Do I have freedom FROM religion?

Originally posted by SaturnFX
If God gave all humans the right of life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness, then why is the history books filled with the opposite.
It is the establishment of mans enlightenment of the human condition that established these ideals and enforced them..
If God had any concern about government, personal freedom, etc...then why has this not been demonstrated throughout history the second one person decided to collar another against their will?

No, God did not grant me my freedom...mankinds social evolution did.

bing.com
right [ rīt ] 1.correct: accurate, or consistent with the facts or general belief
2.having correct opinion: holding a correct opinion about somebody or something
3.proper: correct with regard to use, function, or operation
Synonyms: correct, true, accurate, exact, precise, factual, veracious, dead-on, spot-on.
No one grants another rights, you take your "rights" or you leave them. The "freedom of speech" is pointless if you have nothing to say, and pointless still if what you say doesn't acutally help anyone who want help but are otherwise unable to help themselves.
Say for instance someone puts a gun to you and says, "Give me your money please." What would you do? You can CHOOSE to die with your money and have it stolen from your corpse, or you can CHOOSE to give your money over and maybe be spared, to say he FORCED you to give him your money is a matter of opinion imo.
When I was in the Military, my comrades and I were told to repeat things such as:
Drill Sergeant: "What makes the green grass grow?"
New Recruits: "THE BLOOD, THE BLOOD, THE BLOOD MAKES THE GREEN GRASS GROW!"
I told a fellow soldier matter of factly: "We're being brainwashed."
He said, "Yes, I agree."
If the Drill Sergeants met any sort of resistance whatsoever they would say,"No one put a gun to your head and made you sign up!"
There are some Soldiers I have immense respect for, and others should be and are, jailed.
The thing is, you can't blame any one person or group for the unhappiness YOU feel.
Own your feelings. Feelings are the baby and "logic" is the bathwater. The baby remains and the bathwater is constantly changing being renewed and is cleansing. Never stop learning, and especially dont' keep yourself from learning about religion if that's what you are going to be discussing frequently.
For instance, you credit mankind's social evolution for your freedom.
May I ask, just what sort of freedom is it you are claiming if you are unhappy with the way mankind's social evolution has become?

Originally posted by TheRedneck
The single fallacy in your argument, OP, is that you seem to think the government is not comprised of people. Accepting a job from the government does not in any way reduce the government agent's inalienable right to freedom of their religion. That means they have the right to follow the deity of their choosing, as you have the right to follow no deity. That means they have the right to practice their religion just as you have the right to practice none. That means they have the right to express their religion to others just as you have the right to express your disapproval of their religion.

Your rights do not trump the rights of others.

You do have the right to demand that you or your children not be required to pray in any government-sanctioned event. You do not have the right to demand that others be prohibited from praying in a similar circumstance. If, for instance, a teacher says a prayer in front of the class, that is the teacher's right. If a teacher demands that your child repeat after them, then that violates your right. So far as I know, nowhere in the US does a public school allow such.

It's the same old argument that I hear from people who are so upset that they have to hear others talking about their religion. No one has a right to force others to be silent! Everyone has the right to say what they think about the matter.

Now that I've covered the right, let's talk about simple tolerance. Can you not tolerate someone else having the same rights you do? Can you not tolerate someone asking you attend church with them? Why is that such a heinous thing? I don't attend a formal church, but I am constantly asked if I would like to go to church with someone... I simply smile and say "Thank you, but I'm not much of a church-goer". If they press on too far, I either leave or tell them to please drop it. I do not try to deny them their right to speak because I do not wish to be denied the right to speak.

Anger and resentment, which both cannot exist unless the person feeling chooses to allow them to exist, lead to bitterness and segregation. Bitterness and segregation lead to injustice and bigotry. Bigotry leads to subjugation and abuse. These then lead to misery and suffering.

Acceptance and tolerance lead to respect. Respect leads to equality. Equality leads to happiness for all.

TheRedneck

And if the teacher started each session with a prayer to satan and invited the youngsters to join them......

Your multiple fallacy above is that of assuming that if those inalienable rights to freedom of expression (religious in this context) were to stray from the state sanctioned norm, that every body would see it the way you do.

