Religion and the law

[Mister Agenda]

I would say a religious belief is the belief that one's spiritual claims are based on reality. If the argument for or against a law is based on logic and evidence, it's not based on religion, even if a religion would agree with the conclusion of the logical/empirical argument.

If the purpose of a new stop sign is to prevent traffic accidents and you can produce empirical findings that support that it will or won't, the purpose of the stop sign isn't religious. If you think every third crossroad should be a four-way stop because 3+4=7, a holy number in the eyes of Marduk, the stop sign is religious if that is the 'argument' that prevails.

[Angrboda]

I would say a religious belief is the belief that one's spiritual claims are based on reality. If the argument for or against a law is based on logic and evidence, it's not based on religion, even if a religion would agree with the conclusion of the logical/empirical argument.

If the purpose of a new stop sign is to prevent traffic accidents and you can produce empirical findings that support that it will or won't, the purpose of the stop sign isn't religious. If you think every third crossroad should be a four-way stop because 3+4=7, a holy number in the eyes of Marduk, the stop sign is religious if that is the 'argument' that prevails.

The problem with that is that law tends to be aligned with morals, and morals aren't logically or empirically demonstrable. If we make empiricism our standard, then we seem to have a problem justifying morals and law at all.

(Your definition is also at one and the same time overly broad and overly narrow. It all depends on what is meant by the word 'spiritual'. Buddhism can be viewed as spiritual, but traditional Buddhist doctrine is not based on anything spiritual. Karma and rebirth are based upon dependent origination, not belief in a soul or spirit. Yet we would definitely want to include them under the rubric of religion. And the farther afield you go from mainstream religions, the more difficult it becomes to define them as being "spiritual" in any meaningful sense. The only way that could seem to be capable of being brought under control is to align "spirit" with those things relating to our existence as minds or Logos, that spirit refers to those aspects of life and mind which involve questions of meaning and purpose. But then philosophy becomes religion and we've overshot the mark.)

[Minimalist]

Beliefs are really irrelevant.  If you want to believe that throwing virgins into a volcano appeases the gods, go ahead.  Just don't do it.  Actions are what matters.

Where it gets dicey is when you get these obnoxious xtian or muslim fanatics who think they can actively discriminate against people who do not share their silly beliefs.

[ignoramus]

This reminds of a guy here who demanded he have his license photo taken with a colander on his head stating religious beliefs.
They did give him hell. Not sure of the outcome.

Why would the authorities find it any more ridiculous than other people's beliefs in a zombie, his space wizard father and a talking snake?
(and don't start me on the Muslim attire)

[The Valkyrie]

Read the title and thought Rob went all negatio on us.

What makes Scientology a religion in some countries and not in others? Comes down to what your countries courts define religion. 

I remember people drinking ETOH in church in a town with a blue law. That sounds like special protection.

Well, I've heard Rob's affections are negotiable.

That's similar, right?

[robvalue]

I'm thinking again about point 1, and that guy who wouldn't make cakes for a transgender person for religious reasons. He said something along the lines of, "My religious beliefs are that God made only two genders, and we don't get to dictate them, so I won't make a cake that celebrates changing gender".

It's the weird way beliefs and facts are mixed up here that fascinates me. If he thought it was simply true that there are only two genders, and that a "change of gender" isn't a legitimate thing to do, why would religion enter into it? It's like the "religious belief" is a free pass to assert whatever you want, with the expectation that people should just accept it, even if it's not actually true.

It's seems like the person doesn't care what is true.

[Minimalist]

This reminds of a guy here who demanded he have his license photo taken with a colander on his head stating religious beliefs.
They did give him hell. Not sure of the outcome.

Why would the authorities find it any more ridiculous than other people's beliefs in a zombie, his space wizard father and a talking snake?
(and don't start me on the Muslim attire)

Ramen.