Sanctioning harm under guise of religious freedom

Sarahs Mum first spotted this excellent article by Eva Cripps at The AIMN

This article should be read out to the High Court when Pedo Pell fronts up.

https://theaimn.com/sanctioning-harm-under-guise-of-religious-freedom/

You think with religions track record the exact opposite would be proposed.
Religion is not an excuse for acting like a “insert appropriate word” and you will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and your mates who cover it up will also be prosecuted.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Sanctioning harm under guise of religious freedom

Sarahs Mum first spotted this excellent article by Eva Cripps at The AIMN

This article should be read out to the High Court when Pedo Pell fronts up.

https://theaimn.com/sanctioning-harm-under-guise-of-religious-freedom/

OK, but presenting “religious freedom” as fundamentally contrary to “other freedoms”, whilst well intentioned, is doomed to fail.

IMO we should all support the right to true religious freedom, which include two requirements missing from the current governments pseudo-religious freedom proposals:

1. Following any religion, or no religion, should not disadvantage any individual, subject to requirement 2.
2. All religious beliefs and practices are subject to the established laws of the land, and where these are inconsistent, the law of the land shall prevail.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Sanctioning harm under guise of religious freedom

Sarahs Mum first spotted this excellent article by Eva Cripps at The AIMN

This article should be read out to the High Court when Pedo Pell fronts up.

https://theaimn.com/sanctioning-harm-under-guise-of-religious-freedom/

OK, but presenting “religious freedom” as fundamentally contrary to “other freedoms”, whilst well intentioned, is doomed to fail.

IMO we should all support the right to true religious freedom, which include two requirements missing from the current governments pseudo-religious freedom proposals:

1. Following any religion, or no religion, should not disadvantage any individual, subject to requirement 2.
2. All religious beliefs and practices are subject to the established laws of the land, and where these are inconsistent, the law of the land shall prevail.

Fair proposal isn’t it

Cymek said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Sanctioning harm under guise of religious freedom

Sarahs Mum first spotted this excellent article by Eva Cripps at The AIMN

This article should be read out to the High Court when Pedo Pell fronts up.

https://theaimn.com/sanctioning-harm-under-guise-of-religious-freedom/

OK, but presenting “religious freedom” as fundamentally contrary to “other freedoms”, whilst well intentioned, is doomed to fail.

IMO we should all support the right to true religious freedom, which include two requirements missing from the current governments pseudo-religious freedom proposals:

1. Following any religion, or no religion, should not disadvantage any individual, subject to requirement 2.
2. All religious beliefs and practices are subject to the established laws of the land, and where these are inconsistent, the law of the land shall prevail.

Fair proposal isn’t it

Yes.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Cymek said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

OK, but presenting “religious freedom” as fundamentally contrary to “other freedoms”, whilst well intentioned, is doomed to fail.

IMO we should all support the right to true religious freedom, which include two requirements missing from the current governments pseudo-religious freedom proposals:

1. Following any religion, or no religion, should not disadvantage any individual, subject to requirement 2.
2. All religious beliefs and practices are subject to the established laws of the land, and where these are inconsistent, the law of the land shall prevail.

Fair proposal isn’t it

Yes.

The only problem would be if the law of the land is based on some nonsense like Sharia law whose aim is to elevate Muslim men and everyone else especially women too bad

Cymek said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Cymek said:

Fair proposal isn’t it

Yes.

The only problem would be if the law of the land is based on some nonsense like Sharia law whose aim is to elevate Muslim men and everyone else especially women too bad

That would be the same nonsense as basing it on Christianity.

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Yes.

The only problem would be if the law of the land is based on some nonsense like Sharia law whose aim is to elevate Muslim men and everyone else especially women too bad

That would be the same nonsense as basing it on Christianity.

True but the punishments are somewhat harsher.

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

The only problem would be if the law of the land is based on some nonsense like Sharia law whose aim is to elevate Muslim men and everyone else especially women too bad

That would be the same nonsense as basing it on Christianity.

True but the punishments are somewhat harsher.

