Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 62 (9057 total)
64 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, nwr, PaulK, Tangle, Theodoric, vimesey (7 members, 57 visitors)
Newest Member: drlove
Post Volume: Total: 889,717 Year: 829/6,534 Month: 829/682 Week: 64/445 Day: 10/10 Hour: 1/8


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Religious Liberty Quiz
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17071
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 5 of 80 (888985)
10-28-2021 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by ringo
10-28-2021 12:13 PM


No, that’s a clever one.

There should be a right to practice symbolic ritual cannibalism- with legal foodstuffs. Not actually eating people. (Even that is a restriction on religious liberty, IIRC).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by ringo, posted 10-28-2021 12:13 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by kjsimons, posted 10-28-2021 1:29 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17071
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 11 of 80 (888991)
10-28-2021 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Phat
10-28-2021 3:03 PM


Re: On The Other Hand
quote:
Is it cannibalism if the Creator of all seen and unseen is feeding you (or offering you) what you need?

If it’s eating human flesh, it’s cannibalism. By definition.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Phat, posted 10-28-2021 3:03 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17071
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 5.7


(3)
Message 16 of 80 (889013)
10-29-2021 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
10-28-2021 11:26 AM


So let us consider some points.

First, it seems obvious that we don’t want judges to have much say in whether a religious objection is valid or not. But if we rule out any say, a “yes” answer means that pretty much anyone can claim the exemption.

Second, even before we consider the first point it is obvious that we should not let religious belief become a carte blanche to ignore the law.

Third if we really support religious liberty we shouldn’t give privileges that will favour the dominant religion over others. The rights of minority religions are in more need of protection.

Considering these points together, if we’re going to allow religious exemptions to any law we ought to be asking ourselves whether it’s worth having the law at all. It’s better not to have a law than have exemptions - and if we do have exemptions they’d better be narrow.

And that leads to a fourth point. If you want to say “it depends” it better not “depend” on anything that will work in favour of majority religions or allow minority religions to be denied their exemptions.

So, some of these are pretty obvious. We - or rather, you Americans - shouldn’t be making children say the Pledge of Allegiance at all. There’s no need for a special right in that case. It’s equally obvious that religious organisations shouldn’t be allowed to ignore workplace safety regulations. The question of polygamy isn’t much harder - it certainly shouldn’t be a religious exemption, you either allow it or you don’t. As things are now it’s very open to abuse and shouldn’t be allowed. If there’s a wholesale reform of marriage law - and I think there should be - maybe a solution can be crafted.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 10-28-2021 11:26 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17071
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 5.7


(3)
Message 18 of 80 (889016)
10-29-2021 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Phat
10-28-2021 4:09 PM


A can of worms ?
quote:
But the whole secular freedom from religion thing is itself a sub-topic. Can of worms. Hornets' nest.

This seems a very strange claim.

What makes it a “can of worms”? Unless “freedom of religion” is seen primarily as special privileges for the religious - and it should not be - then it should be a natural consequence.

Surely everyone should be free from religions they don’t follow. Christians should not be subject to Sharia law, for instance. And if you respect freedom of belief at all obviously nobody should be penalised for not having a religion, let alone be forced into subscribing to one, even nominally.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Phat, posted 10-28-2021 4:09 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022