As an agnostic, I was offended by Mitt Romney's assertion that only people with a religion have freedom. Am I wrong to assume that I have freedom without a religion?
2007-12-06 04:42:30 · 23 answers · asked by Dan 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It's really the other way around,he got it exactly backwards. Religion as a rule is a tool of control,not a source of freedom.
AD
2007-12-06 04:50:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Obama helps religious Freedom i does no longer provide credit to that Pat Robertson the guy who shoves Jesus Christ down all of us's throat on his television show each morning or while he grow to be working for President lower back in the 70's.
2016-10-10 09:51:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mitt Romney is a mormon! He actually believes an illiterate con artist was a prophet.
I think the opposite is true. Those who have a devout faith have no freedom. They are bound by their religion, which is some cases convinces their followers to kill themselves and others. How many atheists have you heard of killing people in the name of no god?
2007-12-06 05:02:48 · answer #3 · answered by go avs! 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Since it is perfectly "acceptable" to discriminate against the non-religious in this country, he is partially right.
As an atheist:
1) I have lost good jobs at companies that have religious people in charge firing anyone found not to be a christian.
2) I have been on job interviews where they have inquired on my religion and the interview was immediately terminated upon my truthful answer.
As long as religious people can deny jobs to the non-religious in this blatantly discriminatory manner, the basic inalienable right and freedom of making a living is denied.
2007-12-06 04:53:44 · answer #4 · answered by sprcpt 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
TG, I'd pay a dollar to see you stand up in front of my church and say "You know, you guys aren't all that different from Mormons." Talk about fainting and the gnashing of teeth!
Anyway, I think what Romney was getting at was it is the ability to worship that endows freedom upon us. One is incumbent upon the other. There can be no religion without freedom and there can be no freedom without religion. Your religion is agnosticism, which, by virtue of acting as a religion becomes as one.
2007-12-06 05:00:38 · answer #5 · answered by cornbread_oracle 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Since non-religious people are not answering to a higher authority, it is possible they have more freedom. I do not agree with Mr. Romney's assertion.
2007-12-06 04:53:11 · answer #6 · answered by buffalobo 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
What Mr. Romney needs to learn is that freedom of religion also means freedom FROM religion.
He is patently stupid as a brick - we don't need another idiot jeebuz lover in the white house.
edit: agnosticism and atheism are not religions - I am sick of hearing people say that.
2007-12-06 04:59:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
No, Mitt Romney is not correct. That satement has no factual basis, in fact, it doesn't even have any figurative basis - what the hell does that even mean? Do I have the right to free speach? Yes. Religion - to have or not? Yes. The right to a free press? Yes. The right to be secure in my property & belongings (right to privacy) - yep. The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Check.
Looks like I'm all set.
2007-12-06 04:52:49 · answer #8 · answered by slushpile reader 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I thought it was sort of indecent, just like his comments about religious symbols on public property. He has no right to tell any person that they are not free because they do not have a religion. Ironically, he violates Christian scripture which states "all people are children of god". If he truly believes this, why does he act as though atheists and agnostics cannot achieve freedom?
2007-12-06 04:48:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋
How does not believing in God rob you of freedom?
I would guess that Romney believes that God provides you with free will, and that if there is no God, you do not have free will, but this is a flawed argument.
Besides, does it matter? If you are actually not free, but you feel free, then the difference is academic.
I'm an agnostic. I feel free. (I am actually a hard determinist, philosophically speaking, which would take too much to explain here, but I still believe that I am essentially free.) Belief in God would not make me more free. It might change certain aspects of my life for the better, but frankly I like believing that I am in control of my own life, and no outside deity is wielding any influence on me.
2007-12-06 04:48:07 · answer #10 · answered by PhotoJim 4 · 7⤊ 3⤋