• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does the US First Amendment apply equally to all religions in the US or not?

Does the US First Amendment apply equally to all religions in the US or not?

  • Yes - the First Amendment applies equally to all religions in the USA

    Votes: 24 88.9%

  • No - the First Amendment does not cover all religions in the USA

    Votes: 3 11.1%
  • Total voters
    27
Removable Mind said:
Bod...

The Westboro Baptist Church isn't affiliated with any Baptist denomination. The Baptist World Alliance and the Southern Baptist Convention (the two largest Baptist denominations) have each denounced the WBC over the years.

So you might say their credentials were revoked....
Click to expand...

Thanks... didn't know that. Then does the WBC have Church/Religion status in the USA? I don't think that they should...

EDIT: Only 40 members or so? And monitored by hate group organisations... good. But it is still a "Church" and I assume with tax exempt status and such.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Simple yes or no, if not could you please enlighten a non-US citizen on the reasons why some followers of religions in the US should not have the same religious freedoms as others.

Oh - and if I got the wrong Amendment, I mean the one about freedom of religious expression.
Click to expand...


Hell we bend over BACKWARD to try to give all religions equal 1A protections... go to ridiculous lengths sometimes to accommodate a religion practiced by only a tiny minority.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Thanks... didn't know that. Then does the WBC have Church/Religion status in the USA? I don't think that they should...
Click to expand...

Only to it's members. It's seen as a cult more than anything else.
 
Westboro self-labels "Baptist", but no Baptist organization will have anything to do with them or accept them as part of its membership rolls.


I have yet to meet any Baptist, no matter how conservative or fundamentalist, that doesn't despise Westboro.
 
notquiteright said:
How about Christian religious leaders who preach hate toward others and other religions? Quran burners and Gay bashers? I understand some can warp the Quran to say hateful things but then again our Bible has been used to justify everything from genocide to simple lynchings.

Perhaps the better phrasing would be those who use the guise of religion to promote hate, intolerance, and violence should lose their tax free status.
Click to expand...

Is the intolerance written into the bible like it is the Quran? If so, please, go ahead and post passage and verse. I admit, on the Quran I am going by what has been reported and claimed, even by Muslims to be there.
 
clownboy said:
Rastafarians are not allowed their sacrament. I voted no.
Click to expand...

But smoking pot is not legal. It is not the religion. I had a very good friend that was a Rastifarian.
 
notquiteright said:
How about Christian religious leaders who preach hate toward others and other religions? Quran burners and Gay bashers? I understand some can warp the Quran to say hateful things but then again our Bible has been used to justify everything from genocide to simple lynchings.

Perhaps the better phrasing would be those who use the guise of religion to promote hate, intolerance, and violence should lose their tax free status.
Click to expand...

Here, Violent and Intolerant Qur’an Verses « Conservative Colloquium find me such in the Bible. You wish to blame a branch of religion based upon actions and interpretations of some of it's "leaders", with Islam, it is not interpretation, but clearly spelled out in their "Holy" Book.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Simple yes or no, if not could you please enlighten a non-US citizen on the reasons why some followers of religions in the US should not have the same religious freedoms as others.

Oh - and if I got the wrong Amendment, I mean the one about freedom of religious expression.
Click to expand...

ya its the right amendment

So im thinking sometimes. America is predominately christian so it would seem like we would sometimes have conflicts
 
The Misanthrope said:
The psychopathic God of the Christians.
Click to expand...

Before we get to far down that line. Move it to a thread of it's own if you really want to discuss it. Otherwise, compare to the two, they simply are not of the same nature.

Perhaps you should actually read your post. Then reduce it down to intolerance that people are called upon to do unto other people. God sending sinners to hell is intolerant of sinners, but God reserves judgment and use of damnation for himself, and admonishes against man using them against man.

Also, if you are arguing Christians, you might want to leave out most of the Old Testament. Many things in it that were directed from God to the Jews were Changed by Jesus and Christians do not follow or adhere to all of them.
 
Last edited:
notquiteright said:
Please enlighten this USofA citizen- which religions don't get the same 'freedoms'???

A religion devoted to human sacrifice doesn't get a great deal of religious freedom in this country....
Click to expand...
Yes this is the fly in the ointment isn't it. I'll stand by the thought that the once upon a time religions were considered cults in the phrasing of the first amendment. If that isn't the case than one must conclude that the free exercise clause must also conform with the rule of law. ie no human sacrifice, and so on.
 
DVSentinel said:
Before we get to far down that line. Move it to a thread of it's own if you really want to discuss it. Otherwise, compare to the two, they simply are not of the same nature.

