2006-11-16 08:20:13 · 12 answers · asked by john_stolworthy 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The only way that people can be treated equally by government entities is for them to be treated, well, equally. If religious matters become law, then those who disagree with that particular religious tenet lose both their own freedom of worship as well as whatever freedom it is that's now prohibited thanks to somebody else's beliefs.
2006-11-16 08:24:28 · update #1
My definition of freedom is that you can do whatever you like as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of somebody else.
2006-11-16 08:29:06 · update #2
RLP. I DO "buy into" the rules of my faith, but do not feel I should force others to do so if they believe differently.
2006-11-16 08:31:18 · update #3
This question not only makes good sense but deserves to receive some thoughtful answers.
Yes. A person can be truly religious and pro freedom by not imposing their ideals on others. It is when a person crosses this line from individual religious beliefs to imposing them on others, are when rights of others are violated.
Like the people who want to chose who somebody else can love...as the case with gay marriage.
2006-11-16 08:48:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are plenty of religions whose principles do not require that they convert others to their cause, nor impose their canon through civil authority. Most of them do not bear a sufficient number of followers to be of tremendous influence in American politics. However, the fundamental premise of religion is that one must take a "leap of faith", which is defined as going from the knowledge of the rational, natural world to accepting a belief without proof or provability in a supernatural, mystical, spiritual, paranormal-like realm which is usually understood as being beyond the comprehension of man and given access to only by "divine" revelation (miracles, voices from the heavens, "signs" to be interpreted, dreams, vision quests, psycotropic "medicines", etc...). As such, it is, in simpler terms, the individual choice to go from knowledge of the rational world to accepting the existance of the nonrational (more typically known as the "irrational"). Religious people adopt and accept irrationality as by way of seemingly otherwise rational arguements and emotional desires, rather than attending to the rational, reasonable, logical and scientific evidence that nature provides all around. Thus in that sense, any decisions based on the Rights of Individuals through Natural Law and the rational principles thereunder, could be very easily subverted by a "genuinely religious" person, if some "revelation" from "beyond" directs otherwise. Dangerous to have irrational people in govenment, in offices of state, in the voting booth or in jury boxes. Usually, individuals who are "irrational" are locked up i nbooby hatches for a long time, but when they display the "tyrrany of the majority" in a voting, constitutional Republic, then they already own the system.
2006-11-16 16:53:50 · answer #2 · answered by William P 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course they can, I am. My religion is based upon the acknowledgment of complete freedom, and then we choose and act accordingly. (I think most Christian religions should think this, as this was the situation in the Garden of Eden and after). I respect everyone and their religious choices.
2006-11-16 16:35:36 · answer #3 · answered by straightup 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO
Religion has rules that one must follow in order to BE a practicing member of that faith.
I like the rules of the Catholic church and I like following them.
Can a person be a good citizen if he won't follow any of the laws? NO - Same thing.
Rules and laws exist because we want to set a certain behavioral example and if you do not "buy in" to those rules you cannot SAY you do just for the sake of being a part of that group.
Abortion is against what the Catholic Church teaches. I do not believe you can be PRO abortion and be a good Catholic (John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi).
EDIT - John - God gives us "free will" so that WE can choose to follow Him - OR - choose not to. Adam and Eve were told not to do just one thing and they blew it. Religion and Society give us pretty good moral rules and common sense tells us that the rules of Islamic Fanatics are not the rules of God. (If the martyr gets 40+ virgins than I guess it is HELL for the girls...) Killing ANYONE in the name of God is wrong - only God can take a life.
I do not want to impose my rules on you - you have a God given choice and I respect that. Just do not tell me I have to ACCEPT and TOLLERATE what you CHOOSE to do that I think is wrong. I reserve the right to say it is wrong, but God will judge you for your actions - not me.
2006-11-16 16:28:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Of course...I consider myself to be religous and pro-freedom. I do not bring my religion into political issues, which do happen to coincidentally coincide more often than not as I consider myself to be pretty left wing and a buddhist.
2006-11-16 16:41:41 · answer #5 · answered by elysialaw 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If by "truly pro freedom" you mean without regard of consequences to anyone else - no.
2006-11-16 16:26:36 · answer #6 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ever hear "Freedom is never free". Its a cliche for a reason.
2006-11-16 16:23:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
..Whats your definition of freedom? If its the same as mine, then Yes
2006-11-16 16:24:39 · answer #8 · answered by I Hate Liberals 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No.
Religions see Earthly freedom as "worldy".
That is not the point of the religion.
-socially LIBERAL and goddamn proud
2006-11-16 16:24:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes. God leaves my life to me, and he will judge others as he sees fit.
2006-11-16 16:24:24 · answer #10 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