PDA

View Full Version : "Freedom of Religion"--A one sided issue?


BlueStreak
11-11-2009, 11:45 PM
This afternoon I was talking to friend of mine who lives in the Clearwater area of Florida. He told me of a local billboard and the message it contains.

Now, to give a little backround, for years now the local "Big" churches have been renting billboard space and freely exhibiting their religious, social and political views. People complained, the churches fought, and largely won.
In many places the messages remain.

Recently an Atheist organization rented ONE billboard. It contains no images, and no political, or social references. It simply says in plain text, "Don't believe in God? You're not alone.", with the name of the organization in the lower right hand corner. According to my friend, the shit has hit the fan.
The same churches that fought to protect their own signs have filed lawsuits and petitioned the local politicians in a plea to force the Atheists to remove their message.

To me, this is obvious hypocracy at the least. It demonstrates the willingness of organized religion to marginalize and destroy opposing viewpoints.

I would think that "freedom of religion" should protect Christian and Atheist alike.

What do you say?

Dave

d-ray657
11-12-2009, 02:14 AM
I suppose I'm just not creative enough to fathom what type of lawsuit anyone could file because of that sign. But I'm just one of those left-wing lunatics who actually believes that the first amendment protects the ability of Americans to think, believe, and speak according to each person's conscience. Is what the churches are doing there what the tea party really wants?

I've said it once or twice here, that the only appropriate response to speech with which one disagrees is more effective speech. Unfortunately for the churches, the overreaction to the sign made it a much more effective message than if they had just left it alone. Another effective means of counter-speech would have been to put up a billboard that said they are praying for the guy who posted the atheist message - showed that they understood what the Gospels said about turning the other cheek. As it is, they have instead painted religion as vindictive and narrow-minded. If the local politicians pander to this crowd and take action against the billboard, they will cost the good citizens and tax=payers a bundle in attorneys fees. But at least they might get Sarah Palin to pay them a visit.

Regards,

D-Ray

merrylander
11-12-2009, 07:34 AM
For those close to the District you may have seen the Catholic Churches threat to the DC council regarding same sex marriage.

Maybe the Framers should have also said "freedom from religion".

piece-itpete
11-12-2009, 09:05 AM
When you say 'people complained', do you mean sued? I think it's crazy both ways but turnabout is fair play.

The Catholic churches in DC, that's entertaining politics imo, far better than court. There's an article about it today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/11/AR2009111116943.html?wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

Pete

Fast_Eddie
11-12-2009, 09:59 AM
Unfortunately for the churches, the overreaction to the sign made it a much more effective message than if they had just left it alone.

I tend to agree.

Gotta say though, if you're so insecure about your faith that you need to post it on a billboard, you probably don't need to be running a church. I went to Catholic schools. Can't quote the bible, but have heard it all enough to look up the odd quote from time to time. This seems an appropriate occasion.

"Matthew 6:6

But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

BlueStreak
11-12-2009, 10:16 AM
When you say 'people complained', do you mean sued? I think it's crazy both ways but turnabout is fair play.

The Catholic churches in DC, that's entertaining politics imo, far better than court. There's an article about it today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/11/AR2009111116943.html?wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

Pete

"Protested" would have been a better choice of words.

The Catholic Church thing is whacko.
Does the article not say the new law would PROHIBIT the city from forcing the church to perform same-sex marriages? Why would they have a problem with that, if they are opposed to said marriages? Or am I not reading it right?

Dave

spasmo55
11-12-2009, 10:23 AM
Tried the same crap on ad space on public buses in Des Moines, Atheists won the battle as they should have and their ads are back on the buses.

The precedent for freedom has been set for this issue, Thank God:D:D:D

Boreas
11-12-2009, 11:02 AM
The Catholic Church thing is whacko.
Does the article not say the new law would PROHIBIT the city from forcing the church to perform same-sex marriages? Why would they have a problem with that, if they are opposed to said marriages? Or am I not reading it right?

Dave

I guess you didn't read far enough into the article. The Catholic church is, among other things, an employer. As such, the new law would prohibit the Church from discriminating against gays and lesbians in employment or deny health coverage to the same sex partners of Church employees.

John

Fast_Eddie
11-12-2009, 11:07 AM
I guess you didn't read far enough into the article. The Catholic church is, among other things, an employer. As such, the new law would prohibit the Church from discriminating against gays and lesbians in employment or deny health coverage to the same sex partners of Church employees.

Interesting. Then again, the church (I am Catholic, btw) is also against adultry. I don't suppose they'd do well in court denying benefits for someone who cheated on their wife.

BlueStreak
11-12-2009, 11:55 AM
I guess you didn't read far enough into the article. The Catholic church is, among other things, an employer. As such, the new law would prohibit the Church from discriminating against gays and lesbians in employment or deny health coverage to the same sex partners of Church employees.

John


Ah, right you are. And said discrimination would be wrong, IMHO.

Dave

BlueStreak
11-12-2009, 11:56 AM
Tried the same crap on ad space on public buses in Des Moines, Atheists won the battle as they should have and their ads are back on the buses.

The precedent for freedom has been set for this issue, Thank God:D:D:D

Excellent! Good for them!!!

