Sniper religion questions and the right to freedom of religion

[Shy Tall Guy]

I won't argue with anybody's constitutional right to freedom of religion but I'm still quite confused why anybody would need to practice a form of Islam that promotes terrorism and murder? Beyond the obvious reasons of for killing human beings.

Just because the basic right is there should this mean any religion can be practiced by an American citizen? Did our forefathers really think that we should be able to practice any form of religion that some wacko terrorist could come up with? I'm sure they had no concept of just how bad a religion could get.

And if we're going to practice religions like this, because all American citizens are so responsible, why shouldn't they be tracked with a national database of suspect religions and their practitioners? I wonder if such a program was in place during the sniper investigation if the suspects would have been traced quicker. If there were national database of practitioners of suspect religions wouldn't the sniper have been tracked down quicker?

Why do proponents of freedom of religion think there should be no limitations, no registration and no tracking if they have every intention of being responsible Americans?

 

[phrodeau]

Fanaticism may well be the reason religions have faced suppression throughout human history. The US founding fathers were radical in their insistence on protecting religious freedom. It has its consequences, but I think we're better off with religious freedom than without it.

 

[Guest]

 

[WaxNWane]

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Fanaticism may well be the reason religions have faced suppression throughout human history. The US founding fathers were radical in their insistence on protecting religious freedom. It has its consequences, but I think we're better off with religious freedom than without it.

No such thing as a free society. They all have mores and values that limit the people within them or those people live outside the society.

I'm not suggesting taking religion out of the hands of the people but questioning the argument that there should be so few restrictions.

After 13 victims and 3 weeks. Now....nobody wants to consider if religion tracking might have hastened that process?

 

[Don K Dyck]

I won't argue with anybody's constitutional right to freedom of religion but I'm still quite confused why anybody would need to practice a form of Islam that promotes terrorism and murder? Beyond the obvious reasons of for killing human beings.

Just because the basic right is there should this mean any religion can be practiced by an American citizen? Did our forefathers really think that we should be able to practice any form of religion that some wacko terrorist could come up with? I'm sure they had no concept of just how bad a religion could get.

And if we're going to practice religions like this, because all American citizens are so responsible, why shouldn't they be tracked with a national database of suspect religions and their practitioners? I wonder if such a program was in place during the sniper investigation if the suspects would have been traced quicker. If there were national database of practitioners of suspect religions wouldn't the sniper have been tracked down quicker?

Why do proponents of freedom of religion think there should be no limitations, no registration and no tracking if they have every intention of being responsible Americans?

Hi STG, being serious for a brief moment . . .

The freedom of religion was established to prevent the many problems caused in Europe by successive Popes trying to exert control over sovereign kings that Henry Tudor finally settled by forming his own church, after much anguish . . . however, an heir was required . . .

The freedom of religion should not be confused with common law rights to protection from physical violence that existed before the Patriot Act . . .

Courts in Oz and it seems America, are very reluctant to interfere in anything that vaguely resembles, or just might be called religion, be that matter financial, or religious practice or anything else. it creates too much grief . . .

In the US there have been may freaky "religions" claiming to save people from themselves, or the world from itself, or a person from the disturbance in their mind . . . many are just straight-out frauds . . . but at present, a person may hold any belief as areligion, and the courts will not interfere, or will be most reluctant to interfere . . . and that is probably the way it should be . . .

Remember, the Jonestown massacre accounted for about 1,000 deaths of followers, the Family was a bit strange . . . the Manson murders were a result of drug induced mania . . . etc, etc . . .

In our present society, where the Pope protects priestly pederasty by refusing to make it any sort of sin, where the Oz Governor General refused to investigate claims of pederasty while an Archbishop, where the Roman Church in the USA is almost bankrupt because of the number of pederasty suits against it (they may have to sell off thier real estate to pay them out) and the same applies across the world far too frequently, it is natural for people to seek other religious ideas than the discredited establishment creeds.

Buddhism is growing quickly across the wortld . . . the Mormons are reported as the fastest growing church in the West . . . Islam is growing in the West . . . but there are also the unscrupulous shakers and shonks who are in it to prey on the weak-willed rich or emotionally disturbed for their own financial benefit . . . and these parasites occur in all societies . . .

