Any religion. Any practice within that religion.
Why doesn't someone have the right to stone someone to death for their transgressions? Said stoning is in quite a number of religions.
Rush...the rights hero
- Thread starter Renee
- Start date
Any religion. Any practice within that religion.
Why doesn't someone have the right to stone someone to death for their transgressions? Said stoning is in quite a number of religions.
Mr. Friscus
Governor
Um, because it's against American law?
I don't see what's so hard about all this.. I said verbally, and you talk about stoning people to death.
Don't tell me you have to simplify things by making it all-or-nothing.. I thought you were a notch above the JulieinOh's, the Renee's, the Gecko's...
Why is it against the law? It's free expression of religion. I don't see what's so difficult to understand.
Mr. Friscus
Governor
LMAO
I'm HOPING you're being purposefully stupid here.
OBVIOUSLY, you can only express your religion in legal ways.
And speaking out, much to the disdain of atheists, is NOT against the law.
Are you making some sort of connection between speaking about religion and stoning people to death? Are they equally as horrendous?
\
I'm being purposeful in trying to express my point. You seem to fail to understand that we restrict the practice religion in many ways, therefore, we draw lines already. Sometimes even to the point of legality, even if, such as peyote rituals, it is a clear overstep. Rights are not absolute, so the practice of religion is not absolute. No one...again...is stopping anyone from speaking out about their Christianity. No one.
You can't be acting so stupid on purpose, can you be?
EatTheRich
President
No one in the U.S., absolutely no one, has advocated making it illegal to say "merry Christmas." Am I right?
Renee
Governor
I just took you off ignore and see that you call me .....all or nothing? That's kinda funny
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
Over the course of the conversation, I noticed Friscus demanded that he had said verbally. Well...a check of the thread will show that's not the case, as he refused to draw any line until I asked him about stoning, which he dismissed as silly.
The amendment clearly has no distinction and just as clearly states that no law shall be made regarding free exercise of religion. Not the talking about, the exercise of. As religious "practices" include stoning, we, as a society reach an impasse. If killing is allowed by the religion...and as the Constitution disallows the Congress to make a law against it, then stoning simply must be allowed. Such an extreme no lines drawn view of religious freedom in the Constitution is what allows someone to say the document is Islam compliant. No law shall be made...prohibiting the free exercise.
Another consideration regards the change in demographics. Perhaps, in 200 years, less or more, the USA becomes majority something besides "Christian". Hindu perhaps...and beef becomes illegal. Exercise.
These are the arguments we as a society have to have and decide upon. We decided stoning was worse than the crime, we restricted religious practice.
GordonGecko
President
So Rush informs you on "what has happened"? That's how you come by your information?
GordonGecko
President
Craig, as we both know, the Religious Right's definition of "oppression of their religious freedom" is.....them not being allowed to use the public trust (schools, courthouses, etc) to promote their form of Christianity.
And then of course dystopian hypotheticals of "If the atheists get their way...blah,blah,blah"....none of which is realistic in a country where 95% of the country is theist.
It's all about their desire to impose their religion via school prayers, "creation science" classes, use of public buildings, banning abortion, etc......and screaming "oppression of Christianity" when people stand up to them.....atheists and non-Religious Right Christians as well.
I have the evangelical arguments thrust at me at every family gathering.
I had to laugh this weekend...I was at a family gathering Saturday and Maryland was in combat with Boston College. My evangelicals sent out a prayer for Maryland...which I found interesting. BC is a Jesuit school, Maryland one of those devilish secular state schools, and my evangelicals were actually praying for God to defeat the Jesuits on the playing field.
You may have heard...BC won the game on a last second field goal. The MD coach called a time out a moment before the ball was snapped for a FG try. The action took place, the kick was no good. Second try, perfect, BC wins. Hysterical, really.
GordonGecko
President
Well, you know what they say when a prayer is NOT answered positively....it was "God's plan" for Boston College to win.
BTW, have to love how the same people who supposedly take prayer so seriously...as a means of being at one with God, or a supplication for a healing of a life-threatening condition.....so easily use it for something as mundane and frivolous as a....a football game outcome.
BTW, have to love how the same people who supposedly take prayer so seriously...as a means of being at one with God, or a supplication for a healing of a life-threatening condition.....so easily use it for something as mundane and frivolous as a....a football game outcome.
Mr. Friscus
Governor
Um, thank you Captain Obvious?
We've already decided that we have the freedom of religious practice and expression as long as it doesn't break American Law.
So I'm not sure why you're taking on this "thought experiment" of yours that has already been resoluted quite unanimously.
Mr. Friscus
Governor
Nope. Very little.
Usually Rush reports stuff that I don't hear in the MSM.
And hearing the facts vs. accepting his spin are two different issues.
GordonGecko
President
Doesn't Rush get most of his information from Fox and Drudge?
Why not "bypass the middle man"???
GordonGecko
President
BTW, I am particularly gratified on a thread about Rush Limbaugh....we have seen the inclusion of the Religious Right.
Nothing is more ironic or hypocritical than the same folks who bemoan the "loss of family values" and attack gay rights for "going after traditional marriage"....
who are fans of a man on his FOURTH marriage in as many decades.
Nothing is more ironic or hypocritical than the same folks who bemoan the "loss of family values" and attack gay rights for "going after traditional marriage"....
who are fans of a man on his FOURTH marriage in as many decades.
As long as it doesn't break American law...
Yet...you argue that we can't make laws that violate religious expression.
It appears my "thought experiment" has failed to make you think.
Mr. Friscus
Governor
Doesn't Rush get most of his information from Fox and Drudge?
Why not "bypass the middle man"???
I'm not sure.
I think you're making a lot more out of it than it is.. I don't always listen, and the only time I do is when I'm in the car and don't feel like listening to music.
Also, I often disagree with assessments made on the show..
Mr. Friscus
Governor
I don't see what is so hard about this..
As long as it doesn't break American Law, you're allowed to express yourself religiously.
That's what I've said, you seem to think I said something else, something absolute. I didn't.
I don't see what is so hard about this..
As long as it doesn't break American Law, you're allowed to express yourself religiously.
That's what I've said, you seem to think I said something else, something absolute. I didn't.
Yes...facepalm.
I think you said this:
The problem is, their complaint is to restrict the first amendment rights of people who wish the freedom of expression of their religion.
So no, they can't petition for that, and be taken seriously anyway.
I fail to see a mention of American laws. I fail to see a mention of verbal expression. I see you worrying that free expression of religion is being restricted. But you really only worry about Christian expression. Regardless...the Constitution IS American law.
Now, you freely admit we restrict religion and express dismay your words are twisted. Yes...facepalm.
