Religous Freedom

wanderingbear

wanderingbear

Radical liberal
religousfreedom.jpg


To often the religous define their rights, as the right to forse others into beleiveing what they they beleave. It is not.
 
wanderingbear said:
God your blind..
Click to expand...

Religious freedom surely means the freedom to choose between religions or the freedom to choose which parts of a particular religion you want.
The freedom we should be discussing is the freedom either to have or not to have a faith. I guess that might be secular freedom although there is a danger that would fall into the same trap. Therefore we should make it a freedom for those who know no better to join a faith if they wish since the status quo would be total secularism.
Now, considering the trouble most faiths cause to most societies that 'freedom' should be examined very closely. Perhaps those who feel strongly enough should have to apply to belong to a religion and if too many apply membership should be limited.

Any member of any church, mosque of temple who commits a crime should have their entire congregation punished by a ban in assembly for one year for the first offence, five years for the second and lifetime for the third. That means congregation would have to police their own membership.
Freedom? Of course, the members of the congregations would be totally free to abide by the law and to respect the society in which they exist.
tic
 
j-mac said:
Wow, talk about projection...This is laughable.
Click to expand...

You've got that right. For a week now, we've seen them call people horrible names, try to put a man out of business because he didn't believe as them, and attempt to intimidate people into either taking their side or STFU..... but that's not "forcing us to beleave what they beleave?"
 
wanderingbear said:
To often the religous define their rights, as the right to forse others into beleiveing what they they beleave. It is not.
Click to expand...

you realize of course that only liberals define what the religious are doing in that manner.....it's one of the reasons we consider liberals irrational....
 
Dixie said:
A Christian man said he believed in the Biblical interpretation of marriage.
The Left became upset and tried to condemn and destroy the man for not believing as they did.
Who had religious freedom and who was being intolerant of it?
Click to expand...



False, a man said he belived in his version of the Biblical interpertation of marriage, that was okay.

It turned out that the man was donating money to groups that try to push that interperation onto other people.

People did not like that and began to talk about no longer adding to his financial wealth.
 
Jarod said:
People did not like that and began to talk about no longer adding to his financial wealth.
Click to expand...

actually no.....they began to talk about blocking his building his business in certain cities, they talked about gathering at his places of business, demanding free glasses of water to obstruct his business and reduce his financial wealth......do you see the difference?......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
actually no.....they began to talk about blocking his building his business in certain cities, they talked about gathering at his places of business, demanding free glasses of water to obstruct his business and reduce his financial wealth......do you see the difference?......
Click to expand...

No, three people talked about blocking his business. (I disagree with them, just like I disagreed with those who wanted to block the NYC Mosque.)

I heard nothing about demanding water.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top