Biden Says Religious Freedom Is Key to Fighting Extremism

[rug]

By The Associated Press
NEW YORK — Oct 18, 2015, 5:38 AM ET

Vice President Joe Biden says protecting religious liberty is a moral imperative that defends society against violent extremists.

Biden received the Athenagoras Human Rights Award at a ceremony Saturday night in New York. It's the highest award bestowed by the Greek Orthodox Church.

Biden says terrorist groups like al-Qaida and the Islamic State pervert Islam to justify horrific acts. He says America will be strong as long as it's a beacon for human rights.

The vice president says religious values are entirely consistent with civic values in the U.S. He's crediting his Catholic faith for giving him "refuge and reassurance."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/biden-religious-freedom-key-fighting-extremism-34549154

[atreides1]

1. That's one side of the coin.

The Westboro Baptist church has religious freedom, as does the Word of God church,...and yet both are examples of how the definition of religious freedom can be usurped by extremists!

I would counter by suggesting to the Vice President, that religious freedom can also be the key to extremisim!

[Rebkeh]

2. Not exactly

Corrupted religion, yes. But you can make that argument about pretty much anything. What inherently neutral and (sometimes) valuable thing doesn't have some kind of distorted form?

[cleanhippie]

5. You imply that there is something inherently good that comes from religion.

What would that be? Can the same be found in a secular source?

[Rebkeh]

6. Kind of

To my mind, religion is inherently neutral. Good can come from it just as easily as bad can. History is filled with examples of both and as for a secular source - same thing. Good can come from secularism just as easily as bad can. Personally, I don't see why they are often framed as mutually exclusive.

Meaning I don't see why they are in a binary. Why must it be one or the other when we can have one and the other.

[cleanhippie]

7. I strongly disagree.

Religion touts itself as inherently good, meaning if one believes, one will be a better person.

Anything "good" one would say comes from religion can be found from a secular source, so with the "bad" that does come from religion exclusively, why do we need it at all.

IOW, it's not binary, but unnecessary.

[Rebkeh]

8. It may be available from a secular source but

what does that have to do with anything? All options should be equally available to all people, to deny one their right to be religious is wrong. To deny one's right to be free from religion is equally wrong. Besides, both attempts are moot anyway. You can't enforce secularism as a personal world view any more than you can force one to believe. What are you gonna do, threaten them if they don't comply? The whole thing is silly and the fix is pretty simple:

If you don't like religion, don't be religious.

[cleanhippie]

9. Wow, you dialed it right up to 10, didn't you?

Who said anything about anyone being forced to do anything?

We're talking about concepts and ideas here, and I can see that my thoughts on the subject have really ruffled your feathers. Your response seems unrelated to anything I said in my previous post.

Does challenging long-held ideas about religion really bother you so much that you must create strawmen in order to feel less threatened? Why?

[Fumesucker]

3. A worshiper of the Screaming Chicken ~would~ say that

[meow2u3]

4. Only problem is with those whose idea of religious freedom IS religious extremism

Case in point: the religious right in the US, who pervert Christianity to justify overthrowing the Constitution and rule of law and replace it with totalitarian rule with evangelical Protestantism as the official religion.

[Rebkeh]

10. Agreed n/t