Equal rights and embracing the UN charter on Human Rights

Tau.Neutrino said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

That would be the same nonsense as basing it on Christianity.

True but the punishments are somewhat harsher.

Equal rights and embracing the UN charter on Human Rights

Yes you have some laws of the land almost straight out of the old testament were punishments like stoning for the victim of a rape and the perpetrators is rarely punished and atheism is not allowed as its against god, nonsense like that that deserves no respect.
We condemn Western law (fair enough) but gee you wouldn’t want to be gay, transgender, lesbian, a women or an atheist, non majority religion in some places, death is the outcome quite often

Cymek said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Cymek said:

True but the punishments are somewhat harsher.

Equal rights and embracing the UN charter on Human Rights

Yes you have some laws of the land almost straight out of the old testament were punishments like stoning for the victim of a rape and the perpetrators is rarely punished and atheism is not allowed as its against god, nonsense like that that deserves no respect.
We condemn Western law (fair enough) but gee you wouldn’t want to be gay, transgender, lesbian, a women or an atheist, non majority religion in some places, death is the outcome quite often

Yes, some places are still living in the past.

Religions in general should work towards equal rights and embracing the UN charter on human rights.

there is a tendency to tie most such deviancy into religion, to the extent a person might think priest, that sort of thing, which has to be substantially wrong at some point, to overshoot, to do that

the conservatives are keen to limit the official instruments of state, they’d he happy to deny it out of existence, much as they could. Government to them is an apparatus given to bloat, almost irretrievably

a lot of middle politics is in fact quite parochial, including a lot of the right

there is an argument that religion has long been a source of power that diluted state power, as many things do, you could generalize democracy does this

mostly the organic aspects of culture rely on informal behavior controls

transition said:

there is a tendency to tie most such deviancy into religion, to the extent a person might think priest, that sort of thing, which has to be substantially wrong at some point, to overshoot, to do that

the conservatives are keen to limit the official instruments of state, they’d he happy to deny it out of existence, much as they could. Government to them is an apparatus given to bloat, almost irretrievably

a lot of middle politics is in fact quite parochial, including a lot of the right

there is an argument that religion has long been a source of power that diluted state power, as many things do, you could generalize democracy does this

mostly the organic aspects of culture rely on informal behavior controls

This is really about improving human behaviour.

Understanding the behaviour of adult males in control of groups of children which can bring out the worst in men concerning sexual dominance, rape and abuse of children.

Improving the doctrine of religions.

Improving the behaviour of religions towards children, women and men.

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

There is a meme that keeps going past about how the 10 commandments keeps on being dragged out…but the beatitudes /sermon on the mount hardly ever gets an airing.

So more Judeo and less Christian.

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

It is possible to rewrite all of those laws from a perspective rooted in humanism, and come up with a perfectly functional set of laws well suited to a modern society and economy. Perhaps even better suited.

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

It is possible to rewrite all of those laws from a perspective rooted in humanism, and come up with a perfectly functional set of laws well suited to a modern society and economy. Perhaps even better suited.

Of course. However, you have seen how easily the populace can be educated to change. It will certainly take a good while.

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

It is possible to rewrite all of those laws from a perspective rooted in humanism, and come up with a perfectly functional set of laws well suited to a modern society and economy. Perhaps even better suited.

Of course. However, you have seen how easily the populace can be educated to change. It will certainly take a good while.

Oh, it has already happened. The various Criminal Codes for each state were written in the early 1900s. Most legislation is already along secular lines.

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

It is possible to rewrite all of those laws from a perspective rooted in humanism, and come up with a perfectly functional set of laws well suited to a modern society and economy. Perhaps even better suited.

Laws and values are for their time. Jesus re-evaluated the old testament but the good news is he’s coming back to do a reappraisal in the fullness of time.
In the mean time the last thing we need is for humans setting their own rules, that would be a clusterfuck of some proportion. God gave them dominion over the planet and the creatures within it and Lord knows they fucked that. No, in the next testament humans will have their power reduced given their track record however there may be some amendments to the ass coveting bill. Well I hope so.