Dave

piece-itpete
11-12-2009, 12:17 PM
Ah, right you are. And said discrimination would be wrong, IMHO.

Dave

But here's the rub: it's a free country.

Pete

painter
11-12-2009, 12:38 PM
I tend to agree.

Gotta say though, if you're so insecure about your faith that you need to post it on a billboard, you probably don't need to be running a church. I went to Catholic schools. Can't quote the bible, but have heard it all enough to look up the odd quote from time to time. This seems an appropriate occasion.

"Matthew 6:6

But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."


I was brought up strict catholic...raised my children to live their faith daily. Do not believe in confessing sins to ANY man other than my God. Taught my children you pray in church...but do not have to be in church to pray. I am proud to say...they have chosen to follow the denomination that suits them best. All roads do indeed lead to Rome IMHO.
I respect and obey the Ten Commandments and the Corporal Works of Mercy.
Perfection is an idealogy not a human condition. :)

Boreas
11-12-2009, 12:51 PM
But here's the rub: it's a free country.

Pete

Meaning the Catholic church is free to discriminate against LGBT people? If so, could you explain how their "freedom" can be allowed to impinge upon the freedom of others?

John

BlueStreak
11-12-2009, 01:14 PM
Meaning the Catholic church is free to discriminate against LGBT people? If so, could you explain how their "freedom" can be allowed to impinge upon the freedom of others?

John

This is the true "rub".
At what point do my rights infringe upon the rights of others and vice versa?

Do I have a right to blast my stereo as loud as I like?
I believe so.
Do my neighbors have a right to "peace and quiet"?
I believe so.
So, how do we accomodate each other without making anyone pack up and move?
(I know that was a somewhat lame analogy.)

But.......
Does an employer have a right to employ who they wish?
I believe so.
Do employees have a right to choose their own lifestyle,
without suffering any retribution, discrimination, or harrasment
in the workplace?
I believe so.

I don't see how an employees private life affects their ability to perform a function for their employer. (So long as it takes place between consenting adults. But, that would be a criminal matter to be taken up in the secular courts anyways.)

So, what do we do? That's the rub, IMHO.

Dave

Fast_Eddie
11-12-2009, 02:08 PM
This is the true "rub".
At what point do my rights infringe upon the rights of others and vice versa?

Do I have a right to blast my stereo as loud as I like?
I believe so.


Well, no. Or, rather, yes, but not if it is annoying anyone.

Do my neighbors have a right to "peace and quiet"?
I believe so.
So, how do we accomodate each other without making anyone pack up and move?
(I know that was a somewhat lame analogy.)

No, that's it exactly. Your rights end where another's begin. You can play your stereo as loud as you like. But if you want to do so, it's on you to do it witout bothering me. So if you like to do it a lot, gonna have to find a farm house in the middle of nowhere. Free to do as you like. Not free to bug me. No conflict there.



But.......
Does an employer have a right to employ who they wish?
I believe so.

I don't. There are folks here quite happy to admit they don't like blacks for instance. Okay to hire all whites 'cause it's who they wish to employ? Not in my book.

Do employees have a right to choose their own lifestyle,
without suffering any retribution, discrimination, or harrasment
in the workplace?
I believe so.

Indeed!

I don't see how an employees private life affects their ability to perform a function for their employer. (So long as it takes place between consenting adults. But, that would be a criminal matter to be taken up in the secular courts anyways.)

So, what do we do? That's the rub, IMHO.

Dave

I think I laid out my points above, but would add - it doesn't seem real likely in my mind that a GLBT is going to want to go to work for a group that spends money persicuting them. Sure, there will be cases. But few and far between I'd wager. This is a made up crisis.

People's rights matter in my book. Plain and simple.

Here's the one that gets me- what if I want to get a job as a server at Hooters?

BlueStreak
11-12-2009, 03:54 PM
I see that you and I agree on more, in fact, everything in post#15.
It is the irony that I was attempting to point out.
I believe employer have the right to employ who they wish. But when abuses arise, and they will; What do you do? Obviously ones rights would have to be curbed a little to protect the right of the other.

Right, Eddie?

Dave

Hooters? Ha,ha. There's an old, and I suspect, contrived battle!

Fast_Eddie
11-12-2009, 04:07 PM
Hooters? Ha,ha. There's an old, and I suspect, contrived battle!

Looking into it as a second career when I retire. Doesn't pay much but I expect to do well in tips.

JJIII
11-12-2009, 06:48 PM
Looking into it as a second career when I retire. Doesn't pay much but I expect to do well in tips.


:eek: Remind me not to go to Denver! ;)

Fast_Eddie
11-12-2009, 07:06 PM
:eek: Remind me not to go to Denver! ;)

You say that! You had a look at that avatar of yours!?

elwood127
11-13-2009, 12:29 AM
The Catholic church has to advertise. How else are you going to get new people to pay for the priviledge of having their sons abused. Keep the flock stupid and pregnant. No birth control means new tender vittals. The one that screams the loudest about gays is usually gay.

JJIII
11-13-2009, 05:41 AM
You say that! You had a look at that avatar of yours!?



What!? You don't think my puppy is purty? ;)