General -  murderers and basic rights (2122 views) Notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussion.Subscribe
 
From: TurkeyMasterJan-5 8:29 PM 
To: robocarrot4  (4 of 234) 
 14716.4 in reply to 14716.1 

robocarrot4 said...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/how-dismantling-roe-v-wade-could-imperil-other-core-basic-human-rights/ar-AARHSrM?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531

Ohh the tragedy!...If we lose the basic  right of our freedom  to kill our unborn children  what right will they take away next?? 

You might want to read the article you are poking fun of, for many other rights could be lost.   Such as your religious freedom or your right to bear arms.  As for your presumption:  Perhaps your religion teaches that a fertilized egg is a human being with all the rights of a citizen.  Fine, but not all religions teach that.  Would you like other people's religious practices to be forced upon you? 

 
 Reply   Options 

 
From: YoungGandalf DelphiPlus Member IconJan-6 10:06 AM 
To: TurkeyMaster  (5 of 234) 
 14716.5 in reply to 14716.4 

Those would actually be two good rights to lose.

 

 
From: TurkeyMasterJan-6 4:57 PM 
To: YoungGandalf DelphiPlus Member Icon  (6 of 234) 
 14716.6 in reply to 14716.5 

While I do not agree with giving up all gun rights, I understand the opposed position and respect the sentiment (and some of the goals) behind it.    More surprising to me, if I understand your comment, is your willingness to give up separation of church and state and the right to one's beliefs.  In a nation that is majority theist, that may mean  that you would have to give up your atheism, or at least your right to express it. However, I presume that there is some misunderstanding here and that you do not believe in thought crime, so I will await your clarification.  

 

 
From: YoungGandalf DelphiPlus Member IconJan-7 5:19 PM 
To: TurkeyMaster  (7 of 234) 
 14716.7 in reply to 14716.6 

I would not give up separation of church and state if religion maintains its exalted status in our society. What I would like to give up is religions rights.

One would need some sort of minority protection law to replace the freedom, but we have that already. What we would lose would be the extreme intrusion of religion into public life, its tax free status, and its ridiculous outgrowths.

We should replace the right of freedom of religion with a right of freedom from religion. That is worth something. The existent right is a constant pain because of its wide invitation for abuse.


 

  • Edited January 7, 2022 5:21 pm  by  YoungGandalf
 

 
From: Ishmael112Jan-7 7:29 PM 
To: TurkeyMaster  (8 of 234) 
 14716.8 in reply to 14716.6 

TurkeyMaster said...

More surprising to me, if I understand your comment, is your willingness to give up separation of church and state and the right to one's beliefs.

I cannot predict the future so I cannot give an opinion about where American law and culture will be in the fullness of time.  However, I am confident they will not be influenced by people who might participate in American democracy but instead sit on the sidelines while saying to anyone who will bother to listen "Ain't it awful."

 

 
From: TurkeyMasterJan-10 2:22 AM 
To: YoungGandalf DelphiPlus Member Icon  (9 of 234) 
 14716.9 in reply to 14716.7 

YoungGandalf said...What I would like to give up is religions rights.

it is no secret that your solutions to social issues tend to be harsher than mine, which is fine.  Many  methods can be tried. However, this seems a bit much to me.  It may be that I am misunderstanding you, so I will ask.   Giving up religious freedom is giving up your freedom because it cuts both ways.  In either case, it is freedom of belief.  I assume you did not mean freedom of belief (?), so then you feel that religious practices have intruded on your freedoms, right?    Separation implies that freedom of religion also means freedom from religion.   That is, if you do not have freedom from religion, then religious freedom is at risk itself. 

Do the courts always rule  that way?   Usually, but not always.   The religious right is always trying to push the boundaries for what we all special rights, but most often they are on the defense.  I am for a high wall of separation indeed, but I think that we need to pick our fights wisely. 

I think that the doctrine of separation of church and state was a stroke of genius, but I am not surprised that some have no interest in fairness, but just want more power. 

  • Edited January 10, 2022 2:24 am  by  TurkeyMaster
 

 
From: NETIZEN_JJan-10 7:49 AM 
To: robocarrot4 unread  (10 of 234) 
 14716.10 in reply to 14716.1 

If it's okay for you to force your religious dogma on other people, how would you like it if someone banned pork products because they're sinful?

N_J

 

 
From: NETIZEN_JJan-10 7:56 AM 
To: YoungGandalf DelphiPlus Member Icon  (11 of 234) 
 14716.11 in reply to 14716.7 

No need to give anything up.

Just enact the Constitution as written.

No more congressional chaplains, no more military chaplains, no more legislative prayers or 'invocations', change the motto to 'e pluribus unum', and remove the 'under God' corruption from the Pledge - that sort of thing.

Religious liberty already includes freedom FROM Government Religion in any way, shape, or form.

We just need to implement it.

Then we need to more forward to the separation of church and commerce, so that 'religious schools' have to follow all the same regulations as non-religious private schools, and 'religious hospitals' have to follow all the same regulations as non-religious hospitals.

We also have to get rid of 'Zombie' religious enterprises:  https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1328&context=nulr#

We also need to get rid of the entire CONCEPT of a 'religious exemption' to a generally applicable statute.  No, religion is not a 'get out of jail free' card with respect to any law you just don't happen to like.  Just as the Mormons learned the hard way when we refused to give them a 'pass' on violating bigamy laws.

N_J

  • Edited January 10, 2022 7:59 am  by  NETIZEN_J
 

 
From: YoungGandalf DelphiPlus Member IconJan-10 8:34 AM 
To: TurkeyMaster  (12 of 234) 
 14716.12 in reply to 14716.9 

Not ordinarily, just because the way things have developed. A people who vote, tolerate, and act for insurrections in irder to install a totalitarian regime, however careless they may have been about that, lose privileges. Especially in our case where there is no remorse, no turning around, and a clear will to break democratic election results the next time. If this happened in a foreign country of interest, our troops would be marching in creating military law.

Giving up religious freedoms has this but also deeper sources: the religious extremism and the religious cover-up of extremist mindsets that we have fostered and nurtured for decades is a big part of the cause of the disquiet in society about fair democracy. It needs to be changed and the overly permissive religious freedom is where the change can happen. We must nit forget that it is long known that all religion’s core messages about their gods have been long known to be false. There are other aspects of religion that may be desirable from a society’s perspective, but that does hardly matter until the core problem has been tamed. We know from history what religions do once they are acting in totalitarian setups of their own making.

Of course, one cannot just take the freedom right down without installing at the same time a more general freedom of beliefs right. Perhaps coupled with a duty to be schooled and informed.

oh and PS: it is no secret that your too weak solutions are not solutions, but exacerbate the underlying problems. This is neither the time nor the issue for political correctness. We have armed insurrectionist in the capital and people with criminal intent in positions of power ready to act at the next election. And we have large parts of the people morbidly dumb and uninformed.

  • Edited January 10, 2022 8:43 am  by  YoungGandalf
 

 
From: YoungGandalf DelphiPlus Member IconJan-10 8:39 AM 
To: NETIZEN_J  (13 of 234) 
 14716.13 in reply to 14716.11 

I would be okay with that as a first step, but we also need to act against the cause of negative actions that the current law has allowed our religions to become. See my just prior posting to tm.

 

Navigate this discussion: 1-3 4-13 14-23 24-33 ... 214-223 224-233 234
Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.

Home | Help | Forums | Chat | Blogs | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
© Delphi Forums LLC All rights reserved.