Peak Warming Man said:

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

It is possible to rewrite all of those laws from a perspective rooted in humanism, and come up with a perfectly functional set of laws well suited to a modern society and economy. Perhaps even better suited.

Laws and values are for their time. Jesus re-evaluated the old testament but the good news is he’s coming back to do a reappraisal in the fullness of time.
In the mean time the last thing we need is for humans setting their own rules, that would be a clusterfuck of some proportion. God gave them dominion over the planet and the creatures within it and Lord knows they fucked that. No, in the next testament humans will have their power reduced given their track record however there may be some amendments to the ass coveting bill. Well I hope so.

Nah. It is called democracy. Laws are by definition worldly matters, not matters of the spiritual.

the great thing about the legal system is the introductions of buts and ifs

well, yeah sure murder is a life sentence BUT….

yep, everyone will be judged equally, IF…

we have laws based on buts and ifs.. not that I think it’s wrong.

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

It is possible to rewrite all of those laws from a perspective rooted in humanism, and come up with a perfectly functional set of laws well suited to a modern society and economy. Perhaps even better suited.

It’s bullshit anyway. Modern secular states based on the rule of law exist despite religion not because of it.

Witty Rejoinder said:

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

It is possible to rewrite all of those laws from a perspective rooted in humanism, and come up with a perfectly functional set of laws well suited to a modern society and economy. Perhaps even better suited.

It’s bullshit anyway. Modern secular states based on the rule of law exist despite religion not because of it.

No way!

Yaweh!

Is it true that left over wine, the symbolic blood, and wafers, the symbolic body, of the symbolic Christ may not be poured down the sink and thence into the sewers with the not so symbolic shit?

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

Or not.

As the case might be.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Sanctioning harm under guise of religious freedom

Sarahs Mum first spotted this excellent article by Eva Cripps at The AIMN

This article should be read out to the High Court when Pedo Pell fronts up.

https://theaimn.com/sanctioning-harm-under-guise-of-religious-freedom/

imho
allowing Priest to get married
would go a long way toward addressing
the eh~hem God-Given instinct to have sex.

Witty Rejoinder said:

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In western societies the law is rooted, rooted in Judeo/Christian principles.
We live in a religious based society.
That’s pretty much it.

It is possible to rewrite all of those laws from a perspective rooted in humanism, and come up with a perfectly functional set of laws well suited to a modern society and economy. Perhaps even better suited.

It’s bullshit anyway. Modern secular states based on the rule of law exist despite religion not because of it.

that’s an interesting proposition, seems true enough, but I wonder if the existence of the state is (essentially) open to denial (of its existence – extent of) much the same as God is. A lot of people think of religion in terms of faith, the extent God is acknowledged, but the reality is most faith is about your thoughts (choice) about to what extent a God (or the non-physical world) exists. The incorporeal, the intangible, much of which reality originates. The state has similarities, in a democracy (or of freedom) you have choices about to what extent you acknowledge it

I note too the law is mostly a contingent backdrop, most behavior controls are informal, relying on agreement, rather than imposing force.

transition said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

party_pants said:

It is possible to rewrite all of those laws from a perspective rooted in humanism, and come up with a perfectly functional set of laws well suited to a modern society and economy. Perhaps even better suited.

It’s bullshit anyway. Modern secular states based on the rule of law exist despite religion not because of it.

that’s an interesting proposition, seems true enough, but I wonder if the existence of the state is (essentially) open to denial (of its existence – extent of) much the same as God is. A lot of people think of religion in terms of faith, the extent God is acknowledged, but the reality is most faith is about your thoughts (choice) about to what extent a God (or the non-physical world) exists. The incorporeal, the intangible, much of which reality originates. The state has similarities, in a democracy (or of freedom) you have choices about to what extent you acknowledge it

I note too the law is mostly a contingent backdrop, most behavior controls are informal, relying on agreement, rather than imposing force.

I wish you had told me all this before I sent in my latest tax forms.

I always assumed there was some sort of tangible punishment if you didn’t pay your taxes.