I absolutley wish it were as you state, but I know that if a muslim teacher were to start each session with a prayer to Allah, there would be uproar.

I think what the OP is trying to say is that the state apears to sanction a specific religion, and what you have in america seems to be absolute freedom to worship christianity, and limited freedom to worship other faiths.

ETA Actualy, what I should say is that while you have freedom to worship (almost) anything you like, you certainly dont have freedome to outwardly express it.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

Was it reprogramming or simply change of opinion? Some people mix the two.............

I can't answer that accurately as I tend to think there is almost no creative thinking going on in society. We are all products of influences around us and the only seemingly freedom we have is in exposure to begin with.

Yeah, we have freedom from religion. It's as simple as not paying attention to it. When I channel surf and see programs about religion and that prayer stuff, I just simply skip over it. Some of my friends talk about Jesus a lot - I listen, but I could care less. I'm always going to hear about stuff that doesn't interest me, so I suck it up and move on.

reply to post by idmonster

And if the teacher started each session with a prayer to satan and invited the youngsters to join them......

Well, you quoted my post but apparently didn't read it. Try this condensed version:

Originally posted by TheRedneck
If, for instance, a teacher says a prayer in front of the class, that is the teacher's right. If a teacher demands that your child repeat after them, then that violates your right.

A teacher has the right to pray or not. A student has the same right to pray or not. A teacher cannot therefore force a student to pray, and I would accept going so far as to say teachers of younger students, due to their position of authority and the tendency of the very young to accept suggestions without consideration, should not be inviting participation in a specific prayer.

I'm still trying to figure out why the particular religion has any bearing on the rights of people...

TheRedneck

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by SaturnFX
So, here is a question I have then...I have freedom of religion in the United States...I can choose whatever I want, be it christianity, buddism, spaghetti'ism, etc.

But, do I have freedom from religion? Can I go to public places and not have my children or I indoctrinated into any form?

Oh, you mean like the gay pride parades in every city every year? How about you move those inside so that those of US who want freedom from rampant amorality don't have to have OUR children subjected to THAT?

Tell you what, you can have a word removed from a building they day your buddies agree to never have another parade again where the evening news pukes feel compelled to shove those perverse images in our faces.

Deal?

The governments hold gay pride parades?
thought it was just a parade that anyone is allowed to have, including KKK and the like.

the gay pride parade is not a government function...don't like it, complain to the businesses and organizations that hold them.

Interesting response, since religion is not a function of government. I though religion was just personal beliefs that anyone was allowed to have, including KKK and the like.

So it's okay to ban if YOU don't like it, but something YOU like, it's off-limits?

Typical liberal mindset. Hypocrite.

Your failing to comprehend the thread.
not surprising
Typical conservative mindset. Idiot.
(not seeing how this helps in understanding..but then again, your not trying to understand, are you)

Idiot? Aren't you being a bit of a thread bully? Sitting at your computer, taking a swipe at anyone offering up an opinion that differs from yours, as though no one else is allowed an opinion?

I understand your post quite well. You don't want to see the word "God" anywhere in public. You equate seeing that word to "indoctrination" as though a single word could ever convey the complex belief system behind it. As though your child would somehow glean a complete understanding of Christianity and its history by reading those three letters on a statue in the park. Lots of Muslims and Jews and members of other religions pass by those statues and buildings every day, yet they are not instantly converted to Christianity. They drive past Christian churches, yet they are never compelled to pull into the parking lot to learn more. Yet ONE word has the power to corrupt a young mind forever.

And yes, I know what is coming next. You'll say that the government specifically prescribes the separation of church influence in state affairs, which is true. But the point YOU are missing is that the government does recognize the right of people to practice whatever religion they choose. It does NOT, however, prescribe remedy to people like you who get offended by printed language that is associated with religion. That is one of the tough breaks caused by another freedom the government provided by the first Amendment. They were tolerant, unlike you. The founding fathers were Christians, and they used Christian principles when writing the constitution, and did not hide that fact. Deal with it.

Using your heightened sense of offensiveness to single words, making your assumption that an entire cultural experience in its full context can be derived from the mere sighting of a single word, I should find LOTS of single, three-letter words offensive, but I don't. So tell me, Saturn, WHO is the intolerant one here?

