Should religions that do not respect the law of the land be banned?

Question

If you feel that you can not respect the law of your country above your religion should that religion be out lawed?

Answer 1

I know that in Islam even if we live in a land that is not a Muslim country we have to obey the law first and that is what God told us in the Quran.

Everyone should respect the law of the land they live in no matter what and if they dont like it they should go somewhere they do, right?

Answer 2

I understand your reasoning.

However, you must realize that all governments are faulty because their people are faulty. Many governments would work if each individual were responsible. This, of course, is not the case.

In our Constitutional republic, we have a document that outlines what rights should NEVER be taken away. Beyond that is our so-called democracy. If the majority does not react to a group that is trying to violate what is established by the Constitution or by the majority in previous years, it is failing its duty; the country as it was envisioned may very well fall.

Now, the same applies when the majority wishes to violate the Constitution. In this situation, it is the duty of the elected officials to maintain the Constitution's sovereignty (though what good is a document if the masses do not accept it, no matter how just it may be?), but we frequently see that this is not the case...

...Which leads me to one more point. We all interpret things differently. This is why only the texts that can be understood and followed LITERALLY are worth anything. Beyond that, the majority must decide.

Our system is flawed by nature (the majority rules, but the majority must abide by what it does not necessarily accept), but it would be considerably more effective if people accepted their responsibility as MEMBERS of the society, and in this case, of the government, as it is a government OF the people, at least in theory.

All nations and empires will fall. The United States, I imagine, will be no exception.

Edit: There is so much more to say, but I can't be bothered to do it here. I would, however, like to add that, if people do not wish to abide by the rules of a country and have their own ideas of what to do to make it right, they should stage a revolution. This is what normally happens, is it not? They would, of course, be challenging a country from within the country, and they would have to go up against our mighty military. However, if neither side will concede to the other through words and neither is willing to continue on without change, this must occur.

But we are nowhere near this point in the United States. Too many are apathetic...

Answer 3

Most people talking on this subject do not have a clue what they are talking about. Arbitration courts have been around since before the US existed. Although binding, arbitration courts are totally voluntary, both sides must agree to the arbitration. Those that do not agree to arbitration can take to to the regular public civil courts. Several large Christian and Jewish organization include in their vendor contracts that the vendor agrees any disputes will be settled in arbitration courts (Christian or Jewish depending on the organization) rather than civil courts. Common law recognizes that when a matter is settled in a arbitration court it is binding and generally the civil courts will not hear a case that has already gone through and arbitration court unless gross abuse can be proven. Now, I agree, if somebody wants to ban Sharia arbitration courts for Muslims, then they must also ban Christian, Jewish, or any other religious arbitration courts. It is an all or nothing proposition, either all religions who want arbitration courts as an option to civil courts have the opportunity, or none can have that opportunity. Ban one you must ban them all. Given that a handful of states have passed legislation in this regard I expect it is just a matter of tie before a federal court hands down such a ruling. Gray Wanderer: Religious arbitration courts only apply to civil matters and have nothing to do with criminal matters, and may not hand down rulings that go beyond what normal civil courts can do.

Answer 4

No because this is America and here we are granted freedom of religion by the Constitution. The reason the Pilgrims from England left England was because they were being persecuted for their religion and for other acts against the Church of England. If we resorted to banning a religion just because they chose their religion over the land we would be just like England was in the 1600s.

Answer 5

It would depend on what law(s) you are talking about. Sometimes religion deserves to be disrespected. The ongoing abuse of children in the Catholic Church demands to be exposed, the exploitative, money-grubbing cults need to be examined, and the manipulative political interference of religious leaders should be questioned.

However, when tyrants wish to control the culture which they dominate, they must hasten to destroy the opposition and eliminate dissent and that would include religion. First to go is a free press, rapidly followed by the intellectuals. Soon, artists come into the firing line. We have seen this formula played out a hundred times in Europe, and I hope that we are all wise to it by now.

I wholeheartedly support everyone’s right to practise their religion or belief. And by that I include the right not to believe, or to change one’s religion – something that not all religions of course accept.

Answer 6

We all have the right to worship whoever and whatever we want. To ban a particular religion all because the politicians of the day don't like it is just plain ignorant. Religion should not be controlled by politicians since they are the farthest thing from a God :)

Answer 7

Jesus said to render what is Caesar's to Caesar and what is God's to God. If a civil crime is committed, such as murder, treason, theft or harm to another human being, and it was done under the sanction of a religion, the perpetrator should still be tried in civil court and punished if found guilty. Religions aren't good or evil, people are. The rest I leave for God to sort out!

The parable mentioned in the first sentence is why I'll never contribute to any organized religion which therefore is why I'm not welcome by any organized religion.

Answer 8

I will take a quote from the gun lobby.

religions don't disrespect the law people do.

The more you ban something the more it will grow. People do not want to be told they can't do or believe something. Christiantiy grew in the first century because of the terrible persecution. Islam is growing because of the same. We are rebellious by nature. Furthermore, Do we outlaw a government that disrespects our religion?

Answer 9

Its a hard one. I know my religion has had to stop things as to respect the law of the land. It seems right to me.

Answer 10

Religions cannot in and of themselves break a law. It is the religious followers who break laws. If a humanist breaks a law, should atheism be banned? How could that be enforced?