Way to go Ed!
Page 1 of 1
Way to go Ed!
E. McCaffrey: Freedom from others' religion
Election time is almost here. If people elect anyone who is guided by their religion rather than the Constitution, they are doing this country a disservice.
Arguments for "religious liberties" are being used as a battering ram against the wall of separation between church and state. That is bad news for everyone, regardless of their religious beliefs or lack thereof.
The aim of those using this tactic is not greater "religious freedom" for all; their aim is to advance their versions of Christian thinking, thereby reducing the religious freedom of others, including other Christians with different beliefs, values and lifestyles.
They don't want "religious freedom." They aim to destroy the wall of separation so they can force others to abide by their religious beliefs.
That is not what the writers of the Constitution wanted; far from it.
With that in mind, it is in the best interest of all Americans to oppose those half-baked arguments for "religious freedom" or they will have their rights, and freedom of (and from) religion, diminished or eliminated.
More damage to the wall of separation does not result in greater "religious freedom" for all; it results in greater Christian power for specific conservative Christian groups and less for those with more liberal thinking.
Those who value their religious beliefs and practices should be strongly in favor of secularism — and an absolute wall of separation between church and state.
You can't have freedom of religion without freedom from the religious beliefs of others.
Ed McCaffrey, Mexico
SJ Link
Election time is almost here. If people elect anyone who is guided by their religion rather than the Constitution, they are doing this country a disservice.
Arguments for "religious liberties" are being used as a battering ram against the wall of separation between church and state. That is bad news for everyone, regardless of their religious beliefs or lack thereof.
The aim of those using this tactic is not greater "religious freedom" for all; their aim is to advance their versions of Christian thinking, thereby reducing the religious freedom of others, including other Christians with different beliefs, values and lifestyles.
They don't want "religious freedom." They aim to destroy the wall of separation so they can force others to abide by their religious beliefs.
That is not what the writers of the Constitution wanted; far from it.
With that in mind, it is in the best interest of all Americans to oppose those half-baked arguments for "religious freedom" or they will have their rights, and freedom of (and from) religion, diminished or eliminated.
More damage to the wall of separation does not result in greater "religious freedom" for all; it results in greater Christian power for specific conservative Christian groups and less for those with more liberal thinking.
Those who value their religious beliefs and practices should be strongly in favor of secularism — and an absolute wall of separation between church and state.
You can't have freedom of religion without freedom from the religious beliefs of others.
Ed McCaffrey, Mexico
SJ Link
T- Number of posts : 3862
Registration date : 2008-06-23
Re: Way to go Ed!
David Theriault responds with unsubstantiated opinions:
Opinion #1: religious rights "diminished or eliminated," like that isn't already happening.
Who? What? Where? How? How about some facts or examples David? This is a myth perpetuated by Christian zealots which started in earnest after 9-11-2001.
Opinion #2: A school will prohibit the wearing of a cross but not a pagan pentagram.
Students can where a cross every day of the school year. It's a myth perpetuated by Christian zealots that they cannot.
Opinion #3: Try holding an after-hours Bible study in a school library.
It's done all the time across this country. The key is "after hours".
Opinion #4: Sorry, but "separation of church and state" is nowhere to be found in the Constitution.
First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" The Establishment Clause is a limitation placed upon the United States Congress preventing it from passing legislation respecting an establishment of religion. The second prohibition inherent from this specified prohibition is no preference by the U.S. government of one religion over another; an aim desired by the Founding Fathers necessary to accommodate all of the many denominations in the United States. The Establishment Clause prohibits Congress from preferring or elevating one religion over another, but does not prohibit the government's entry into religious domain to make accommodations for religious observances and practices in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause.
Opinion #5: Believe it or not, Christians are being jailed for exercising those rights, right here in America.
Again, who? What? Where? How? We need some facts or examples David. If in fact there have been arrests, are you sure they were for religious beliefs? Or did they break established law while expressing those beliefs?
David Theriault is just another 9-11, religious zealot who bases all of his opinions in religion. It's kinda like how Al-Qaeda operates. David Theriault aims to destroy the "wall of separation" so he can force others to abide by his religious beliefs.
SJ Link
Opinion #1: religious rights "diminished or eliminated," like that isn't already happening.
Who? What? Where? How? How about some facts or examples David? This is a myth perpetuated by Christian zealots which started in earnest after 9-11-2001.
Opinion #2: A school will prohibit the wearing of a cross but not a pagan pentagram.
Students can where a cross every day of the school year. It's a myth perpetuated by Christian zealots that they cannot.
Opinion #3: Try holding an after-hours Bible study in a school library.
It's done all the time across this country. The key is "after hours".
Opinion #4: Sorry, but "separation of church and state" is nowhere to be found in the Constitution.
First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" The Establishment Clause is a limitation placed upon the United States Congress preventing it from passing legislation respecting an establishment of religion. The second prohibition inherent from this specified prohibition is no preference by the U.S. government of one religion over another; an aim desired by the Founding Fathers necessary to accommodate all of the many denominations in the United States. The Establishment Clause prohibits Congress from preferring or elevating one religion over another, but does not prohibit the government's entry into religious domain to make accommodations for religious observances and practices in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause.
Opinion #5: Believe it or not, Christians are being jailed for exercising those rights, right here in America.
Again, who? What? Where? How? We need some facts or examples David. If in fact there have been arrests, are you sure they were for religious beliefs? Or did they break established law while expressing those beliefs?
David Theriault is just another 9-11, religious zealot who bases all of his opinions in religion. It's kinda like how Al-Qaeda operates. David Theriault aims to destroy the "wall of separation" so he can force others to abide by his religious beliefs.
SJ Link
T- Number of posts : 3862
Registration date : 2008-06-23
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum