Christian Persecution

[robvalue]

So... because the law can't dictate reality exactly, it's tyranny?

[dyresand]

Tyranny? The constitution is there to protect minorities. When there's just 2.5 Christians left in America, the constitution will still protect their right to religious practice. What it won't protect is their desire to put their religious beliefs into law, as it should be.

According to the letter it will, but in realty there will be discrimination against the minority.

Christians in this country fucking persecute anything and anyone they want to and the minority. 
When they get fucking called out on it they say they are getting persecuted. Think about it womans rights
you don't like the the fact that woman can have them. People are trying to get abortion illegal that it'self 
is challenging women's rights. Christians are trying to persecute women they don't like the  fact they have a choice
to have a child or not. There is a list of fucked up shit christians are trying to persecute oh like gay marriage for years
now they are upset that marriage isn't christian anymore. Marriage was never a christian thing marriage is older than religion itself.

[Lek]

So... because the law can't dictate reality exactly, it's tyranny?

It's more of an abstract concept. If you are hanging out with a group of people, and 90% have one idea about how they want to do something, the 10% with different ideas will probably be overridden by the 90% majority. It's not about a form of government, but rather the reality of the way people actually are.

[Shining_Finger]

I said except outside those types of classes. If you have people wanting to inject into history classes or something, or at any point talking about it like it's a settled fact, then you have problems.

I'm pretty sure Mike Huckabee and the like would love us to go closer to a theocracy than we already are, and we're pretty close already. We have god on our money, our court buildings, and our pledge. We have people complaing about prayer being removed from schools as if it should have been there in the first place. People in office are expected to espouse christianity. People complain that bama might be muslim, as if it's a horrible thing if he did actually believe in allah, ignoring the fact that Huckabee would be as bad for this county as a devout muslim.

No our country isn't a theocracy, though not for lack of trying on the christian's part.

We also have homosexual marriage, legal abortion, no prayer allowed in public schools, and are in the process of removing religious symbols from public property.

1. Homosexual Marriage: The majority of PEOPLE are in favor of it, if not the majority of Christians. 
2. Yeah? And?
3. No prayer allowed to be lead in public schools: Actually you can pray in schools. You just cannot lead or tell students or staff to pray. This applies to Muslims and Satanists too. 
4. For Allah should be on the dollar then?

[dyresand]

We also have homosexual marriage, legal abortion, no prayer allowed in public schools, and are in the process of removing religious symbols from public property.

1. Homosexual Marriage: The majority of PEOPLE are in favor of it, if not the majority of Christians. 
2. Yeah? And?
3. No prayer allowed to be lead in public schools: Actually you can pray in schools. You just cannot lead or tell students or staff to pray. This applies to Muslims and Satanists too. 
4. For Allah should be on the dollar then?

^Well Satanists really don't believe in satan it's more of mockery of  Christianity.

[robvalue]

So... because the law can't dictate reality exactly, it's tyranny?

It's more of an abstract concept.  If you are hanging out with a group of people, and 90% have one idea about how they want to do something, the 10% with different ideas will probably be overridden by the 90% majority.  It's not about a form of government, but rather the reality of the way people actually are.

So...

What is the relevance of this "tyranny of the majority"? What issue is being tyrannised?

If you weren't making a particular point, then my apologies I agree that reality doesn't conform to ideals.

[Lek]

It's more of an abstract concept.  If you are hanging out with a group of people, and 90% have one idea about how they want to do something, the 10% with different ideas will probably be overridden by the 90% majority.  It's not about a form of government, but rather the reality of the way people actually are.

So...

What is the relevance of this "tyranny of the majority"? What issue is being tyrannised?

If you weren't making a particular point, then my apologies I agree that reality doesn't conform to ideals.

You made the statement that even when there are 2.5 christians left in the US, the constitution will still protect the rights of that minority.  I don't agree with your statement.  I believe that if and when, non-christians become a large majority, the rights of a christian minority will be ignored to a large degree.  That's typical human group behavior and would prove true in any society with a democratic-based system of government.  Now that christians are shrinking as a majority, it's easier to pass laws like gay marriage, etc.  It would not have happened in the 50s or 60s.  The interpretation of the constitution and the laws that result would be based more on the interpretation and needs of the majority.  The letter of the constitution would support fair treatment of all, but in reality it never worked that way - take slavery, for instance, or black people afterwards.  Therefore, my reference to "the tyranny of the majority".  It's tyranny because it is most often unfair and oppressive, to a degree, towards the minority of people with different views and needs.

[Crossless2.0]

So...

What is the relevance of this "tyranny of the majority"? What issue is being tyrannised?

If you weren't making a particular point, then my apologies I agree that reality doesn't conform to ideals.

You made the statement that even when there are 2.5 christians left in the US, the constitution will still protect the rights of that minority.  I don't agree with your statement.  I believe that if and when, non-christians become a large majority, the rights of a christian minority will be ignored to a large degree.   That's typical human group behavior and would prove true in any society with a democratic-based system of government.  The interpretation of the constitution and the laws that result would be based more on the interpretation and needs of the majority.  The letter of the constitution would support fair treatment of all, but in reality it never worked that way take slavery, for instance, or balck people afterwards.  Therefore, my reference to "the tyranny of the majority".  It's tyranny because it is most often unfair and oppressive, to a degree, towards the minority of people with different views and needs.

So what rights specifically do you imagine will be denied to Christians?

Let me narrow that down for you. What rights -- other than the "right" to tell everyone else how they must live -- do you imagine will be denied to Christians?

[abaris]

Now that christians are shrinking as a majority, it's easier to pass laws like gay marriage, etc.

It's not your right to interfere with the rights of others. It's your right to live your own life as you please with all the rules, you want to impose on yourselves. Interfering with other people's business isn't a right. It's by definition the attempt on tyranny, since you obviously consider imposing your lifestyle on others as some kind of entitlment.

[robvalue]

Edit: forget it.