Perhaps you should actually read your post. Then reduce it down to intolerance that people are called upon to do unto other people. God sending sinners to hell is intolerant of sinners, but God reserves judgment and use of damnation for himself, and admonishes against man using them against man.

Also, if you are arguing Christians, you might want to leave out most of the Old Testament. Many things in it that were directed from God to the Jews were Changed by Jesus and Christians do not follow or adhere to all of them.
Click to expand...

Also the bible say sour sins have been forgiven so really the only crime that can get us damned is not trusting Christ as our lord and savior. just saying
 
DVSentinel said:
Before we get to far down that line. Move it to a thread of it's own if you really want to discuss it. Otherwise, compare to the two, they simply are not of the same nature.

Perhaps you should actually read your post. Then reduce it down to intolerance that people are called upon to do unto other people. God sending sinners to hell is intolerant of sinners, but God reserves judgment and use of damnation for himself, and admonishes against man using them against man.

Also, if you are arguing Christians, you might want to leave out most of the Old Testament. Many things in it that were directed from God to the Jews were Changed by Jesus and Christians do not follow or adhere to all of them.
Click to expand...

Also, if you are arguing Christians, you might want to leave out most of the Old Testament
Click to expand...
I note you said "most of the Old Testament," not all of it. If the NT contains all "decent" but frightened people need for "salvation," why do Christians bother with some of the OT? And do you wanna state what parts of the OT are valid? I can understand if you demure, I mean you don't wanna risk incurring the wrath of some of the 30,000 odd brands of Christianity that infest the U.S, do you!?
 
Last edited:
BasicGreatGuy said:
Human sacrifice is against the law, because it infringes on another person's right of due process. Ergo, human sacrifice is not protected under the I Amendment.
Click to expand...

What if the sacrificial human volunteers for the sacred rite? Due process applies if the one infringed upon isn't onboard with the action. It's one thing to drag the virgin to the Pit O' Death, another if she dives right in...

It seems to me the 'personal responsibility, let's not turn this place into a nanny state' crowd would allow human sacrifice if the 'victim' is willing. She chooses to smoke- that will kill ya, she chooses to use IV drugs- lots of things the 'no nanny state crowd embraces- why not voluntary human sacrifice????
 
Bodhisattva said:
I know that there is a lot of interpretation and that "Accepted" religions often preach hate... but none practice human or animal sacrifice or have true hate messages. I think the Southern Baptist ones that protest outside soldiers funerals should not qualify as a religion. If a church or group starts doing stuff like that they should have their credentials revoked.
Click to expand...

That is why I asked about so simple a definition you gave- first voodoo is accepted and does sacrifice animals- that mainstreet America doesn't have the First Voodoo Church of the Holy Redeemer doesn't mean it isn't accepted.

That is slippery slope you start down when you start selecting churches because of a freedom of speech issue- Burn a Quran or burn a Bible? Hide pedophile priests throughout the Church system- more than just an isolated parish or priest- should the Holy Mother Church be stripped of it's tax exempt status due to wholesale conspiracy to protest pedophiles in Holy Garb?

I don't defend lunatics out of an agreement with their insanity, but they are the canary in the mineshaft.
 
The Misanthrope said:
I note you said "most of the Old Testament," not all of it. If the NT contains all "decent" but frightened people need for "salvation," why do Christians bother with some of the OT? And do you wanna state what parts of the OT are valid? I can understand if you demure, I mean you don't wanna risk incurring the wrath of some of the 30,000 odd brands of Christianity that infest the U.S, do you!?
Click to expand...

God created man, thus God is the parent of mankind. Like children, when young, mankind needed stricter rules and discipline from God. As mankind matured, man did not need as strict of guidance from God. But just like a parent, though some rules change as a child matures, some core rules remain. The Old Testament is a document of Christianities history, but also contains those core rules that did not change when Christ created a new covenant with man.

The Ten Commandments still apply, but dietary restrictions do not. If you want to learn even more, go find a Pastor or Biblical Scholar and a proper place to go into that level of detail.
 
yes of course it does it allows all religions the same protections and those protections end at infringing on others rights and breaking of certain level laws.
 
DVSentinel said:
God created man, thus God is the parent of mankind. Like children, when young, mankind needed stricter rules and discipline from God. As mankind matured, man did not need as strict of guidance from God. But just like a parent, though some rules change as a child matures, some core rules remain. The Old Testament is a document of Christianities history, but also contains those core rules that did not change when Christ created a new covenant with man.

The Ten Commandments still apply, but dietary restrictions do not. If you want to learn even more, go find a Pastor or Biblical Scholar and a proper place to go into that level of detail.
Click to expand...

