General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums37,615 people sign unamerican petition to "outlaw offending prophets of major religions"
I was looking around the White House Petition site. There is a petition there to "outlaw offending prophets of major religions."
- Moses
- Jesus
- Mohammad
Such acts offend billions of people, and cause unrest in the world. Furthermore, acts like this contradict the essence of coexistence and peace among humans. Labeling these acts as freedom of speech is similar to labeling murder as freedom of expression!
We all know the chaos such acts can cause, but it's difficult to answer the question: What do they contribute to our nation, or humanity in general?
Created: Sep 17, 2012
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/outlaw-offending-prophets-major-religions/94kL1tsN
I consider this petition unamerican and the people that signed it betrayers of the first amendment. I'm all for religious tolerance, but this type of infringement of speech and promotion of religion is inappropriate and the opposite of what our founders envisioned. It's embarrassing that a petition like this would get so many signatures.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)The one that would outlaw unamerican expressions of restrictions on speech?
Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Sure, a law to this effect would be unconstitutional as framed.
As a practical matter, we do accept certain types of restrictions such as making it illegal to print counterfeit $100 bills. Is that an infringement of freedom of the press?
I like $100 bills, because I think they look cool. I don't have many of them, but I do have a press. So let's say I engrave some plates and print up a bunch of $100 bills for the purpose of decorating my walls. I have no intention of attempting to spend them. Explain, by reference to the First Amendment why it should, or should not, be legal for me to print my decorative accurate reproductions of these fine wallet-sized masterpieces.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)That does the job pretty nicely IMO.
sakabatou
(42,157 posts)But the 1st Amendment says I can offend your prophets. In fact, I'll do it now.
*goes off to draw Muhhamed*
rocktivity
(44,576 posts)or not believing in them?
And why ignore other religions -- it should be okay to offend THEIR prophets simply because they aren't as popular?
It sounds like they're confusing what's illegal with what isn't constitutional. In America, ALL religions are created equal.
rocktivity
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)JI7
(89,252 posts)jsr
(7,712 posts)Idiots.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Maybe we should have them executed, then give them posthumous awards for bravery and courage.
Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)But the juxtaposition struck me as funny, just one of those things.
0zone
(60 posts)...why don't they themselves respond in kind? Next they will try to pass a law against offending anyone who is dead and gone.
0zone
(60 posts)Romney?
Ryan?
Some crazed Republican?
Ron Obvious
(6,261 posts)In addition to the obvious free speech violations, do the signers of initiatives like this realise it would put the government in the position of defining what a a 'major' religion is and who is a 'prophet'?
Are all of them happy with L. Ron Hubbard, Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, Jim Jones, David Koresh, the Reverend Moon et al to be on such a list.
I imagine that other than the knee-jerk cultural relativists, the signers of this petition only have one particular prophet in mind.