- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
- Messages
- 4,230
- Reaction score
- 1,605
- Location
- San Diego
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Re: Woman arrested after damaging Satanic display at Florida Capitol
Why shouldn't the encroachment of the establishment of religion be viewed with the same bold lines?
I see limiting government establishment of religion as keeping government controls low. This is not government control, it's keeping religion in the hands of the people. I am not advocating big government secularism, I am advocating small government in establishing religion.
If you're advocating public establishment, you're the one arguing for greater encompassing government.
Equal access isn't "tyrannical." It's equal. It's in the name. Otherwise, it'd be called "tyrannical access."
Can you explain what the middle ground is between "enforcing the absence of religious display" and "endorsing religious displays?"The liberties are enough...I no more want government to enforce the absence of religious display, anymore than I want them to endorse them.
Tell me about how you feel about the encroachment of "free speech" or the encroachment of your "right to bear arms?"That's just silly, we are no more going to become a Theocracy, than we are a secular nation. It's foolish to believe that we need Government to "protect us" from beliefs.
Why shouldn't the encroachment of the establishment of religion be viewed with the same bold lines?
You're viewing this from the reverse side of things:Ah, so an all encompassing government control is just fine with you, and you see opposition to that as just people that need to be forced until they see how good it is eh?
The atheists, and Satanists do things like this IMHO, not because they truly want some sort of equality in the public sphere, but because they think it will upset people, and jab a finger in their eye. Pretty vile if you ask me...
I see limiting government establishment of religion as keeping government controls low. This is not government control, it's keeping religion in the hands of the people. I am not advocating big government secularism, I am advocating small government in establishing religion.
If you're advocating public establishment, you're the one arguing for greater encompassing government.
You're mistaking equal access by minorities to "tyranny."Allowing a display of a nativity scene, or a Menorah during the holidays is not "showing preference". Government does that by making laws. But, courts have ruled that the minority can tyrannize the majority with the force of Government. I don't believe that was the intent of the Constitution.
Equal access isn't "tyrannical." It's equal. It's in the name. Otherwise, it'd be called "tyrannical access."