User Tag List

First 678

Results 71 to 79 of 79

  1. #71
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    As an odd side note, does SCOTUS' removal of restrictions on larger companies in terms of campaign contributions, so they can contribute as per individuals would, have any bearing on this? Yes, I'm thinking broadly more in terms of principle and it might not have any legal connection, but it comes to mind as we discuss the religion aspect so I thought I'd mention it.
    Legally those are completely separate issues.

    All companies can donate to campaigns, being a larger company doesn't confer a greater ability to contribute funds (except insofar as it has more profits to contribute).

    Only in this specific legal instance (that being religious exemption) does the size and management structure of a company come into play when determining how the law applies.

  2. #72
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Legally those are completely separate issues.

    All companies can donate to campaigns, being a larger company doesn't confer a greater ability to contribute funds (except insofar as it has more profits to contribute).

    Only in this specific legal instance (that being religious exemption) does the size and management structure of a company come into play when determining how the law applies.
    Thanks, I appreciate the synopsis.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #73
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    I think Beorn should aim for more arguments that don't make absolutely no sense to an atheist. Last I checked, religion has no bearing whatsoever on how I live.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Is this true in the US? Because where I live, this sounds crazy.
    I don't think this is officially true in any way, but I get the impression that there are far more people in the USA that believe this sort of thing than in Europe, generally. Also, there are definitely people in high places here who want to officiate it.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  4. #74
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Who needs it? If you have the right and freedom to believe and behave as you see fit (as long as you do not actively harm another while doing so), why do you need religious freedom? How are religious beliefs and acts different from other human beliefs and acts?

    I say, let us get rid of religious freedom. Let us have liberty instead!
    Religious freedom and freedom of conscience are usually meant to be interchangeable, I guess the only difference is that 'religious freedom' is more often associated with group actions and institutions (kind of like families and businesses) that might otherwise be subject to potentially oppressive laws that do not necessarily apply to individuals. Do you see a technical difference between the two, or is this just a linguistic preference based on personal feelings toward organized religion?

    I favor retaining the term so that its conceptual development is better remembered.

  5. #75
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    Please don't be silly. I have the widest construction of what amounts to religious belief of anyone on here.

    Under my view of religious belief both irreligious belief and religious belief would be and are treated as equal. However, it seems pretty clear that the move to get rid of religious belief is to elevate irreligious belief above religious belief.
    Religious belief is not treated equally to irreligious belief, today. Religious belief is given deference. It is not socially acceptable to question someone's religious beliefs. However, irreligious beliefs are allowed to be questioned. Questioning someone's faith in Jesus is rude, but questioning someone's political ideology is not. That's a double standard. I think all beliefs should be challenged, and as long as it is considered "rude" to question someone's religious belief, the double standard will persist.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  6. #76
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    No. Religious freedom is distinct from other freedoms. The reason is that it forces the government to recognize that there are other institutions that can determine how we ought to live. Without such recognition there are only two agents that determine how people should live and those are the state and the individual. In such a situation it's MUCH easier for the state to marginalize and discriminate against minority views.
    Religious freedom is not distinct. It is a subset of ideological freedom. Religion is just an ideology with magic.

    You think that without churches, there would only be individuals and the state that could determine how people should live? I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at here. You think there are no secular institutions that could contribute?
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  7. #77
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    Religious freedom has allowed us to work out how we should live our lives with less interference from government. As religion has eroded we have needed more and more interference from government.

    As Tocqueville said, "I am inclined to think that if faith be wanting in him, he must be subject; and if he be free, he must believe."
    We haven't needed more "interference" from the government because religion has eroded. 100 years ago quantum mechanics was a fledgling theory and there were only 2 billion people on the planet. Human society has changed more in the last 100 years than the last 500,000 years. THAT is why governments have more power today, to tackle the challenges that come along with those changes. Claiming religion has anything to do with that is idiotic. Religion is a sideshow. Christians are still worried about "the gays". You think Christianity is up for writing rules for Wall Street or the internet? The Bible didn't even get slavery right. No thanks.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  8. #78
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Religious freedom and freedom of conscience are usually meant to be interchangeable, I guess the only difference is that 'religious freedom' is more often associated with group actions and institutions (kind of like families and businesses) that might otherwise be subject to potentially oppressive laws that do not necessarily apply to individuals. Do you see a technical difference between the two, or is this just a linguistic preference based on personal feelings toward organized religion?

    I favor retaining the term so that its conceptual development is better remembered.
    My world view is not religious, but I have it and can have it because I have the freedom to believe what I want. The same freedom allows Beorn to believe what he wants. Yet it appears that his belief is more equal than mine, because his is 'religious' in nature. The privilege this inequality provides is, as we have seen in the other thread, used not only to defend itself, but often abused to all manner of ends. As long as there is legal inequality between belief systems, there is inequality between people. And I, for one, fail to see why one sort of world view should be more holy than all the others.

  9. #79
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Do some beliefs deserve more protection? Isn't that what this boils down to? Perhaps the founders recognized that religious freedoms were more frequently and egregiously violated than other freedoms. Even today, Christians are murdered in muslim nations and Christian charities are forced by the government to violate their beliefs (Obama vs the Little Sisters of Mercy). Since it is so tempting for the state to violate religious freedoms, it makes sense to put in more safeguards. If the state started persecuting people for their political ideology (as in N. Korea) or their scientific ideology, then we should look at putting more safeguards in those areas as well.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

Similar Threads

  1. Another blow to religious freedom
    By Lateralus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 222
    Last Post: 03-21-2014, 12:38 PM
  2. Problem of Religious bigotry
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-26-2013, 03:57 PM
  3. Religious Testimonies & Authenticity
    By Totenkindly in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 07-06-2011, 12:37 PM
  4. Yet another Islamist atrocity against religious freedom and free speech...
    By lowtech redneck in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 11-13-2010, 09:01 PM
  5. religious nutbars
    By darlets in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-13-2007, 06:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO