Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

Freedom of religioin, requires......

Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2016 4:23:12 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
Freedom of religion requires freedom from religion.

There is no doubt that I have ever heard that the Founding Fathers of the USA expected the citizens to have freedom of religion. Most of them had fresh in their memory the state sponsored churches of Europe, and all of the problems that caused, like death to blasphemers, or those who choose to be baptized as adults, subsequent to an infant baptism, that they felt was done without their consent or understanding.

They believed that it was paramount that each individual could live out religious beliefs, to the extent that they were not contrary to the moral and civil law of the land. No human sacrifices, that sort of thing.
All of this is well expressed by the notion of "Freedom of Religion".

Here is the catch. If I am to be free to express my religion, I have to be free from your religion.
If I must attend to the rituals and beliefs of your religion, and they are contrary to my own, I will not have freedom of religion.

If I must honor your God, and do what pleases him, I have forsaken my own God.
If I am to have freedom of my religion, it is required that I am free of your religion.
When government sponsored activity, any government, local, state, federal, is in process, there can be no sanction (official permission or approval for an action) of any particular religion.

If the government endorses Allah, and his prophet Mohamed, how am I to feel if I am Christian?
If the city council is 100% Muslim, they do not have the right to open session with praise of Islam, and subject non-Muslim citizens to listen to it.
They do not have the right to impose sharia law on the community.

When government pays the bills, provides the time, gives the opportunity, it must be neutral in regards to religious beliefs.
The Founding Fathers believed they had the God given right to establish their nation, but they were clear that this God was of all people, not a particular group.
The God of Deism is nondenominational, and this is the God recognized in the constitution, and referred to by the Founding Fathers.
God the creator, of people free to worship any God, or not, as they choose.
Peepette
Posts: 1,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2016 6:21:58 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/4/2016 4:23:12 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
Freedom of religion requires freedom from religion.

There is no doubt that I have ever heard that the Founding Fathers of the USA expected the citizens to have freedom of religion. Most of them had fresh in their memory the state sponsored churches of Europe, and all of the problems that caused, like death to blasphemers, or those who choose to be baptized as adults, subsequent to an infant baptism, that they felt was done without their consent or understanding.

They believed that it was paramount that each individual could live out religious beliefs, to the extent that they were not contrary to the moral and civil law of the land. No human sacrifices, that sort of thing.
All of this is well expressed by the notion of "Freedom of Religion".

Here is the catch. If I am to be free to express my religion, I have to be free from your religion.
If I must attend to the rituals and beliefs of your religion, and they are contrary to my own, I will not have freedom of religion.

If I must honor your God, and do what pleases him, I have forsaken my own God.
If I am to have freedom of my religion, it is required that I am free of your religion.
When government sponsored activity, any government, local, state, federal, is in process, there can be no sanction (official permission or approval for an action) of any particular religion.

If the government endorses Allah, and his prophet Mohamed, how am I to feel if I am Christian?
If the city council is 100% Muslim, they do not have the right to open session with praise of Islam, and subject non-Muslim citizens to listen to it.
They do not have the right to impose sharia law on the community.

When government pays the bills, provides the time, gives the opportunity, it must be neutral in regards to religious beliefs.
The Founding Fathers believed they had the God given right to establish their nation, but they were clear that this God was of all people, not a particular group.
The God of Deism is nondenominational, and this is the God recognized in the constitution, and referred to by the Founding Fathers.
God the creator, of people free to worship any God, or not, as they choose.

This is correct, but has been bastardized by several states, an effort to permit religious prejudice. It extends the freedom of religion from an individuals ability to practice, into the public sphere to demonize that who do not share a particular belief system. Those who do not know their history do not realize during the colonial era various Protestant sects, Catholics and Jews had battles between one another, labeling each other as heretics and heathens. Various colonies instituted strict rules of religious observance through governing bodies. People who did not follow these rules or share the belief system instituted were often banished and sometimes hanged. There was little religious tolerance. The founding fathers were privy to this kind of intolerance. Most were apart of the Enlightenment movement (Deist), though saw the merits of religious institutions. Their goal was to balance the right of individuals to practice their faith against the needs of the whole; one would not infringe upon the other. These Freedom of Religion Laws that have been recently instituted harken back to this era.
RookieApologist
Posts: 469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2016 7:23:19 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/4/2016 4:23:12 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
Freedom of religion requires freedom from religion.

There is no doubt that I have ever heard that the Founding Fathers of the USA expected the citizens to have freedom of religion. Most of them had fresh in their memory the state sponsored churches of Europe, and all of the problems that caused, like death to blasphemers, or those who choose to be baptized as adults, subsequent to an infant baptism, that they felt was done without their consent or understanding.

They believed that it was paramount that each individual could live out religious beliefs, to the extent that they were not contrary to the moral and civil law of the land. No human sacrifices, that sort of thing.
All of this is well expressed by the notion of "Freedom of Religion".

Here is the catch. If I am to be free to express my religion, I have to be free from your religion.
If I must attend to the rituals and beliefs of your religion, and they are contrary to my own, I will not have freedom of religion.

