Which of the following is a form of religious oppression?

Question

1a. Putting "in god we trust" on the money in violation of the Constitution
1b. Undoing that prior injustice

2a. Putting "under god" into the pledge of allegiance in violation of the Constitution
2b. Undoing that prior injustice

3a. Forcing all public school children to participate in daily prayers in violation of the Constitution
3b. Undoing that prior injustice

4a. Erecting idols of the 10 commandments in public places in violation of the Constitution
4b. Undoing that prior injustice

5a. Restricting who can have sexual relations with who to placate your religious sensibilities
5b. Undoing that prior injustice

6a. Enacting all manner of laws restricting certain types of behavior at certain times to placate your religious sensibilities
6b. Undoing that prior injustice

7a. Using tax dollars to directly fund religious activity via faith based initiative in direct violation of the Constitution
7b. Undoing that prior injustice

Feel free to add more.

Sorry "anyone", you are simply flat wrong. The Constitution prohibits Congress from passing any laws RESPECTING the establishment of religion. This is key, as it means not only can they not institute a national religion, it means they can not in any way give deferrence to religion. It IS a form of oppression to place religious sentiments on the money supply, etc., as it is a state sponsored promotion of someone else's religious perspective. Taken to the extreme, my perspective could be completely squelched by drowning it out with crap like that. Oppression can range from the trivial to the agredious.

'honey', you clearly don't like the Constitution. I suggest you take your own advice and move somewhere where supreme law of the land is more to your liking.

Answer 1

Giving people "vouchers" so they can go to a religious school and my taxes can pay for it.

That may fit under seven as it is vague. I do not expect you to spell them all out though as we would not have time.

So would funding church based charities that "help" the homeless and then pray with them.

Oh what about laws concerning stores not being open on Sundays in some areas.

The IRS is cracking down on churches that preach politics and tell people how to vote as well. They are losing tax exempt status.

OH I forgot the one that pisses me off the most! Being able to discriminate against the non-religious now:
http://www.sptimes.com/2006/08/13/Columns/Non_Christians_need_n.shtml

Answer 2

Your definition of oppression needs a little work. Expression and the freedom to express is not oppressive. Not allowing choices IS oppressive.
Neither 1 nor 2 is an example of oppression.
3a is.
4 isn't.
5a, 6a and 7a are all oppressive.
In particular, either forcing or forbidding prayer in school is oppression. Having a motto on our money doesn't mean anything. You don't have to swear that you believe in the motto to use the money. You also have an option when it comes to reciting the Pledge of Allegience. You can say it or not say it. That isn't oppression. When it comes to using public money for religious purposes, however, that doesn't allow any personal choice and it is therefore uncontitutional.
Your Ten Commandments comment is rather confusing. You call an installation of the commandments an act of idolatry, but the concept of idolatry being sinful comes from the commandments you are referring to.
I'm going to leave that issue and go into Constitutional application. Our Consitution says that our government cannot make any laws regarding the free practice of religion. That means that we can't force any particular religion on anyone, we can't force people to practice religion at all and we also cannot force anyone NOT to be religious. We can't make any laws either for or against religion. The Consitution does not say that religious values must be excluded from our lives. It merely gives us the right to choose. I believe that we have the right to set standards in our local communities, but no set of standards other than our Constitution can speak for our entire nation. The drawbacks of that idea have been pointed out to me. Morality laws can vary from state to state. I'm willing to accept that. If the majority of the people in, say, Ohio want the Ten Commandments in their courthouses, they should be able to have that. And if I disagree with it, I need to live in another state.
In all honesty? I would not want to see any religion-based laws be more than city or county ordinances and not really applicable to visitors. So we could have towns that don't allow alcoholic beverages and towns that do, but laws against driving under the influence could be statewide.
I feel that these are very good things for you to think about, but don't become an extremist while you are battling against extremism.

Answer 3

I don't think we need studies to correlate godlessness with crime rates, public indecency, racial discremination and tons of other really ugly issues (compare yourself to one safe and clean Muslim world here). Religion is a good thing and that is for certain.
On the other hand
Do u want 6 year-old kids to choose for themselves on whether they wanna know about God or not?? Do u think man in general is as good as to go about life in perfect harmony without any written moral code or any conscience?? What is the 'generic' reference u intend to integrate with?? Do u have such thing u and your atheist buddies?? Or do u want people to f*** the world up?? I mean how come u r so sure godlessness is not gonna deliver your civilized community to chaos??
How do u know that the money that went to the churches didn't help improve the lives of some of the bums in your neighborhood and maybe gave them some positive thoughts to go for instead of shooting crack or raping your sister?? I mean u can't be so blind to the influence of religion. Do u want to deny the society something like that??
I don't know if 'in God we trust' gives u so much pain in the eye and I can't see no reason they should remove it either. 'Oppression' is such a big word man look into what u wrote.

Answer 4

LS, surely you remember the whining last year about the nonexistent "war on Christmas". Then there was the temper tantrum when the 10Cs were removed from public property. Then the idiots who wanted the San Deigo Zoo to remove references to Hindu culture from their displays of Eastern Indian animals while at the same time inisisting that references to Noah's Ark and "Intelligent Design" be put in the primate section. And let's not forget about the yearly hysteria over Halloween and Christian efforts to get it banned because it's roots are in a religion different from theirs. Or how horribly "oppressed" Christians are being on Air Force bases by not being allowed to aggressively try to convert people to Baptism and harass those who refuse. Or the wailing and gnashing of teeth that followed the Dover descision when ID was called out on what it was: Fraud.

Answer 5

Assalamu alaikum all of your charges and your opinion in preserving with those charges are truly suitable.we could continually be united if we like peace and freedom.Allah needs us to well known,love and help one yet another even with if we've diverse faith and faith.yet we could continually provide suggestion to one yet another if someone made incorrect doings.we could continually set up the prosperity in this community without destruction and killing one yet another. Allah hates blood shed.we could continually sparkling up the topics and disputes between us peacefully. even with the indisputable fact that it does no longer recommend that we keep away from disputes because diverse opinion continually ensue to us who've diverse journey,understand-how,options-set and faith.we could continually administration properly our lusts.shall we no longer be selfish,stingy and smug.Allah hates it very a lot good and undesirable doings should be measured through the Qur'an and hadith because the existence guidance guide for all people given through Allah swt, thanks very a lot for your reminder.might want to Allah bless us and teach us the right direction.Ameen

Answer 6

The A's have it.

Oh damn he beat me to it. :(


A. Allowing churches to remain tax-exempt, while they rake in a profit on brainwashing.
B. Undoing that prior injustice.

Answer 7

"a" in all of the above. Churches are packed in this country and all you hear is: Religion is being oppressed? You can do all the praying you want in USA. We need to have all the Churches pay tax and maybe they will pray more intently.

Answer 8

How about making legislation ruling over other people's bodies based on religious convictions.

Answer 9

1) a 2) a 3) a 4) a 5) a 6) a 7) a

Sad, isn't it.

Answer 10

8a. Granting tax-exempt status to churches who then go on to campaign for a political party.

8b. Undoing that prior injustice.