Originally posted by Evanzsayz
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Can I go to a public place with my children and not have them see two gay guy's kissing....NO! There is your answer.

BINGO! YAHZTEE! Bing Bing Bing... END OF STORY...

To the poster who said lack of prayer in school is why our schools are going downhill fast, you mean it isn't the shoddy teaching, emphasis on attendance over performance, and general weakness of the overall curriculum? Hmm glad you were here to point out it's none of those things that are FACTUALLY happening and is instead caused by a lack of appeasement of your zombie sky god.

Honestly that comment was literal proof of how weak our school system has become. I didn't know you could pack that many logical fallacies into one sentence and still type it with a straight face.

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun

 

I just re-read my post. The word bad just aint there. The bad is all of it. Not one part THE WHOLE DAMN THING. ALL RELIGION is bullshat. IMHO. There will never be freedom from it nor true freedom from anything else that encompasse's religion. It's slavery, pure & simple. Good people do good things, Bad people do bad things, but when good people do bad things, that takes some religion. When there has to be hundreds of sites dedicated to the victims of molestation at the hands of the catholic church, that say's a whole damn bunch about religion. And the "Good People" involved in said religion.
Let folks chose for themselves, don't beat them over the head with it and make them feel lost with out it. I aint lost. I made up my own mind years ago. It's fairey tales of biblical proportions.

edit on 27-5-2012 by openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)

right over your head dude. That's great that you decided for yourself, I am all for that. However, you failed to address anything regarding my first response to you.

You keep using "good" and "bad" without any adherence to a foundation. Are you saying that all humanity has a sense of what is good and what is bad? If that's the case, then it shows that there ARE objective moral values, sort of like rules or laws of morals (not written laws or laws of the state).

For example, was what Hitler did to in WW II to the Jews good or bad?

Why is the year 0 that "Jesus" guys date of birth, what makes him so important we make him the year 0? Pretty sure people were well around before him, even recording time. AMIRITE?

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

I agree ive met many many of this crowd who are like that........yet ive met some that are not, they just make their choice, and religious things just dont bother them......they just dont subscribe to them and realize that other people do......

I agree and people like this you would never know they are an atheist. I have zero belief in the Muslin religion, but I can still greatly enjoy their culture, and that is the way I see religion, mostly as a culture. There are a lot of non-religious cultures out there too with their own social laws and rules, and I treat them the same way.

I also understand, no matter where you are on earth, that the majority will determine what rules society will play by....it is just the way we are, and there isn't a person on the planet that is happy with all the rules. I say live with it or move to where the rules fit your lifestyle.

Originally posted by Tresker
Why is the year 0 that "Jesus" guys date of birth, what makes him so important we make him the year 0? Pretty sure people were well around before him, even recording time. AMIRITE?

Might as well start somewhere, you want to start with 676,000 year of the human?

But to answer your question I would say that at one time the most educated were religious based and so we get a year zero....but the real question is why does it bother you?

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

I agree ive met many many of this crowd who are like that........yet ive met some that are not, they just make their choice, and religious things just dont bother them......they just dont subscribe to them and realize that other people do......

I agree and people like this you would never know they are an atheist. I have zero belief in the Muslin religion, but I can still greatly enjoy their culture, and that is the way I see religion, mostly as a culture. There are a lot of non-religious cultures out there too with their own social laws and rules, and I treat them the same way.

I also understand, no matter where you are on earth, that the majority will determine what rules society will play by....it is just the way we are, and there isn't a person on the planet that is happy with all the rules. I say live with it or move to where the rules fit your lifestyle.

edit on 28-5-2012 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)

This is interesting. Islam ("the Muslim religion") is almost identicle to Christianity. The term "Muslim" means nothing more than a person that follows Islam therefore Muslims as a whole do not have a culture. Afghans have a culture, Egyptians have a culture, Italians have a culture.

