General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSerious question: What happens when religious freedoms collide?
Let's say, person A claims a deeply held religious believe and sues for the right to be accommodated so that belief will go un-violated.
Let's say, person B claims a deeply held religious believe and sues for the right to be accommodated so that belief will go un-violated.
Now, what if the claims of A and B are mutually exclusive?
For example:
What if a Christian denies service to a homosexual on account that homosexuality is illegal in the Old Testament, but said homosexual is member of a religion that believes that all people are equal, regardless of sexual preference, and should be treated as equals?
There is no scenario where both religious freedoms can be upheld at the same time.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Takket
(21,625 posts)This has nothing to do with religion. That is just the sheep's clothing on the wolf. Therefor the homosexual's argument is never going to be taken seriously.
stone space
(6,498 posts)But they are not the same thing.
world wide wally
(21,754 posts)Yorktown
(2,884 posts)Islam says on Judgment Day, all Jews will be hunted down. If I were to say on Halloween Day, all Pygmies, Zulus or Eskimos will be hunted down, I end up in jail for incitation to violence. And rightly so.
It's high time religions were made to bow to the common set of rules.
Lest I decide to create my own religion, giving me the right to rob the bank next door to give alms to myself, as I would have decided I am poor in the eyes of the Lord I just made up.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)Halloween is October 31 - Judgement day is . . . what day is judgement day anyway?
Also many Christians believe that the second coming will also result in a lot of non-Christians being killed as well.
Bryant
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)that property not being used is community property and any individual with a use for that property may use it.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)&feature=youtu.be
Zorra
(27,670 posts)in favor of the RW self-identified christian.
In several of the most liberal localities in Indiana, there are anti-discrimination laws in place to protect LGBT persons from discrimination.
In the conservative localities, no such protections are in place. The way the Indiana law is written, the government will be liable for costs of litigation if they lose a case in which they are trying to protect the rights of an LGBT person who has been discriminated against. The government would then have to seriously assess their possibilities of winning a discrimination case brought by a victimized LGBT indivdual.
I believe, in reality, that this law is primarily a vehicle for RW self-identified christians to express and justify their hatred for LGBT, and is a blanket attempt by RW self-identified christians to humiliate LGBT persons, and to self-affirm and legally affirm that they are *superior* to some group.
The ability to legally discriminate against LGBT is actually more important to most of them than the actual act of discriminating against LGBT.
At this very moment, all across the US, RW self-identified christians are smugly and joyfully celebrating the fact that they can legally express their hate and self-conceived superiority over their chosen vicitms in Indiana, and their dearest wish is to be able to do this everywhere in the world.
If all of a sudden every LGBT person magically became straight, RW self-identified christians would be totally lost, because they would have no one to hate, and therefore, they would have no basis or reason for their religious beliefs.
I suspect they would then go after the Jewish people, if they could not find another easy victim group like LGBT who are not specifically recognized as fully federally protected under the Constitution from predation and discrimination by christofascists.