And this started when? With the Blue Laws of the Puritants? Or earlier than that?
What I’d like to discuss here is the advancement of religion into governing people’s private lives.
Let’s see. The courts could marry anyone they like–a parrot to a cat if they wished. However, the courts, who are separated from religion by the Constitution, would only–until recently–marry a man and a woman. That was a matter of civil law, not church law. Marriage in the Catholic Church was–and still is–between a man and a woman. So nothing has changed. Marriage in the Catholic Church does not prevent gay marriage. Prior to the civil law being changed, Catholics had no say in who the courts married–for example, someone who was previously divorced. The Catholic Church did not and does not marry people who have been previously divorced, either–but that never stopped divorced couples from remarrying through the court system.
So, you were saying?
I agree with all of this. The only thing I’d add is that religion makes communities stronger and more unified.
Hi. We’re in a discussion forum.
But it matters… I see it as a progression:
atheist>agnostic>spiritual>religious
The latter three may all have the similar reasons for their belief, but there is a stark difference in how the last views the rest; either your practice according to those specific beliefs, or you are godless. I think that is important in considering why religions were organized.
Courts dont magically pop up in society. Judges are appointed. Christians through the politicians they elect attempt to appoint judges that share their sociopolitical views. It’s why the Christian right champions supreme court picks who are anti gay marriage or against Roe v Wade. It’s also why politicians regularly play up their faith during elections. Yes, the courts ultimately overruled. But overruled what? State and local laws made by religiously inspired politicians.
You were saying?
1 Like
Thank God for courts that overrule irrational religious inspired law. On a smaller note, some towns you cant buy beer on Sunday. The claim that religious groups dont create laws through representatives is false.
I was saying both people of faith and non-believers are American citizens. Both have a right to say what they believe is best for society as a whole. Both have one vote.
Your turn.
No one said they dont have a right to vote. The question was why atheists care about religion. Atheists care sometimes because religion seeps into their lives via religious voters and politicians creating laws for everyone. That’s what Alex was addressing.
Your turn.
I mean Trigger. Not alex
And the laws that cross the line are eventually struck down by courts. But not always immediately.
And those laws that are being struck down were made or adopted by the government that was elected by American citizens. They were also struck down by the government elected by American citizens. So why are you denigrating the votes of American citizens? Because those citizens are people of faith? Should they be denied their vote and their voice? Is that what you consider the American way?
Nobody is denigrating anyone. The question was why atheists care about religion. Do you care about Democrats? Are you “denigrating” Democrats if you disagree with laws…unconstitutional laws? What an absurd argument.
Nobody is saying their votes or voices should be denied, anymore than not wanting to pay for single payer health care is “not wanting Democrats voices denied”. Atheists care about religion when the religion begins forcefully entering their lives. It’s a very simple, reasonable point. How would you feel if a local Islamic city counsel outlawed pork in your county?
I dont understand why this is so disagreeable lol
1 Like
I don’t denigrate Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, or Independents that vote appositive of what I do. They have their reasons for voting as they do; I have mine. The majority then have the opportunity to run things their way–at least until the next election, when people are once more given a chance to evaluate the current situation.
Republicans care about democratic laws. Atheists care about religious based laws. Laws effect everybody. Everybody effectse everybody. The courts are responsible for striking down unconstitutional laws. Nobody is saying religious ppl shouldnt vote
Why what is disagreeable? Thus far, I am not seeing anything that is disagreeable.
Why did you tell me I’m denigrating religious people then?
Facepalm…
So, you were saying?
