8 years ago
4
Americans are entitled to religious freedom, but there are limits
It used to be that budget cuts were the best way to kill a law you hated but lacked the votes to formally repeal. You know, if you can’t beat ’em, defund ’em. Don’t like same-sex marriage, contraception, HIV testing or even child labor laws? Never you worry: Just say that a higher power has exempted you, even if your exemption means trampling on other people’s rights.
Continue Reading
http://www.washingtonpost.com
Join the Discussion
One's freedom ends where another one's begins. I don't understand why this rule is so damn hard to understand.
Oppressing someone else is not, and never shall be a freedom.
On that other site I had one person reply that his religious freedoms were being impeded. I asked him for specifics, and he said he's a photographer and he can't refuse to do gay weddings. I pointed out he can refuse anyone but if he agrees to the shoot and then backs out after he learns the couple is gay then he's in for breach of contract. If he's stupid enough to cite intolerance for his reason why then he's going to get intolerance back.
It's not that they can't understand, it's that they don't want to. They were quite happy with the status quo before, thankyouverymuch.
Your wrong,................. refusal alone can be enough...........http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/us/weighing...h-in-refusal-to-photograph-ceremony.html?_r=0....... Breach of contract has no bearing in these cases..........http://www.financialexpress.com/article/compa...-refusing-to-bake-cake-for-gay-wedding/96237/ .................A gay couple may intentionally go to a Christian establishment and seek service(s) for their marriage with the intention to sue, then go to another establishment and have their needs met. Kind of like having your cake and eating it too?
I find the argument of "but you're oppressing my religious freedom!" a very confusing one. I recently saw a Facebook post by a woman claiming that as an American Christian, she was tired of being oppressed. She claimed she had "become the minority" and was having all of her freedom taken away. How can people be so blind to situations such as that of "religious freedom" being used to unfairly deny equal rights to other citizens? How can they not see that they're causing harm? I usually understand both sides of arguments, at least somewhat, and I do kind of understand how churches might want to retain the right to not actively participate in gay marriage ceremonies (though being gay myself I definitely do not agree with that stance). However, their desire to deny equal rights to others goes far beyond the actual ceremony itself. I know some extremely intelligent and loving people that would like nothing more than to see LGBT people denied the right to marry, have kids, adopt, teach in schools, be puclicly out of the closet, or anything else that may remind them of our existence and allow us to "corrupt their children." I just... I don't understand.
Sorry, veered a little off topic. In an attempt to return (somewhat) to my point, if I even have one: I respect religions, even if I do not follow any myself. I disagree with how people use religion, and I disagree with many interpretations, but that's not really my business. I respect that religious people expect religious freedom, and I want them to have it so long as they don't use it to cause harm. However, I'm baffled by how people think they get to use their religious beliefs to control the legal rights of people who don't even follow the same religion. Perhaps this is something you have to be religious to understand. In my eyes, however, separation of church and state should be followed.