Zone1 Should false religions be banned?

[ding]

No. First Amendment.

 

[BreezeWood]

No. First Amendment.

something about yelling fire in a crowded auditorium ... at least for those dedicated to a free and wholesome way of life.

especially the outcome of corrupt religions as recorded throughout history recognized as being parricidal menaces unnecessary for free and productive societies.

 

[ding]

something about yelling fire in a crowded auditorium ... at least for those dedicated to a free and wholesome way of life.

especially the outcome of corrupt religions as recorded throughout history recognized as being parricidal menaces unnecessary for free and productive societies.

That you equate the establishment clause to yelling fire in a crowded auditorium shows your lack of objectivity.

 

[BreezeWood]

That you equate the establishment clause to yelling fire in a crowded auditorium shows your lack of objectivity.

especially the outcome of corrupt religions as recorded throughout history recognized as being parricidal menaces unnecessary for free and productive societies.

do you ever respond to the content of posts than the desert dwellers obsession to misconstrue the subject matter with their own juvenile prejudices.

the very reason for the establishment clause as written in the constitution to prevent religion itself from the consideration of a free society.

 

[Zincwarrior]

If one reads a religious source text, such as the Bible, in its entirety, one can see that many religious groups and adherents have based their beliefs off of a small part of it, but that it is often taken out of context or misinterpreted, while being ignorant of the whole, and therefore, in my view, false.

If we could compare the specific religious beliefs of individual adherents or groups, and show that they bear little resemblance to the entirety of the source text they claim to have originated from, I would consider them false religions.

It'd therefore be in favor of stripping them of their protected status under the law, if not outright banning them in some cases, in order to preserve true religion which is authentic to its source texts and prevent it from being corrupted.

As an example, the cult known as the Westboro Baptist Church is heretical to the Bible and the theology of John Calvin - ignoring most of it, particularly God and Christ's emphasis on love, and simply takes bits and pieces out of context to justify existence. Therefore, I'd be tempted to argue that they shouldn't qualify for religious protection under the law and that it should be legal for the state to ban them.

No entity should be tax exempt.

 

[ding]

do you ever respond to the content of posts than the desert dwellers obsession to misconstrue the subject matter with their own juvenile prejudices.

the very reason for the establishment clause as written in the constitution to prevent religion itself from the consideration of a free society.

You shouldn’t be throwing stones and living in a glass house. The point of the establishment clause is the free worship of God without being attacked for it.

 

[BULLDOG]

BAN THE HERESY OF ALL FALSE RELIGIONS!! The Flying Spaghetti Monster's noodly goodness is the only one true way to salvation!!

 

[Zebra]

If one reads a religious source text, such as the Bible, in its entirety, one can see that many religious groups and adherents have based their beliefs off of a small part of it, but that it is often taken out of context or misinterpreted, while being ignorant of the whole, and therefore, in my view, false.

If we could compare the specific religious beliefs of individual adherents or groups, and show that they bear little resemblance to the entirety of the source text they claim to have originated from, I would consider them false religions.

It'd therefore be in favor of stripping them of their protected status under the law, if not outright banning them in some cases, in order to preserve true religion which is authentic to its source texts and prevent it from being corrupted.

As an example, the cult known as the Westboro Baptist Church is heretical to the Bible and the theology of John Calvin - ignoring most of it, particularly God and Christ's emphasis on love, and simply takes bits and pieces out of context to justify existence. Therefore, I'd be tempted to argue that they shouldn't qualify for religious protection under the law and that it should be legal for the state to ban them.

i keep reading about the Westboro Baptist Church.
they seem not to be well liked.
why is that so?

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

i keep reading about the Westboro Baptist Church.
they seem not to be well liked.
why is that so?

.

They have been very in-your-face with their anti-LGBT, anti-military screed, up to and including rioting at funerals of fallen military.

And I thank God for the Patriot Guard Riders, who started shielding the bereaved of those military members at the funerals from these deranged losers. They even showed up and stood guard at my husband's funeral, covid regulations be damned.

.

 

[presonorek]

The Flying Spaghetti Monster

I don’t think you are allowed to say that in the religion forum though I could be wrong.

 

[forkup]

As an example:

The Bible says that God is Love, and that Christ was sent to die on the cross out of God's love for humanity.

Therefore, groups which call themselves "Christian", but which a reasonable person can see do not emphasize God's love are heretical, and should lose their protected status.

As a counterexample, the Bible also contains passages where God commands genocide and other acts most would hardly call "loving." So if your standard is “emphasizes love,” then many sections of scripture — and many major denominations — fail that test.

What you're actually saying, then, is that your interpretation of what matters in the Bible is correct — and those who disagree should be banned. That’s not about defending “true religion”; that’s just enforcing your personal theology through state power.

In a pluralistic society with competing interpretations of the same text, using the state to decide which reading is “authentic” is exactly why religious freedom exists in the first place.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

How

(1) do you define a false religion,

and

(2) how do you ban in a nation built on freedom of thought?

 

[Zincwarrior]

All hail his Noodly Appendage!

 

[Zincwarrior]

something about yelling fire in a crowded auditorium ... at least for those dedicated to a free and wholesome way of life.

especially the outcome of corrupt religions as recorded throughout history recognized as being parricidal menaces unnecessary for free and productive societies.

You are free to call them out. You are not free to say government should ban them.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

You are free to call them out. You are not free to say government should ban them.

.

This is America, where you're free to say anything you want to say.





.

 

[BreezeWood]

You shouldn’t be throwing stones and living in a glass house. The point of the establishment clause is the free worship of God without being attacked for it.

there is no heaven in the desert religions, they worship themselves and no one else when referring to their monarchical god ... how they contribute to their own public ridicule.

the sole purpose of the establishment clause is to keep the phony desert religions particularly christianity from ever being involved with the us gov't -

 

[BreezeWood]

You are free to call them out. You are not free to say government should ban them.

really ...

the greatest evil is found within the protections afforded religion - in fact its hard not to see any religion that is not similarly afflicted by the corrosive behavior of certain congregations.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

really ...

View attachment 1143468

the greatest evil is found within the protections afforded religion - in fact its hard not to see any religion that is not similarly afflicted by the corrosive behavior of certain congregations.

.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.




.

 

[BreezeWood]

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

what thanks are those ...

 

[Mr Natural]

Aren’t they all false?