People please learn to seperate religion from the propaganda. Sharia law is not Islam it is the law of the land of the given culture. Allah is nothing more than the literal english translation of God. Islam is closer to Christianity than Judaism. I am neither a Muslim, Chrisitan or a Jew, but I'm a bit sick of the ignorance that has been brought on by propaganda. If you're going to discuss religion atleast know what you're talking about.

One more thing, you cannot be an athiest unless you don't believe in God. People that don't believe in religion are not an athiest unless they don't believe in God. You can seperate God from religion.

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

I agree ive met many many of this crowd who are like that........yet ive met some that are not, they just make their choice, and religious things just dont bother them......they just dont subscribe to them and realize that other people do......

Ironically, if I am ever talking with someone who falls into that category, I tend to listen closer to them than I do someone who is rabid about denigrating other religions. Why? Maybe because they seem more reasoned and more informed. And it goes beyond just atheists; I know plenty of Christians who seem to think it is their calling to get in people's faces, and I am sure the same exists in all of the major religions.

It's not a religious tolerance problem; it's a human tolerance problem. It has more in common with with racism, bigotry, and intolerance than with what one chooses to believe.

Excellent post!

TheRedneck

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by idmonster

And if the teacher started each session with a prayer to satan and invited the youngsters to join them......

Well, you quoted my post but apparently didn't read it. Try this condensed version:

Originally posted by TheRedneck
If, for instance, a teacher says a prayer in front of the class, that is the teacher's right. If a teacher demands that your child repeat after them, then that violates your right.

A teacher has the right to pray or not. A student has the same right to pray or not. A teacher cannot therefore force a student to pray, and I would accept going so far as to say teachers of younger students, due to their position of authority and the tendency of the very young to accept suggestions without consideration, should not be inviting participation in a specific prayer.

I'm still trying to figure out why the particular religion has any bearing on the rights of people...

TheRedneck

It shouldnt...but it does.

And you're right. i did miss the nuance around "demanding your child repeat after them".

However!

If a teacher exercises their right and prays in front of a class of minors, is it right?

I would argue no. A teacher is seen as an authority figure, and children are extremly maleable (psychologicaly).

I absolutley agree that the teacher has the right to perform whatever acts of worship they feel they need to, but I would also say that this should not be done in front of suceptable children.

I might be wrong, but i think the OP's point was that religion should be removed from from government, and schools are goverrenment institutions. Not should religion be removed...in total.

I have no issue with adults coming to a conclusion based on their own experience, education and belief, (those born agains are the most annoyingly evangelical, but at least they've made an informed decision.

A child is very suceptable to the behaviour of the adults in its life. (1 to 5 the parents - 5 to about 11 the teachers - after that forget it, its peer pressure all the way )

ETA - apologeeees for spellink, I blame the gin

reply to post by idmonster

It shouldnt...but it does.

I think you'll find that most people of all denominations and religions in the USA would agree with me that it doesn't matter. As a general rule, the more extremist a person is, the louder they scream. But in an election, it is not the loudest screamers who determine the leader and thus the policies; it is the majority who have their say behind a privacy curtain.

If a teacher exercises their right and prays in front of a class of minors, is it right?

I think that it depends on the students they are teaching.

From what I see around here, students up to the sixth grade have a single teacher all day. Since these are also the most susceptible to influence from an authority figure, then I would say no, a teacher should conduct their prayers in private. But if a teacher wanted to wear a cross or a pentagram or a Star of David necklace, then by all means they have the right to do so.

In my religion (Christianity) it is actually considered inappropriate to pray in public, save in a religious gathering. Jesus Himself mentioned this when listing the faults of the Pharisees, that they pray openly in public to garner favor among man instead of privately to garner favor from God.

If the students are in college, especially in a religion or history class where it might be seen as appropriate, I see no reason to deny a teacher the right to publicly say a prayer. Neither do I see a problem with teacher-led prayer at events if the students participating have no problem with it.

It becomes a question of appropriateness, with the final answer becoming a balancing act among a teacher's right to pray and a students right to not pray. If someone is forcing another to pray through coercion, then that is inappropriate; if all involved parties are choosing to pray, then it is not. And by involved parties, I do not mean attendees at special events; I mean those involved with putting on the event. Attendees are not required to pray along, or even to be present.

