• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Freedom from religion

BTW, the spelling is "hypocrisy".

Azure said:
A safe assumption would also be to say most criminals are Christians as well, when, if you did a survey, it might suggest otherwise.
Click to expand...
Or it might not.

http://www.skepticfiles.org/american/prison.htm

Azure said:
I asked a simple question. Are you being forced to be religious? If not, then you have freedom from religion.
Click to expand...
So someone not forced to be rapist has freedom from rape? Someone not forced to own slaves has freedom from slavery? Is English your second language?

Azure said:
I don't get it.

Are you guys being forced to be religious?
Click to expand...
We are forced to be part of religion.
 
One more important point.

"We are endowed by our Creator " is from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. The Declaration isn't the basis for our rights.

The Constitution is the basis for our rights and it mentions neither god nor a creator.
 
Settlers arrive first, set the tone through culture and make the laws. Immigrants come later, attempt to fit in, and contribute. The original settlers, the English Protestants, set America on her course to greatness. It was the English Rule of Law, coupled with the Protestant emphasis on individual responsibility to God and neighbor, self-reliance, and tolerance for the beliefs of others, that made possible the vision of individual freedom.
Click to expand...

Except, of course, the belief that people have the inalienable right to be free from religion.

Actually, many of the folks that settled the early United States weren't that keen on the tolerance of the beliefs of others. Roger Williams founded Rhode Island because the religious folks in the Massachusetts Bay Colony banished him from Massachusetts.

. . . . . .

As for freedom of religion, I like the idea that school kids don't have to listen to prayers over the school's public address system. I like the idea that science is taught in science class and religion is taught in religion class.
 
Azure- I have not yet figured out how to live my life without having to utilize little pieces of paper that say "In God We Trust" on them, but I'm getting close.
 
strathmeyer said:
Azure- I have not yet figured out how to live my life without having to utilize little pieces of paper that say "In God We Trust" on them, but I'm getting close.
Click to expand...

Oh cry me a river.

What the hell does that piece of paper have to do with forcing you to be religious?
 
Ipecac said:
One more important point.

"We are endowed by our Creator " is from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. The Declaration isn't the basis for our rights.

The Constitution is the basis for our rights and it mentions neither god nor a creator.
Click to expand...

I've seen arguments that since the Constitution contains the words "in the year of our lord":

Founding Fathers said:
...the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven...
Click to expand...

it is proof that the Founding Fathers were Christian and that the US is a Christian nation.

As for religion affecting people, how about blue laws?
 
Last edited:
ksbluesfan said:
Call me crazy, but hasn't the US Supreme Court consistently upheld "Freedom from religion"?
Click to expand...

No. In fact, I would be willing to bet that the phrase has never appeared in a Supreme Court opinion, except possibly in a reference to someone else's argument.

What they have said is that government cannot advance or impede religion in general or any particular religion (Lemon), that they must avoid entanglement in religion (also Lemon), and that they may not, by their policies, appear to endorse any particular religion or set of religious beliefs. (Can't recall the case where "the endorsement test" first appears.)
 
Azure said:
Oh cry me a river.

What the hell does that piece of paper have to do with forcing you to be religious?
Click to expand...

Because I have not yet figured out how to live my life without having to utilize them? Do I need to speak slower or use smaller words?
 
Hell hath frozen over. Azure makes the best pionts.

Strathmeyer, Azure was pointing out that having "In god we trust" on your banknotes means NOTHING to you in any practical way.
 
Gurdur said:
Hell hath frozen over. Azure makes the best pionts.

Strathmeyer, Azure was pointing out that having "In god we trust" on your banknotes means NOTHING to you in any practical way.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

It means nothing to me, and I believe in God.

In fact, I hardly look at the words.
 
I find it interesting that the article misquotes the Declaration of Independence saying "our Creator" instead of "their Creator."

It's my opinion that "their Creator" was chosen over "our Creator" for a specific purpose.
 
Azure said:
Exactly.

It means nothing to me, and I believe in God.

In fact, I hardly look at the words.
Click to expand...
You live in Alberta, according to your profile. You haven't noticed that those words aren't even there?

Or do you refuse to use Canadian money in Canada?
 
Meadmaker said:
No. In fact, I would be willing to bet that the phrase has never appeared in a Supreme Court opinion, except possibly in a reference to someone else's argument.

What they have said is that government cannot advance or impede religion in general or any particular religion (Lemon), that they must avoid entanglement in religion (also Lemon), and that they may not, by their policies, appear to endorse any particular religion or set of religious beliefs. (Can't recall the case where "the endorsement test" first appears.)
Click to expand...

"Freedom from religion" may not be the exact wording used, but Justice Souter said "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion" in his opinion in Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994). That's pretty close.
 
ksbluesfan said:
"Freedom from religion" may not be the exact wording used, but Justice Souter said "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion" in his opinion in Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994).

That's pretty close.
Click to expand...
Nope. When splitting hairs over the First Amendment and the arguments over the Establishment Clause, that "pretty close" dodge does not cut it. (For all that Justice Souter's words were well parsed.)

Freedom from (mandatory) religion is better expressed in other writing, to include the original text of the First Amendment.

What you cannot expect is to be free from the any and all evidence of religion, since freedom of worship is also in the First Amendment, nor can you expect to be completely free from any and all its influence, as those same worshippers will interact with you. The question is the matter of degree, in real life rather than in some ideal Ivory Tower.

What's important is where we all give and take at the boundary layer, and what consideration we offer to one another.

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
Nope. When splitting hairs over the First Amendment and the arguments over the Establishment Clause, that "pretty close" dodge does not cut it. (For all that Justice Souter's words were well parsed.)

Freedom from (mandatory) religion is better expressed in other writing, to include the original text of the First Amendment.

What you cannot expect is to be free from the any and all evidence of religion, since freedom of worship is also in the First Amendment, nor can you expect to be completely free from any and all its influence, as those same worshippers will interact with you. The question is the matter of degree, in real life rather than in some ideal Ivory Tower.

What's important is where we all give and take at the boundary layer, and what consideration we offer to one another.

DR
Click to expand...

I think we're saying something similar. I don't expect to live in a society that is completely free from religion. I wouldn't want to live in a society that told people that they could not worship freely.

I expect to live in a society where the religious aren't given favor over the irreligious.
 
Madalch said:
You live in Alberta, according to your profile. You haven't noticed that those words aren't even there?

Or do you refuse to use Canadian money in Canada?
Click to expand...

I used to live in the US, plus I deal with US dollars a lot.

Maybe I should refrain from using Canadian dollars because the words 'in God we trust' are not there, and I believe in God.

That would do wonders, eh?
 
ksbluesfan said:
I think we're saying something similar. I don't expect to live in a society that is completely free from religion. I wouldn't want to live in a society that told people that they could not worship freely.

I expect to live in a society where the religious aren't given favor over the irreligious.
Click to expand...

And Black people aren't given free reign with racial slurs, just like white people.

As much as both of us want that, people will never be un-biased one way or the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom