Comments on: Freedom of Religion is a Farce

By: c

Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:46:17 +0000

Y’know “conspicuous” religious symbols are already banned in French schools?

By: Witek

Witek — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 22:22:47 +0000

Interesting comments. Where is Alex?

By: Doug Indeap

Doug Indeap — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:10:04 +0000

The government could hardly operate if anyone could opt out of laws with the excuse that their religion requires or allows it. The U.S. courts have confronted this sort of issue and have ruled that the government cannot enact laws specifically aimed at a particular religion, but if the government enacts laws generally applicable to everyone or at least broad classes of people (e.g, laws concerning traffic, pollution, taxes, contracts, fraud, negligence), it can require everyone, including those who may object on religious grounds, to abide by them.

In rare (one hopes) circumstances, such a generally-applicable law could put an individual in an ethical Catch-22 if it requires one to take actions one considers immoral. This potential dilemma is not peculiar to any particular religion. Anyone–Christian, atheist, etc.–may be put in such a bind. For just this reason, when such binds can be anticipated, provisions may be added to laws affording some relief to conscientious objectors.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:16:52 +0000

interesting though alex, and interesting response witek.
i suppose in the decision to accept religion, or the search for religion/God, then there’s the possibility of any religion being started up. When does a cult stop being a cult and start being a religion. when does scientology move from fanatical belief to recognised faith?

witek’s response is interesting as government needs to bear some responsibility in protecting the public. I suppose the defense of religion is part of that.

In islam the face covering or the hadj is not designed to be a symbol of anonymity, but in witek’s example, the v for vendetta masks are a way to remain anonymous as well as a unifying symbol.

Somewhere in this is a new discussion and thought about privacy laws.

By: Witek

Witek — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:41:41 +0000

Interesting point of view on widely discussed topic. I think that in certain conditions (i.e. governmental office, driving, teaching) there should be a ban on full face coverings. Because soon one might want to start their own religion which requires a face covering like this one:

http://cache.boston.com/resize/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2008/02/10/1202700672_7670/539w.jpg