Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
Mon Mar 30, 2015, 11:15 AM Mar 2015

Serious 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.

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Serious question: What happens when religious freedoms collide? (Original Post) DetlefK Mar 2015 OP
Turns out person A is actually a corporation, so it wins 5-4. n/t Orsino Mar 2015 #1
The homosexual loses Takket Mar 2015 #2
Religious bigotry is bound to conflict with religious freedom. stone space Mar 2015 #3
All of the above ^^^^^ world wide wally Mar 2015 #4
'Religious' freedom is given way too much leeway Yorktown Mar 2015 #5
Well that's not the best analogy el_bryanto Mar 2015 #9
How about a religious belief Downwinder Mar 2015 #6
Which one is the Octopus and which one is the crab? snooper2 Mar 2015 #7
Indiana is counting on conservative local and state judges to decide Zorra Mar 2015 #8

Takket

(21,625 posts)
2. The homosexual loses
Mon Mar 30, 2015, 11:20 AM
Mar 2015

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.

 

Yorktown

(2,884 posts)
5. 'Religious' freedom is given way too much leeway
Mon Mar 30, 2015, 11:29 AM
Mar 2015

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)
9. Well that's not the best analogy
Mon Mar 30, 2015, 12:36 PM
Mar 2015

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)
6. How about a religious belief
Mon Mar 30, 2015, 11:34 AM
Mar 2015

that property not being used is community property and any individual with a use for that property may use it.

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
8. Indiana is counting on conservative local and state judges to decide
Mon Mar 30, 2015, 12:24 PM
Mar 2015

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.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Serious question: What ha...