If I must honor your God, and do what pleases him, I have forsaken my own God.
If I am to have freedom of my religion, it is required that I am free of your religion.
When government sponsored activity, any government, local, state, federal, is in process, there can be no sanction (official permission or approval for an action) of any particular religion.

If the government endorses Allah, and his prophet Mohamed, how am I to feel if I am Christian?
If the city council is 100% Muslim, they do not have the right to open session with praise of Islam, and subject non-Muslim citizens to listen to it.
They do not have the right to impose sharia law on the community.

When government pays the bills, provides the time, gives the opportunity, it must be neutral in regards to religious beliefs.
The Founding Fathers believed they had the God given right to establish their nation, but they were clear that this God was of all people, not a particular group.
The God of Deism is nondenominational, and this is the God recognized in the constitution, and referred to by the Founding Fathers.
God the creator, of people free to worship any God, or not, as they choose.

Didn't get past the asinine first sentence.
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2016 8:38:02 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/4/2016 7:23:19 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 11/4/2016 4:23:12 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
Freedom of religion requires freedom from religion.

There is no doubt that I have ever heard that the Founding Fathers of the USA expected the citizens to have freedom of religion. Most of them had fresh in their memory the state sponsored churches of Europe, and all of the problems that caused, like death to blasphemers, or those who choose to be baptized as adults, subsequent to an infant baptism, that they felt was done without their consent or understanding.

They believed that it was paramount that each individual could live out religious beliefs, to the extent that they were not contrary to the moral and civil law of the land. No human sacrifices, that sort of thing.
All of this is well expressed by the notion of "Freedom of Religion".

Here is the catch. If I am to be free to express my religion, I have to be free from your religion.
If I must attend to the rituals and beliefs of your religion, and they are contrary to my own, I will not have freedom of religion.

If I must honor your God, and do what pleases him, I have forsaken my own God.
If I am to have freedom of my religion, it is required that I am free of your religion.
When government sponsored activity, any government, local, state, federal, is in process, there can be no sanction (official permission or approval for an action) of any particular religion.

If the government endorses Allah, and his prophet Mohamed, how am I to feel if I am Christian?
If the city council is 100% Muslim, they do not have the right to open session with praise of Islam, and subject non-Muslim citizens to listen to it.
They do not have the right to impose sharia law on the community.

When government pays the bills, provides the time, gives the opportunity, it must be neutral in regards to religious beliefs.
The Founding Fathers believed they had the God given right to establish their nation, but they were clear that this God was of all people, not a particular group.
The God of Deism is nondenominational, and this is the God recognized in the constitution, and referred to by the Founding Fathers.
God the creator, of people free to worship any God, or not, as they choose.

Didn't get past the asinine first sentence.

I recommend remedial prepositional training.
Tree_of_Death
Posts: 766
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2016 8:43:57 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/4/2016 4:23:12 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
Freedom of religion requires freedom from religion.

There is no doubt that I have ever heard that the Founding Fathers of the USA expected the citizens to have freedom of religion. Most of them had fresh in their memory the state sponsored churches of Europe, and all of the problems that caused, like death to blasphemers, or those who choose to be baptized as adults, subsequent to an infant baptism, that they felt was done without their consent or understanding.

They believed that it was paramount that each individual could live out religious beliefs, to the extent that they were not contrary to the moral and civil law of the land. No human sacrifices, that sort of thing.
All of this is well expressed by the notion of "Freedom of Religion".

Here is the catch. If I am to be free to express my religion, I have to be free from your religion.
If I must attend to the rituals and beliefs of your religion, and they are contrary to my own, I will not have freedom of religion.

If I must honor your God, and do what pleases him, I have forsaken my own God.
If I am to have freedom of my religion, it is required that I am free of your religion.
When government sponsored activity, any government, local, state, federal, is in process, there can be no sanction (official permission or approval for an action) of any particular religion.

If the government endorses Allah, and his prophet Mohamed, how am I to feel if I am Christian?
If the city council is 100% Muslim, they do not have the right to open session with praise of Islam, and subject non-Muslim citizens to listen to it.
They do not have the right to impose sharia law on the community.

When government pays the bills, provides the time, gives the opportunity, it must be neutral in regards to religious beliefs.
The Founding Fathers believed they had the God given right to establish their nation, but they were clear that this God was of all people, not a particular group.
The God of Deism is nondenominational, and this is the God recognized in the constitution, and referred to by the Founding Fathers.
God the creator, of people free to worship any God, or not, as they choose.

The God of deism is denominational--it excludes non-theistic religions like Buddhism and Taoism and polytheistic ones like Hinduism. To refer in any government office to one God is unconstitutional.
"If life were easy, it wouldn't be difficult."--Kermit the Frog

#Treebrokethechurchbells--DD

"I am after all the purveyor of intellectually dishonest propaganda." --YYW
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2016 8:53:37 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/4/2016 8:43:57 PM, Tree_of_Death wrote:
At 11/4/2016 4:23:12 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
Freedom of religion requires freedom from religion.

There is no doubt that I have ever heard that the Founding Fathers of the USA expected the citizens to have freedom of religion. Most of them had fresh in their memory the state sponsored churches of Europe, and all of the problems that caused, like death to blasphemers, or those who choose to be baptized as adults, subsequent to an infant baptism, that they felt was done without their consent or understanding.

