Fannie's Room
This situation is so alarming to me, and I know I'm not alone.
1. The very people who appeal to "freedom of religion" seek to invalidate any religion that is not their own.
"They have no doctrinal belief about God. He/She/It can be whatever you want he/she/it to be. Or you can choose to not believe in a god at all. Or you can believe in many gods. It doesn't really matter....I could continue indefinitely describing this so-called "church" as a false church. Again, for more details see this helpful site for information on a wide range of religions, cults and denominations.""
Um, just to be clear, in order to enjoy the benefit of living in a country where we have freedom of religion, one must also realize that others will ALSO enjoy that freedom, even those that don't share the same religion or beliefs that you have. Why has it become so critical to the practice of one religion to try to invalidate all other religions?
2. Even further, in a country where we all value freedom of religion, why is it one reliigion's mission to take actiona against another?
"Homosexual activists will try to persuade the public and legislators alike that speech and/or action taken against the pro-homosexual views of this "church" must be silenced.
Did I read this passage incorrectly? Is he not saying that action SHOULD BE TAKEN against these churches and that homaseksuals will try persuade the public to silence this action? Um, I wouldn't be ashamed of trying to encourage tolerance among different religious views. Is it so abherrant to expect such a thing in a nation that prides itself on freedom of religion? Freeedom of religion logically leads to many religions. I would never ask anyone to abide by or have faith in multiple religions. But I would expect them to respect others' freedom to worship just as they enjoy their own freedom to worship.
3. Finally, I don't think this is about censorship vs. non-censorship. Freedom of speech does not necessarily mean freedom from accountability for that speech. Those who perpectuate hate against gays: those who liken us to terrorists, those who blame us for any wrong done to the US, or who claim we are unraveling the country or who say that we are out to destroy family... these people are not directly responsible for a man whose gone off the deepend choosing to shoot up a church of gay-accepting people. But they must also realize that their words matter. Do you know what the majority of people would do to Osama Bin Laden if they had a chance? What people would do to someone who threatened their family? Humans are willing to do heinous things to people who they perceive to be a threat to their families or who they belive have perpetrated violence upon them or their country. Anti-gay propoganda demonizes gays and makes it a little easier for an unstable person to take vengeance into their own hands.
"Did I read this passage incorrectly? Is he not saying that action SHOULD BE TAKEN against these churches and that homaseksuals will try persuade the public to silence this action?"
I think the implication that words/actions should be taken against these churches is definitely there.
The big fault I see of fundamentalist Christianity is that its very nature demands it to be intolerant- not only are other faiths not legitimate, but many in the faith see it as their religious duty to try to convert other people. Laws that prohibit state institutions from trying to convert people into fundamentalism, necessarily then, are seen as infringing on fundamentalism. Basically, these people won't be satisfied until our nation truly is a fundamentalist Christian nation eagerly awaiting the Second Coming. And, I think many would readily admit that.
If the anti-gay forces were to admit that their words are in any way responsible, they would have to conclude that the Bible itself is responsible for a lot of bloodshed.
Fannie,
I think you're right. In which case, they should not plead freedom of religion, because that, in fact, is not what they want. In fact, they hate that others have the freedom to practice other religions. What they really want is state sanctioned religion, which just so happens to be their particular religion, Christianity, and not only that, but their particular denomination of Christianity.
Is this not ludicrous to them? Have we not learned from history and from current events that even state sanctioned religion breeds factions and hairsplitting over nuances in interpretations of text and between denominations and variations even within the same religion.
Religion, in part, serves as means to deal with the human condition. All people question why we are here, how we got here, and what our purpose is. If each human doesn't have the freedom to respond to that condition with their own beliefs or non-beliefs (which are still kind of beliefs) as long as they don't cause harm to others, then that restriction infringes on the very nature of what it is to be human. And that simply cannot lead to peaceful living among many people. We should be thankful that our nation does not infinge on the personal and very human decision to choose what one believes. And if it means living among others who choose to belive something different, ten that is the sacrifice for being able to choose your own belief.
I know I'm preaching to the choir here. But I am aghast that people who enjoy freedom of religion currently advocate state sanctioned religion.
hammerpants said,
"But I am aghast that people who enjoy freedom of religion currently advocate state sanctioned religion."
In essence, Christian dominionists use freedom of religion to try to abolish freedom of religion.
The Holy Bible is very clear: death to homosexuals. Leviticus
Thank you, "Christian" (IP 70.241.208.90 of Southwest Texas Junior College), for today's flaming bag of dog shit.
Any more veiled threats you would like to make from your place of study or employment?
Christian,
But seriously, please stop commenting here. Now that I've realized the article you commented on was specifically about a Christian who murdered members of a gay-friendly church, I am reporting your comment to the proper authorities.
Threats like that need to be taken seriously given recent events with churches and self-described "churches."
Commenting by HaloScan
