altogether.

The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment affords Americans freedom to practice a given religion or practice no religion at all; government is prohibited from rendering a religion illegal, or subjecting religious adherents to criminal prosecution, or compelling the observation of a particular religion through force of law.

Rubbish. The clause only prevents the Federal govt. from favoring one sect over another. Many states had their own established religion, usually the sect that founded the colony. Massachusetts was the last state to dis-establish its state sponsored church, in 1833 or so. the driving impetus was huge changes in the states' demographics, not the 1st Amendment. There is no 'freedom from religion' in the original intent. The clause is itself a key platform of the Baptist sect, not some 'Enlightenment' philosophy; the Baptists invented the clause.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Does religious freedom extend to Sharia Courts ?

If you have the freedom to refuse service because of your beliefs should others have the freedom to manage their affairs in accordance with their religious beliefs ?

Is religious freedom absolute or just for your religion ?

My own view is that we live in secular states and that the laws protect all of us. Religious freedom stops when it washes up against this. Whatever the religion. The law is the thing and if you dont like the law vote to change it.

No it does not. The Constitution is the supreme law of our nation. Freedom does not override the Constitution. This is the root of the problem with Islam in America.

Shame The Devil and tell the truth, this is the root of the problem with Christianity in America too.

ALL Religious Law must be trumped by Civil Law if there is a conflict. All.

 

[AVG-JOE]

We've freedom of, not from religon Tom , the only hedge against our courts being thrown down some religmo rathole is our constitution declares gub'mit secularism

Even though we've sorts that'll claim it's morality is a celestial manifesto

~S~

Wrong.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment affords Americans freedom from religion – where religious doctrine and dogma may not be codified into secular law all must obey; where government is prohibited from establishing a sanctioned state religion; and where government is prohibited from seeking to promote or advance religious dogma in preference to other religions or being free from religion altogether.

The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment affords Americans freedom to practice a given religion or practice no religion at all; government is prohibited from rendering a religion illegal, or subjecting religious adherents to criminal prosecution, or compelling the observation of a particular religion through force of law.

Rubbish. The clause only prevents the Federal govt. from favoring one sect over another. Many states had their own established religion, usually the sect that founded the colony. Massachusetts was the last state to dis-establish its state sponsored church, in 1833 or so. the driving impetus was huge changes in the states' demographics, not the 1st Amendment. There is no 'freedom from religion' in the original intent. The clause is itself a key platform of the Baptist sect, not some 'Enlightenment' philosophy; the Baptists invented the clause.

Dude.... just 'cause people keep doing it wrong, doesn't mean that The Constitution is flawed, it means that religion in general and Christianity in particular have held way too much political power in this country for far too long.

For example: Freedom of religion means that ALL of the venues dedicated too the worship industry pay property taxes. Nowhere in The Constitution does it say that the worship wing of the entertainment industry should get any tax breaks. Churches in America will never experience true freedom until they're free to pay their taxes.

`​

 

[sparky]

We've freedom of, not from religon Tom , the only hedge against our courts being thrown down some religmo rathole is our constitution declares gub'mit secularism

Even though we've sorts that'll claim it's morality is a celestial manifesto

~S~

Wrong.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment affords Americans freedom from religion – where religious doctrine and dogma may not be codified into secular law all must obey; where government is prohibited from establishing a sanctioned state religion; and where government is prohibited from seeking to promote or advance religious dogma in preference to other religions or being free from religion altogether.

The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment affords Americans freedom to practice a given religion or practice no religion at all; government is prohibited from rendering a religion illegal, or subjecting religious adherents to criminal prosecution, or compelling the observation of a particular religion through force of law.

government is prohibited from rendering a religion illegal, or subjecting religious adherents to criminal prosecution, or compelling the observation of a particular religion through force of law.

>>>>>

On National Day of Prayer, Trump establishes new faith-based initiative

 

[doesanyoneknowmyname]

religion influencing your political system.

That remains to be seen and I live in the US.

Honestly, hatred of religion is far more influential in your party, than the Christian influence is in mine. We're not running around insisting that God be present in all aspects of our government, near as much as the left is insistent on removing all references to Him.

"Honestly, hatred of religion is far more influential in your party, than the Christian influence is in mine. "


amazing


"We're not running around insisting that God be present in all aspects of our government, near as much as the left is insistent on removing all references to Him."

truly astounding.

and I am certain you actually believe this nonsense!

 

[doesanyoneknowmyname]

We've freedom of, not from religon Tom , the only hedge against our courts being thrown down some religmo rathole is our constitution declares gub'mit secularism

Even though we've sorts that'll claim it's morality is a celestial manifesto

~S~

"We've freedom of, not from religon Tom ,"

If we do NOT have "freedom FROM" religion why are there atheists roaming freely?

 

[sparky]

We've freedom of, not from religon Tom , the only hedge against our courts being thrown down some religmo rathole is our constitution declares gub'mit secularism

Even though we've sorts that'll claim it's morality is a celestial manifesto

~S~

"We've freedom of, not from religon Tom ,"

If we do NOT have "freedom FROM" religion why are there atheists roaming freely?

They're free to roam, but pay taxes to the church's initiative anyways Mr NoName

 

[doesanyoneknowmyname]

We've freedom of, not from religon Tom , the only hedge against our courts being thrown down some religmo rathole is our constitution declares gub'mit secularism

Even though we've sorts that'll claim it's morality is a celestial manifesto

~S~

"We've freedom of, not from religon Tom ,"

If we do NOT have "freedom FROM" religion why are there atheists roaming freely?

They're free to roam, but pay taxes to the church's initiative anyways Mr NoName

but we have every other right and freedom that christians have.

and our numbers are growing.

and we vote

and we can vote for atheists, secularists, non-religious laws...

and as far as I know....there are NO or FEW religious laws on the books.....

so....

 

[sparky]

so vote ......and vote tose religmo's and their religmo doctrines OUT of our law's , courts, schools , congress , POA , $$$, out, out....OUT!!!!

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS (OF THE ETHICAL ATHEIST) - Ethical Atheist

~S~