Serious religions have similar tenets of peace among men and creating a caring society. This applies to all the monotheistic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, in historic order. However, many bigots corrupt the basic tenets for their own personal advantage. Fundamentalist anything is always dangerous becuse it believes that what was appropriate in a much earlier period of history still applies literally in today's modern world . . . and it rarely does!!

End of being serious . . .

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Im sorry I just dont see the correlation of individual freedoms to being allowed to practice radical Islamic religion.

The 12 people who lost their lives to this " sniper " - heh they really had great freedom there - their right to practice freedom of religion was a great help against someone who was shooting at them with a rifle as his religion demanded.

I suppose freedom means a lot of different things to a lot of different people - would your freedom be so jeopardized if you were not allowed to practice a particular religion?

any way it is all just an academic argument as there is so many religions being practiced now that any ban would be worthless

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Re: Re: Sniper religion questions and the right to freedom of religion

Hi STG, being serious for a brief moment . . .

I am glad to see that people realize I am being satirical. Not all analogies are perfect, but sometimes a person has to try in order to make a point.

 

[Don K Dyck]

No Evidence Yet . . .

Im sorry I just dont see the correlation of individual freedoms to being allowed to practice radical Islamic religion.

The 12 people who lost their lives to this " sniper " - heh they really had great freedom there - their right to practice freedom of religion was a great help against someone who was shooting at them with a rifle as his religion demanded.

I suppose freedom means a lot of different things to a lot of different people - would your freedom be so jeopardized if you were not allowed to practice a particular religion?

any way it is all just an academic argument as there is so many religions being practiced now that any ban would be worthless

Hi STG, there is no evidence as yet that this was a religiously motivated exercise . . . it may be promoted as such by the media to further promote the coming US-Iraq War for OIL Reserves, but journalists world-wide frequently take the easy way when writing news stories . . . spread the hysteria rather than do the hard investigative journalism like Woodward and Bernstein did on Nixon and Watergate . . .

Sadly, these sniper victims were just innocent people in the wrong place at the wrong time . . .

Radical Islam, as alllegedly practised by the Wahabbi sect of Islam, and Radical Christianity, as practised by the neo-crazy Fundamentalist Christians occupying the White House, are equally dangerous . . . as the proposed US-Iraq War for Oil Reserves will sadly demonstrate at great and unnecessary cost of human life . . .

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Re: No Evidence Yet . . .

Hi STG, there is no evidence as yet that this was a religiously motivated exercise . . .

Well I thought people realized I was being satirical; almost every one of my posts, and the title of the thread itself, is a slightly reworded version of what was posted in the following thread:

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122818

The intention was to show the hypocrisy of many gun control advocates.

 

[Cerberus666]

there is no form of islam that promotes terrorism and murder. there are sick fucks who claim to do things in the name of islam. But islam does not promote violence in any way, shape or form.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

there is no form of islam that promotes terrorism and murder. there are sick fucks who claim to do things in the name of islam. But islam does not promote violence in any way, shape or form.

Read my post above and read the following thread:

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122818

 

[Purple Haze]

Shy Tall Guy was being satirical, now he's handing out reading assignments.

Silly Goose...

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Shy Tall Guy was being satirical, now he's handing out reading assignments.

Silly Goose...

There will be a test in the morning, so make sure you read the appropriate chapters.

 

[Purple Haze]

(GROAN)

 

[Don K Dyck]

Re: Re: No Evidence Yet . . .

Well I thought people realized I was being satirical; almost every one of my posts, and the title of the thread itself, is a slightly reworded version of what was posted in the following thread:

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122818

The intention was to show the hypocrisy of many gun control advocates.

Hi STG, I agree that the gun control proponents are an illogical, niave lot . . . in Nazi germany first they made people register their guns, then they went around and collected them . . . if you failed to deliver your gun(s) up, then your children and then wife were shot one at a time, and you stood the very real risk of being shot also . . . that's what happens in a fehuerstat . . . that apprears to be the plan for the US once the NRA are suppressed . . .

That is what is currently happening in Oz since a student went bezerk in a Monash University (Melbourne Victoria) class, killing two and wounding five others before being overcome . . . using registered hand guns . . . he was an Asian student studying Economics . . . Now the government and the gun control lobby want to ban handguns, further disarming the population below the level of self-defence . . .

Thanks for the great link . . . tell the wankers to stuff off . . .