Religion when looked at even slightly closely falls down, its all such stupid illogical contradictory nonsense, even ancient alien colonisation makes more sense to explain human evolution

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

It’s bullshit anyway. Modern secular states based on the rule of law exist despite religion not because of it.

that’s an interesting proposition, seems true enough, but I wonder if the existence of the state is (essentially) open to denial (of its existence – extent of) much the same as God is. A lot of people think of religion in terms of faith, the extent God is acknowledged, but the reality is most faith is about your thoughts (choice) about to what extent a God (or the non-physical world) exists. The incorporeal, the intangible, much of which reality originates. The state has similarities, in a democracy (or of freedom) you have choices about to what extent you acknowledge it

I note too the law is mostly a contingent backdrop, most behavior controls are informal, relying on agreement, rather than imposing force.

I wish you had told me all this before I sent in my latest tax forms.

I always assumed there was some sort of tangible punishment if you didn’t pay your taxes.

You get a phone call demanding payment in gift cards

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

It’s bullshit anyway. Modern secular states based on the rule of law exist despite religion not because of it.

that’s an interesting proposition, seems true enough, but I wonder if the existence of the state is (essentially) open to denial (of its existence – extent of) much the same as God is. A lot of people think of religion in terms of faith, the extent God is acknowledged, but the reality is most faith is about your thoughts (choice) about to what extent a God (or the non-physical world) exists. The incorporeal, the intangible, much of which reality originates. The state has similarities, in a democracy (or of freedom) you have choices about to what extent you acknowledge it

I note too the law is mostly a contingent backdrop, most behavior controls are informal, relying on agreement, rather than imposing force.

I wish you had told me all this before I sent in my latest tax forms.

I always assumed there was some sort of tangible punishment if you didn’t pay your taxes.

chuckle

Cymek said:

Religion when looked at even slightly closely falls down, its all such stupid illogical contradictory nonsense, even ancient alien colonisation makes more sense to explain human evolution

your right, elron had much to preach about them

SCIENCE said:

Cymek said:

Religion when looked at even slightly closely falls down, its all such stupid illogical contradictory nonsense, even ancient alien colonisation makes more sense to explain human evolution

your right, elron had much to preach about them

I don’t believe it, its interesting to think about and would be exciting if true but I’m not that out there

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

Cymek said:

Religion when looked at even slightly closely falls down, its all such stupid illogical contradictory nonsense, even ancient alien colonisation makes more sense to explain human evolution

your right, elron had much to preach about them

I don’t believe it, its interesting to think about and would be exciting if true but I’m not that out there

The problem with that line of thinking is that it might well explain us but it still doesn’t explain the aliens…

furious said:

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

your right, elron had much to preach about them

I don’t believe it, its interesting to think about and would be exciting if true but I’m not that out there

The problem with that line of thinking is that it might well explain us but it still doesn’t explain the aliens…

Yes

furious said:

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

your right, elron had much to preach about them

I don’t believe it, its interesting to think about and would be exciting if true but I’m not that out there

The problem with that line of thinking is that it might well explain us but it still doesn’t explain the aliens…

…or ggnus

Tau.Neutrino said:

Sanctioning harm under guise of religious freedom

Sarahs Mum first spotted this excellent article by Eva Cripps at The AIMN

This article should be read out to the High Court when Pedo Pell fronts up.

https://theaimn.com/sanctioning-harm-under-guise-of-religious-freedom/

I was a devote believer at one time
who became associated with an atheist
and upon a single word/whim turned on a dime.

The remarkable thing following the period of waiting
to (honest to god) see if I’d be struck down by lightening
I found myself feeling as if I’d removed a dirty pair of socks
and eventually not BELIEVING That I was ever “THAT Gullible”

It’s beyond me how I’d fallen for a lie (aka Fairy Tale) for 55+YEARS.

I’m as embarrassed as a rube that learns his $100 ROLEX is a Worthless Fake

Anyway lately I’ve been informing the proud Rolex owners that
“I believe in Jesus……I just DON’T BELIEVE IN GOD.” :-) O-8=

and giggling as they back away to avoid any errant bolt outta’ the blue