I might be wrong, but i think the OP's point was that religion should be removed from from government, and schools are goverrenment institutions. Not should religion be removed...in total.

True enough, but the end result if this is taken too far is that religion must be removed completely. For instance, the subject of statues of the Ten Commandments has arisen. I see nothing wrong with a statue of such displayed on a courthouse square, as long as the government does not request nor pay for it, and as long as the same opportunity is provided to any other religious group to erect a symbol. Without government solicitation or purchase, it is not a government function; it is an expression on public property of a group.

Anyone who does not wish to adhere to the Ten Commandments is free to not adhere to them. They are not public law and cannot be used to decide court cases. I walk past monuments all the time that I honestly cannot remember what they are after I leave the area; why is it so hard for others to do that?

Blanket refusal to allow groups to place monuments on public property is a violation of free speech, as well as a government policy against their particular religion. Even if the government's stance is spread equally to all religions, it is still a policy against religion. And no religion can be restricted that way according to the US Constitution. The end result is that religious freedom is actually diminished rather than encouraged by this policy, which is the exact opposite of what was intended.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by TheRedneck
True enough, but the end result if this is taken too far is that religion must be removed completely. For instance, the subject of statues of the Ten Commandments has arisen. I see nothing wrong with a statue of such displayed on a courthouse square, as long as the government does not request nor pay for it, and as long as the same opportunity is provided to any other religious group to erect a symbol. Without government solicitation or purchase, it is not a government function; it is an expression on public property of a group.

Anyone who does not wish to adhere to the Ten Commandments is free to not adhere to them. They are not public law and cannot be used to decide court cases. I walk past monuments all the time that I honestly cannot remember what they are after I leave the area; why is it so hard for others to do that?

Blanket refusal to allow groups to place monuments on public property is a violation of free speech, as well as a government policy against their particular religion. Even if the government's stance is spread equally to all religions, it is still a policy against religion. And no religion can be restricted that way according to the US Constitution. The end result is that religious freedom is actually diminished rather than encouraged by this policy, which is the exact opposite of what was intended.

TheRedneck

So if there was a courthouse that had the 10 commandments posted, would it be fair for an extremist group to post a banner saying "Death to the Infidels" since that is their religious belief? Would it be fair for the Westboro Baptist Church to post "The Dead Soldiers will burn in hell" since that's their belief?
The problem with allowing religious symbolism of any kind in government buildings is that it opens it up to ALL religious groups, even those we don't agree with and even those that are downright offensive to the majority.
That's why, even as a Christian, I say that government buildings, our money backed by the government, anything relating to government control should be excluded from religious influence.

reply to post by PurpleChiten

There is a place for balance in every situation. A monument with the Quran atop it, a lighted menora, a statue of Buddha... none of these violate any secular laws. A death threat does. There is nothing wrong with enforcing a ban on monuments that encourage illegal behavior... no church is allowed to have human sacrifices either, and that seems to have worked out well.

Westboro Baptist Church is not a religious organization.

It is possible to coexist with others, and that has been my point throughout this thread. There is no reason for anyone to bash religion; the law says it cannot be forced on anyone, so any attempt can be met with legal action. But such legal action is not conducive to anyone's interests if it is carried to an extreme wherein freedom of religious expression is throttled.

All that does is make Christians angry and defensive... which leads to atheists becoming defensive when they are accused of going too far...which makes Christians ignore legitimate problems when they do exist... which makes atheists feel persecuted...

Does anyone besides me see where this is going?

We live in a country that was founded in large part on religious freedom and freedom of expression. 236 years later, we again are being restricted by the government in our ability to freely express our religious views. The difference is that this time, we are doing it to ourselves, while back then it was the English Crown at fault.

TheRedneck

LOL! The Founders were not Christians. America was NOT founded as a Christian Nation. And the Religion WE ARE ALL INDOCTRINATED with in this Country is a sick form from Egypt. Its Messianic.

OP, you are trolling. You have nothing to worry about because its obvious who and what religion the Govt sponsors and its a far cry from Christianity. Your battle is about a CONCEPT. A PERCEPTION.

It does not exist. Except in your mind.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Hey SaturnFX we also have to swear on a holy book in our court systems.