Is there a point where the right to practice ones faith infringes on the rights of another?

Question

What is that point to you?

Answer 1

This is one of those tricky issues. You have the freedom of religion, but if a religion interferes with another's rights, or other laws, it becomes a balancing act. Everything becomes a balancing act in the end, and it's the courts who usually decide these issues because the politicians are too afraid to take them on.

I think each case needs to be handled individually. I'm not sure there is one point. The Amish and Quakers refuse to fight. Is drafting them a violation of their freedom of religion?

On this one, I come down on the side of the religion. It isn't totally fair that they don't get drafted, and others do, but I think the balance falls the other way.

Should the Amish be able to withhold children from schools? Again...on this one, I think the balance falls for freedom of religion. They raise the children to be productive members of their community. It's a simple life that doesn't require advanced schooling.

Should we be able to sacrifice animals? On this one I fall on the side of no. The cruelty to animals out weighs the rights of the religious practisioner.

Should Muslims be allowed to pray in school 3 times a day? I think the answer is actually no. It disrupts class, and withholds the children from it. This issue differes from the Amish one because they could send their kids to private school. That option gives more of the burden on Islam to me.

Should Muslim kids be able to wear garb in school? I think yes. I think all kids should be able to wear religious symbols in secularm schools.

Should teachers? I think no....as an employee of the school, it becomes sanctioned by the school. Since the schools are tax fnded....it in effect becomes tax funded religious reprensentation. I don't think ANY teacher should be able to wear any religious symbol in a school.

It all comes down to that cases merits for me.

For the person below me.....I'll use the most extreme and obvious example for why what you said is stupid......

I believe in human sacrifice and rape as an expression of my religion. You just gave me the right to rape and kill a family member of your's.

There is ALWAYS a balancing act...it just depends where you come down on the balance.

Answer 2

I heard a quote that explains this well: "Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins."

I feel that infringement occurs when a person of one faith is either victimized or forced to observe a religious ritual as a result of someone else's religious beliefs. For instance, if someone believes that their religion requires that nonbelievers should be killed, acting on such a belief would be infringement. Another example would be forced prayer. After all, that's clearly forcing one's religious practice onto another person for the sake of encouraging the belief in a single religion.

I'd also add in a third type of limit: Forcing others to follow religious laws that cannot be explained through secular logic. For instance, it's acceptable to outlaw murder because if murder was allowed, chaos would result. Outlawing gay marriage on the other hand, would be going too far in my opinion. After all, gay marriage is always argued against using religious arguments and gay marriage by non-Christians would not inhibit Christians' abilities to observe their own faith.

However, the line between respect and infringement can be blurry. For instance, let's take the example of alcohol consumption. Secular knowledge tells us that alcohol can lead to problems. Therefore, prohibition would not be infringement. However, Blue Laws, laws banning the consumption of alcoholic beverages on Sunday mornings, would be infringement since the only reason for the restriction to be limited to a specific time period would be for church-related reasons.

In short, I believe that a religion infringes if one of the following occurs:
1. A religion victimizes a person of a different faith.
2. A religious practice is forced upon all groups of people whose religions do not approve of the practice.
3. A religious law is turned into a secular law without having any secular merit.

Again, these are just my views. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion of where the line is drawn.

Answer 3

Probably when it turns to violence. Where as I don't like being witnessed to, it's about the same thing as a "cold sale" and if we eliminated one, we'd have to eliminate the other -- not really a bad thing.

I'd like to see any given morality kept out of law, i.e. the law should not enforce a given morality. This is a touchy area and it needs to be handled with care.

But to some it up, practicing your religion should not harm any other human, and should not proscribe sedition.

Answer 4

Yes, when one person's beliefs start to require those who don't share the same beliefs lives be impacted. It is fine that everyone should be able to live their own beliefs. For instance, don't have premaritial sex, use birth control, or drink if these things go against your beliefs. It goes too far though when you start to try to influence policy to restrict birth control for everyone or as a pharmacist you refuse to fill legal prescriptions for birth control for others. Other people have the right to follow their own beliefs, live their own lives, and make their own decisions.

Answer 5

When people deny me my right to free speech in sharing my faith. Then, it infringes on my Constitutional rights.

Answer 6

No because like each issues there are effective and hazards. in effortless words unrealistic those that believes that the authorities ought to artwork in accordance to their own own criteria have lost faith (my opinion).

Answer 7

NO! There is NO point where that becomes an issue. The moment that ANY religions activity is curtailed opens the door for ALL religios activity to be squelched. Just because a persond doesn't agree with a particular means of method of worship doesn't mean that it is wrong. NOR does it mean that any individual, group of individuals, or government agency has any authority to interfere. I for one am NOT willing to risk giving up any of MY rights just so someone else can't have theirs.

Answer 8

Only if in some way it is forcing them to be a part of what you are doing and they are not wanting to or are not willing to be a part of your practice. For instance, I don't eat pork, so if we order pizza at work, I pick off what I don't eat and let who ever wants it have it - no problem.

Answer 9

At the point where my religious choice impact the lives and rights of others, it has gone too far. When people vote purely based upon religious beliefs and stances and throw the actual issues out the window, it has gone too far.

Answer 10

You freedom stops at the skin of everyone else. Example, you can be anti-abortion, but you don't get to tell anyone else that they can't get one!