Is the government trying to infringe on religious rights ?
Everywhere on the news I see the government interfering with church issues and other thing of that nature . I know where I stand on the subject , I'm curious to see how others feel . This not a debate on the validity of religion or whether religion is evil or not , this a debate about rights of religion and whether or not the government is crossing the line .
Yes
Side Score: 5
|
 |
No
Side Score: 16
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
1
point
I feel that the government has crossed the line . Recently in Houston , Texas an openly homosexual major tried to get churches to turn over their sermons and any other forms of communication they had with others . That is an invasion of privacy . Also , why did she want the sermons ? The reason is she wanted to see what the church said about homosexuality ( do not turn this into a debate about sexuality , I am only mentioning it because it is relevant to the situation ) . You know what other countries read church sermons to see what they are saying ? Communist Cuba and Vietnam . You know what the original purpose of "separation of church and state" was for ? To keep the government out of church affairs and allow the church in government affairs ( right to hold office ) . It has become the church needs to stay out of government affairs and the government gets to tell the church what it can and cannot do . That is an infringement of religious rights . Something this nation was founded on . The pilgrims came here to avoid the government interfering with the church , and now this problem has arose again . Churches are now being forced to marry gays against their beliefs and can face prison time if they don't . Why , because the government is getting involved where it doesn't belong . Again , not a debate about sexuality , it's just relevant to the conversation . A business owned by two Christians that made wedding cakes refused to make a cake for a gay wedding because it went against their beliefs . These two had gay friends , they loved gay people and had no problem with them getting married . The problem was when they were involved , they refused to be involved in something they didn't believe in . And they received hate mail and were forced to shut down their business . They owned a business and businesses have a right to refuse service and they had their right to their religion but the courts ignored this and fined them . A senator said this about the incident " our goal is not to shut down businesses but to rehabilitate them " . Rehabilitate them , for what having an opinion that he didn't agree with . Rehabilitating people simply for having a religion sounds like the words of a communist . Regardless of what you think of religion , we have a right to practice it . But our religious rights , rights the USA was founded on , are being overridden by a controlling government . Everyone is talking about equal rights for all , but who is "all" because based on what is happening in our society it seems "all" is all nonreligious people . Kids in schools can't read their bible or talk about Jesus . This is an infringement of first amendment rights . I will stand alone for what I believe in , but I am standing for freedom and I am willing to bet I'm not alone . And for those you who are going to say " I see you are for religious rights but not homosexuality rights " I am fine with homosexual rights until they take precedent over religious rights and force Christians to trade theirs beliefs for theirs or be punished . Side: Yes
2
points
"Everywhere on the news I see the government interfering with church issues and other thing of that nature ." You must be watching Fox "News" then. Stop doing that. It will rot your brain. "why did she want the sermons ? The reason is she wanted to see what the church said about homosexuality" Not true. Here is what is really happening with that case. Opponents of the equal rights ordinance tried to force a repeal referendum. The city attorney disqualified a lot of the signatures that were submitted to get the repeal referendum on the ballot. Some pastors are suing him for doing so. In order to get the evidence to support the cities case, subpoenas were issued to gather the evidence. The city feels that the sermons may contain proof that the pastors involved in the bulk of the signature gathering activity were encouraging their flock to subvert the proper signature gathering process. The pastors made their sermons relevant to the case by using the pulpit to do political organizing, which is a violation of their 501(c)(3) tax free status. This isn't about persecuting Christians, it's about making them abide by the same laws that everyone else has to abide by. If churches want to engage in politics they are free to do that, but they have to pay taxes like the rest of us if they want to do it. "Churches are now being forced to marry gays against their beliefs and can face prison time if they don't." I assume you're referring to the Hitching Post chapel. That story has also been completely twisted by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) an anti-gay group. Here is a more accurate version of what is happening "A business owned by two Christians that made wedding cakes refused to make a cake for a gay wedding because it went against their beliefs... they received hate mail and were forced to shut down their business." They were not forced to shut down their business. They moved the business to their home because their sales decreased because people didn't like their bigotry so they stopped doing business with them. It's no different than all the Christians boycotting companies JC Penny, Disney, Heinz, Starbucks, etc. for supporting gay rights. Do you think it's okay for businesses to refuse to serve Christians, or minorities, or republicans, or women, or can they only discriminate against gays? If a gay person owns the only hospital in a town, do you think they should be able to refuse service to Christians? The owners of Microsoft and Apple are both atheists, would it be okay if they refused to sell computers to theists? "Kids in schools can't read their bible or talk about Jesus." Side: No
0
points
First point , it's not just the news , these issues are being brought up everywhere . Second , you seem to forget that the signatures were deemed completely valid , the city attorney didn't care and disqualified them . How exactly do you know they are using the pulpit to do political organizing , where you there ? I was not talking about that case specially , I was talking about how it is happening to a lot of churches in general . They were practically forced to shut down because no one would shop there , the fact they had to relocate their business is still bad . Third , for your last point , they refused service because it was against their belief to be involved with gay weddings. If they had been in another form of business then I would agree it would be unreasonable to deny service . For the second part of your last point , that is irrelevant unless the atheist worships a religion where it would be against their belief to sell computers to Christians , then I would be fine with it . And about the " not true " part at the bottom . It is true , a lot of schools tell their students not to read their bibles , class presidents can't say anything about Jesus without the school censoring their speech . Side: Yes
|
NO ---- Rather our federal government is trying to move its ponderous ass around without stepping on someones PC-ness. Moves by smaller local governments to bring religious preference into governance are usually called out immediately. Liberty for all remains a very popular part of our Constitution. I know you said you did not intend a commentary on homosexuality yet most of your examples site gay rights. IMO that problem is primarily about social acceptance. Side: No
1
point
1
point
|
