Religious Freedom Law
Yes
Side Score: 7
|
No
Side Score: 12
|
|
|
|
1
point
Let it up to the voters? Gee what a novel idea. Allow the voters in each state to determine the freedoms they have to protect themselves from political correct Government control. Gee I thought those rights were already given us in the Constitution. Oh, I forget, the Democrat party wants the Constitution to be a living, changing document that can change with the PC times. Side: Yes
1
point
1
point
Yes I would. Allow me to court Vivekanand, "To be good and to do good is the soul of all religions". Religion only teaches us harmony, peace and the way to achieve salvation. Different religious persons follow different paths to come closure to their God and achieve peace. The differences of these beliefs leads to war only when there is a third party which understood only half the meaning of religious beliefs and teachings. Some times, in the power, people take religion as excuse to justify their gruesome activity but in reality religion has nothing to do with that. Side: Yes
|
4
points
1
point
There is no need for a religious freedom law due to the fact that we already have religious freedom. No one is prohibited from believing what they want to believe. This argument is about whether or not people can use their religion as an excuse to be bigots and hate/discriminate against other groups that they do not agree with. Don't want to bake a cake for a gay wedding? Then don't own a bakery. You're allowed to believe that being gay is wrong, but you cannot enforce this view on others. You can't pick and choose who you want to service. If you are working a job where you run into instances that conflict with your religion, then do not take that job. Don't cry and say that you are not receiving religious freedom. You are. You are just being denied the ability to be a hateful bigot. Side: No
|