They believed that it was paramount that each individual could live out religious beliefs, to the extent that they were not contrary to the moral and civil law of the land. No human sacrifices, that sort of thing.
All of this is well expressed by the notion of "Freedom of Religion".

Here is the catch. If I am to be free to express my religion, I have to be free from your religion.
If I must attend to the rituals and beliefs of your religion, and they are contrary to my own, I will not have freedom of religion.

If I must honor your God, and do what pleases him, I have forsaken my own God.
If I am to have freedom of my religion, it is required that I am free of your religion.
When government sponsored activity, any government, local, state, federal, is in process, there can be no sanction (official permission or approval for an action) of any particular religion.

If the government endorses Allah, and his prophet Mohamed, how am I to feel if I am Christian?
If the city council is 100% Muslim, they do not have the right to open session with praise of Islam, and subject non-Muslim citizens to listen to it.
They do not have the right to impose sharia law on the community.

When government pays the bills, provides the time, gives the opportunity, it must be neutral in regards to religious beliefs.
The Founding Fathers believed they had the God given right to establish their nation, but they were clear that this God was of all people, not a particular group.
The God of Deism is nondenominational, and this is the God recognized in the constitution, and referred to by the Founding Fathers.
God the creator, of people free to worship any God, or not, as they choose.

The God of deism is denominational--it excludes non-theistic religions like Buddhism and Taoism and polytheistic ones like Hinduism. To refer in any government office to one God is unconstitutional.

Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but some Buddhists are Theists. Honest.
I have had some heated debates where my position was that Buddhists are not required to have a belief in God. The other person insisted they did. Viet Nam versions in particular seem so inclined.
Nothing in the Taoist belief system insists no belief in God. Some do, some do not.
As for polytheistic religions, you forgot to mention Christianity.
Jefferson and others thought the trinity was nonsense, but they tolerated each other, no problem.
Some forms of Deism resemble Pantheism, you know, God is everywhere.
Deist have ben accused of being Pantheistic.

That dog don't hunt.
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2016 8:55:04 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/4/2016 8:53:37 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
At 11/4/2016 8:43:57 PM, Tree_of_Death wrote:
At 11/4/2016 4:23:12 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
Freedom of religion requires freedom from religion.

There is no doubt that I have ever heard that the Founding Fathers of the USA expected the citizens to have freedom of religion. Most of them had fresh in their memory the state sponsored churches of Europe, and all of the problems that caused, like death to blasphemers, or those who choose to be baptized as adults, subsequent to an infant baptism, that they felt was done without their consent or understanding.

They believed that it was paramount that each individual could live out religious beliefs, to the extent that they were not contrary to the moral and civil law of the land. No human sacrifices, that sort of thing.
All of this is well expressed by the notion of "Freedom of Religion".

Here is the catch. If I am to be free to express my religion, I have to be free from your religion.
If I must attend to the rituals and beliefs of your religion, and they are contrary to my own, I will not have freedom of religion.

If I must honor your God, and do what pleases him, I have forsaken my own God.
If I am to have freedom of my religion, it is required that I am free of your religion.
When government sponsored activity, any government, local, state, federal, is in process, there can be no sanction (official permission or approval for an action) of any particular religion.

If the government endorses Allah, and his prophet Mohamed, how am I to feel if I am Christian?
If the city council is 100% Muslim, they do not have the right to open session with praise of Islam, and subject non-Muslim citizens to listen to it.
They do not have the right to impose sharia law on the community.

When government pays the bills, provides the time, gives the opportunity, it must be neutral in regards to religious beliefs.
The Founding Fathers believed they had the God given right to establish their nation, but they were clear that this God was of all people, not a particular group.
The God of Deism is nondenominational, and this is the God recognized in the constitution, and referred to by the Founding Fathers.
God the creator, of people free to worship any God, or not, as they choose.

The God of deism is denominational--it excludes non-theistic religions like Buddhism and Taoism and polytheistic ones like Hinduism. To refer in any government office to one God is unconstitutional.

Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but some Buddhists are Theists. Honest.
I have had some heated debates where my position was that Buddhists are not required to have a belief in God. The other person insisted they did. Viet Nam versions in particular seem so inclined.
Nothing in the Taoist belief system insists no belief in God. Some do, some do not.
As for polytheistic religions, you forgot to mention Christianity.
Jefferson and others thought the trinity was nonsense, but they tolerated each other, no problem.
Some forms of Deism resemble Pantheism, you know, God is everywhere.
Deist have ben accused of being Pantheistic.

That dog don't hunt.

I should add that non-theist Buddhists are very understanding of their theist brothers.
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2016 9:11:58 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
Look at this:

Polydeism (from Greek `0;_9;_5;_5;_9;^3; ( 'poloi' ), meaning 'many', and Latin deus meaning God) is a polytheistic form of Deism encompassing the belief that the universe was the collective creation of multiple Gods, each of whom created a piece of the Universe or Multiverse and then ceased to intervene in its evolution.
https://en.wikipedia.org...