Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even we Texans know it's time for RP to retire to his ranch.
I hope to god he doesn't run for another term as Governor.
Not sure how he keeps winning since he really does not have that big of a love fest going on here.
At least he's not the moron Gov like in CA or NY.
No, rick is his own very special kinda moron; and he belongs all to us.
I wonder how the bill would stand up to a Muslim teacher putting out items of celebration for Ramadan or a Hindu teacher doing the same for Diwali.
Just fine.
You have no right to not encounter someone who practices such. You can however avoid it, choose not to support the person because of it, etc...
I flipped through the radio the other day and heard a islamic singing prayer. I encountered it and moved on to something else. I was not forced to listen, nor do I have the right to demand I not encounter such while I am searching the radio stations. This would be the same if I attended any public area.
With respect to religion, the Constitution guarantees "Congress [and due to the 14th Amendment, the States] shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
That means that government can't impose religion nor can it stop you from exercising your religion. That clearly means that Perry is wrong (big surprise there.) You can be free from government imposed religion.
Perry didn't say anything about imposed religion. The US Constitution does not guarantee that you will live in a country completely void of all evidence of religion. Whether you participate or not is up to you, whether you agree or not is up to you, whether you believe something different is also up to you. Simply seeing a religious symbol doesn't impose religion on you.
Freedom "from" religion as Perry is stating is that of a person who demands they have a right to not encounter religion. This implies a person has the right to dictate to another on what they can not do as it concerns religion in public in order for them to avoid encountering it.
You stated freedom from religion is implied as such with freedom of religion. So, logically freedom of speech would also contain the same concept. That means, someone could then demand people in public not use a given speech or content so as to meet the rights of a person to be free "from" encountering such.
Again, are we free to demand that you can not speak anything I may disagree with in public because I am free from encountering it?
He is a freedom guy. With all the dumb stuff he's done, he's still promoted our freedoms and rights.
Texas has certainly done well during his tenure.
You'd rather have Moombeem Brown in CA or someone like Bloomburg in charge ?
How about ole prison term Rod from IL ?
Illinois had the distinct honor of having 2 former governors in prison at the same time. One was Democrat. The other Republican who was defended by another former Republican governor and lost.
4 of the last 7 Illinois governors have been convicted and sent to prison. Not clear if Illinois governors trend more corrupt than in other states or are less competent at hiding corruption than governors in other states. Probably a little of this and that.
Freedom "from" religion as Perry is stating is that of a person who demands they have a right to not encounter religion. This implies a person has the right to dictate to another on what they can not do as it concerns religion in public in order for them to avoid encountering it.
You stated freedom from religion is implied as such with freedom of religion. So, logically freedom of speech would also contain the same concept. That means, someone could then demand people in public not use a given speech or content so as to meet the rights of a person to be free "from" encountering such.
Again, are we free to demand that you can not speak anything I may disagree with in public because I am free from encountering it?
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander
You stated freedom from religion is implied as such with freedom of religion. So, logically freedom of speech would also contain the same concept. That means, someone could then demand people in public not use a given speech or content so as to meet the rights of a person to be free "from" encountering such.
Since freedom from religion means you cannot be compelled to practice a religion wouldn't it logically follow that freedom of speech would be taken as meaning you cannot be compelled to speak for/against arbitrary issues?
Or is it really just apples and oranges?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
