Religious Liberty?

[Ravenshire]

To what extant should religious liberty in this nation be respected?

Everyone should be able to believe whatever they want including .

But.. at what point should the law respect religious beliefs?

When should allowances be made?

Surely companies, with a Christian basis should not be forced to provide contraception?

A Christina bakery.. shouldn't be...forced..to bake a cake for a gay couples wedding?

Thoughts?

The old adage "your right to swing your fist ends at the other person's nose" comes to mind.  The Hobby Lobby, Chick-Fil-A and the rest of the christer right assholes need to realize that they unequivocally do not have the right to dictates the religious beliefs of those who merely work for them. You speak of respect (as if you had any idea what the word means) yet you advocate for the disrespect of the employees of these companies.

[Ravenshire]

Like moths to a flame...

You're absolutely right, Steel. After all his tripe, especially what he said to Stimbo in his ridiculous HP thread, I'm done responding to this particular troll.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

You say that as if a person's beliefs and their actions are mutually exclusive. If they believe they have divine mandate to perform acts of violence or to oppress certain people, then they're going to feel obligated to do so.

They can 'feel obligated' all they like, but feelings of obligation don't harm other people. Actions do.

Boru

[Regina]

To the extent that we allow them to believe what they want to believe, but not to the extent that they can impose their beliefs on others. For instance, Kim Davis has the right to believe homosexuality is immoral. She does not have the right to refuse to do her job, or interfere with other people's jobs, which she obviously has done.

Companies should do their job, regardless of the customer, as long as the money is good. If you allow stores to refuse service, you're basically letting them decide who can and can't live in the town they sell goods in.

This

My view has always been like this. With "religious freedom" or "religious liberty", you have the right to be as austerely religious as you want to be, in your own life choices. If you want to abstain from sex, dress in a black curtain, or avoid certain foods, go for it.

When you cross the line is when you feel that everyone else has to live as you live. It's not bigotry for someone to not feel that a particular religion (or any religion) is something they want in their life for themselves. It's why I get sick of this "Islamophobia" argument. Yes discrimination against Muslims exists, but at the same time we as individuals have the right to not want Islam (or any other religion) forced down our throats, affecting our lives. That's not discrimination, it's a personal choice.

It needs to be equally recognised that religion, or certain religions, aren't for everyone.

And back onto the fucking "Christinas" and their wedding cakes... *rolls eyes*

[Nay_Sayer]

To what extant should religious liberty in this nation be respected?

Everyone should be able to believe whatever they want including .

But.. at what point should the law respect religious beliefs?

When should allowances be made?

Surely companies, with a Christian basis should not be forced to provide contraception?

A Christina bakery.. shouldn't be...forced..to bake a cake for a gay couples wedding?

Thoughts?

Checkmate

[Joods]

To what extant should religious liberty in this nation be respected?

There is separation of church and state for a reason.
The law respects your right to choose whom to worship or not worship.
The law respects your right to pray where and when you want to.
What the law is clear about is that you do not have the right to impose your religion on others or force them to worship the same god that you do.
You do not have the right to force others to pray if they don't want to.

I respect religious liberties. I do not, however, respect the fact that many religious people seem to think that this means they get to enforce their religion on others, without consent. That is when I lose any respect I had for the person and their views about religion. If you want to pray before your son's football game, go right ahead. But don't expect my son to be forced to join your circle of prayer if he is uncomfortable with it. And if you're the coach and you do this and I see that you treat my son differently (penalize him in some way) because he refuses to pray with you, we're gonna have a problem.

But.. at what point should the law respect religious beliefs?

Being as the law is an inanimate object, it can't really respect anything. But, read the US Constitution. 

When should allowances be made?

What sort of allowances are you referring to?

Surely companies, with a Christian basis should not be forced to provide contraception?

Companies with more than a certain number of employees are required by law to provide healthcare coverage. Period. If they are not paying 100% for that coverage and the employee has to pay for any part of that, then a company shouldn't get to decide on what gets covered and what doesn't.

A Christina bakery.. shouldn't be...forced..to bake a cake for a gay couples wedding?

No one is stopping any bakery from refusing to provide goods and services to anyone. A business isn't forced to do anything they don't wish to do. However, if said business enters into a contract with a person or a couple, then decides to change their minds about honoring that contract, they're going to have a problem. As long as they have not entered into any contractual obligations with any person or entity, they are not bound by law to provide goods and services to said individual(s).

[LadyForCamus]

Like moths to a flame...

Yeah, as much as I would love to weigh in on this, TC never participates in the threads he starts, so I'm not even going to waste my time this time.

[mediocrates]

Thoughts?

If this was my only food I think I might starve...

[Homeless Nutter]

Checkmate

From what I gather - the product in the pic is "kasha", which can be any one of a variety of grains, like buckwheat, barley, grits, or even cous-cous, typically boiled. On a side-note - the Russian recipe recommends adding butter to taste, while English translation calls for oil. Go figure.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Liberty is meaningless if confined to what people may or may not believe in the privacy of their minds. People’s consciences are essential parts of their being that go with them wherever they go. A free society does not ask people of integrity to ignore their consciences when interacting with others. When in the course of their public life, someone openly expresses and practices (like praying and inviting others to do so) their beliefs it exposes others to those beliefs and practices without forcing them to accept, endorse, or engage in them. Legal restrictions that prevent people from living their lives in accordance with their beliefs and mandates that compel them to violate their convictions generally have no place in a free society. The qualifier here applies to instances in which the State has a “compelling interest” to enact and enforce generally applicable laws promoting the universal welfare, protecting the public at large, and preserving civil order, such as prohibitions on polygamy and persecution of human sacrifice. As a matter of public policy, determining what constitutes a “compelling interest” requires discernment; but, I believe, as I hope most Americans do, that judgments should strongly favor the consciences of individuals over State goals as in cases like the sacramental use of peyote and the military conscription of pacifists.