All the above is strictly your view/interpretation not those of Jesus, the deputy (to his Dad) authority of what is unchangeable Scripture, of course. If I were to put the same questions to ten Christians I would most likely get ten different versions to your exposition, all of which would also be just hazarding a guess about a absolutely crucial part of the Bible.

I'm sure you won't mind that, in lieu of Daddy God's binding ruling on the subject, if I stick with the fabled Jesus on this score, who allegedly said of the OT
Truly I say to you, Till heaven and earth come to an end, not the smallest letter or part of a letter will in any way be taken from the law, (i.e. the OT of his father) till all things are done.
Click to expand...
 
Infinite Chaos said:
I wasn't going to post in this thread but this is the key phrase for me. If a religion or a practice within a religion (any religion) breaks a law like equality / criminal damage / drug abuse / child abuse etc etc then that facet should be subjugate to criminal law (at the very least).
Click to expand...

The issue here is essentially that ultimatly rights conflict.

You have a right to assemble. Someone else has a right to property. ULTIMATELY, there's the potential that those two rights can come into conflict with each other. Some form of resolution generally needs to exist. The basic theory, to my understanding, under our legal system is that the person making an affirmative action that directly interfere's wiupon another persons right is the person whose able to be infringed upon to a degree by the government.

So you're able to assemble and the other person is able to have his property. The government is allowed to make laws limiting your ability to assemble ON his private porperty, because your right to assemble doesn't allow you to affirmatively ioverrule the other persons right to his property.

In the case of something like religious human sacrifices or child abuse, I think you again run into the issue where someones right to practice their religion butts up against someone selses right to life and creates a situation where there needs to be a mediator to determine which right has "supremacy" in such a case.
 
Zyphlin said:
The issue here is essentially that ultimatly rights conflict.

You have a right to assemble. Someone else has a right to property. ULTIMATELY, there's the potential that those two rights can come into conflict with each other. Some form of resolution generally needs to exist. The basic theory, to my understanding, under our legal system is that the person making an affirmative action that directly interfere's wiupon another persons right is the person whose able to be infringed upon to a degree by the government.

So you're able to assemble and the other person is able to have his property. The government is allowed to make laws limiting your ability to assemble ON his private porperty, because your right to assemble doesn't allow you to affirmatively ioverrule the other persons right to his property.

In the case of something like religious human sacrifices or child abuse, I think you again run into the issue where someones right to practice their religion butts up against someone selses right to life and creates a situation where there needs to be a mediator to determine which right has "supremacy" in such a case.
Click to expand...
Try telling a fair dinkum Christian that a secular mediator trumps his schizophrenic God(s)!
 
notquiteright said:
Please enlighten this USofA citizen- which religions don't get the same 'freedoms'???

A religion devoted to human sacrifice doesn't get a great deal of religious freedom in this country....
Click to expand...

No one informed Planned Parenthood...


I'm just sayin....
 
DVSentinel said:
Is the intolerance written into the bible like it is the Quran? If so, please, go ahead and post passage and verse. I admit, on the Quran I am going by what has been reported and claimed, even by Muslims to be there.
Click to expand...

".....Woman with “familiar spirits” must be stoned to death. Leviticus 20:27

“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.” Exodus 22:18



Kill those who are not Christian or Jewish:

You must kill those who worship another god. Exodus 22:20

Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different than your own. Deuteronomy 13:6-10

Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you. Deuteronomy 13:12-16

Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. Deuteronomy 17:2-7

Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest. Deuteronomy 17:12-13

Kill any false prophets. Deuteronomy 18:20

Any city that doesn’t receive the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. Mark 6:11

Jude reminds us that God destroys those who don’t believe in him. Jude 5



Ignorance is bliss. Christians should not practice free inquiry nor socialize with non Christians:

Don’t associate with non-Christians. Don’t receive them into your house or even exchange greeting with them. 2 John 1:10

Shun those who disagree with your religious views. Romans 16:17

Paul, knowing that their faith would crumble if subjected to free and critical inquiry, tells his followers to avoid philosophy. Colossians 2:8



Judge other religions for not following Christ:

Whoever denies “that Jesus is the Christ” is a liar and an anti-Christ. 1 John 2:22

Christians are “of God;” everyone else is wicked. 1 John 5:19

The non-Christian is “a deceiver and an anti-Christ” 2 John 1:7

Anyone who doesn’t share Paul’s beliefs has “an evil heart.” Hebrews 3:12

False Jews are members of “the synagogue of Satan.” Revelations 2:9, 3:9



Here are my two personal favorites:

Everyone will have to worship Jesus -- whether they want to or not. Philippians 2:10

A Christian can not be accused of any wrongdoing. Romans 8:33.............."

Biblical Intolerance
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom