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.
As for haning religious pics in school...who cares, as long as they are willing to give the same coverage to other religions. I do wonder what they would do if someone presented them with a pic of Buddah to hang on their wall???
So, you're OK with funding religious symbols through your tax payments?
My tax dollars are wasted on so many things I wouldn't know where to start. But I probably wouldn't start with something that's just going to make atheists look intolerant and petty and vindictive. Do we really want to fight god and apple pie as a primary strategy?
Besides, the OP is talking about one painting purchased over two generations ago -- or for all we know, donated. It's not enough about money to talk about, it's about symbolism. If we want to destroy religious hegemony we have to win legitimately, by winning enough hearts and minds such that they will not want their icons.
My tax dollars are wasted on so many things I wouldn't know where to start. But I probably wouldn't start with something that's just going to make atheists look intolerant and petty and vindictive. Do we really want to fight god and apple pie as a primary strategy?
Besides, the OP is talking about one painting purchased over two generations ago -- or for all we know, donated. It's not enough about money to talk about, it's about symbolism. If we want to destroy religious hegemony we have to win legitimately, by winning enough hearts and minds such that they will not want their icons.
Yes, we must start winning hearts (minds), they are one in the same. We need to stop giving legitimacy to these legends so that we can convince children to think critically and logically. These types of skirmishes will go a long way toward real change by helping children and adults realize the danger of government sanctioning these myths. I was raised to believe that everyone KNEW that God and Jesus existed. I survived public school-led prayer every morning, school plays based upon the Bible, and teachers who taught how the Bible related to all subjects and vice-versa. Much of my school years was wasted with this nonsense and I don't want that to continue with current and future generations.
How is it possible for a corporation to have "religious freedom?"
The Fourteenth Amendment has been ruled to apply to corporations because they are organizations of people, and that people should not be deprived of their constitutional rights when they act collectively.
Actually I am looking at it from the point of view of the US government and the citizens of the US. You are only looking at if from the point of view of the employer.
But that is irrelevant on both sides. A law was passed that needs to apply to all equally. I have pointed out many logical results of religious exemptions, and could come up with hundreds more. This would make this law, or any, irrelevant if there was a blanket exception for religious opinion.
As a case in point, I could start a religion that objected to paying taxes. Does that mean I no longer have to?
He president, congress, senate and supreme court disagree.
HL is not a church. It is a corporation. It exists under different rules than a church.
If hunting licenses were recognized as a human right and mandated by law, then yes, absolutely. PETA would have to provide them.
The corporation does not belong to the government or the employees. As TWD stated, as much as I hate agreeing with him (j/k), the employees have the option of taking employment elsewhere, if they want their employer to pay for contraception. This is the reason your previous hypothetical examples would not and will not occur. If allowed to work freely, the market will resolve these issues. If employer-provided health care for contraception is demanded by good employees, the employers will typically succumb to their demands.
As much as I believe that Buddhist taxpayer money shouldn't be used to fund Christian symbols, neither should Christian taxpayer money be used to fund services against their religions. We have means of determining legitimate religions from illegitimate religions, so your fears won't come to fruition.
Oooohhhh. I feel like a fox in the henhouse with this one. I really do not know where to start, but I do know that no matter what, I am going to get a mouthful of chicken-ey goodness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaznjohn
The corporation does not belong to the government or the employees.
I never said that it did. But corporations have more power than individuals. This is why government should have extra protections to ensure the rights of the powerless. It often does not work this way, but with Obamacare the government is tryin to do the right thing.
Quote:
As TWD stated, as much as I hate agreeing with him (j/k), the employees have the option of taking employment elsewhere, if they want their employer to pay for contraception.
Theoretically, yes, in fact no. Look around. Our economy is not doing so well right now. Unemployment is high and getting a job is not that simple. So your suggestion is not a solution at all.
Quote:
This is the reason your previous hypothetical examples would not and will not occur. If allowed to work freely, the market will resolve these issues. If employer-provided health care for contraception is demanded by good employees, the employers will typically succumb to their demands.
Right. Which is why wages have stagnated for the past 30 years, the number of union jobs have declined, the percentage of workers covered by health insurance keeps dropping and jobs are shipped overseas. The reality is all around you, and proves you wrong.
The thought that the free market solves all is an unfounded hypothesis. In fact, I can point to places like Somalia where there is no government regulation. That is as free a market as you can get. But oddly, their economy is a shambles. The reality is that a regulated market is superior. Unfortunately, our regulations skew too far in favor of corporations rather than people, but it is better than nothing.
My previous hypotheticals can and will occur if left unchecked. Want proof? Look at what Hobby Lobby is trying!!! I am simply pointing out what other religions can do based upon what the company you are defending is already doing. To say that nobody else will try it is naive and even stupid.
Quote:
As much as I believe that Buddhist taxpayer money shouldn't be used to fund Christian symbols, neither should Christian taxpayer money be used to fund services against their religions. We have means of determining legitimate religions from illegitimate religions, so your fears won't come to fruition.
AHA!
First, check out the IRS.http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf There is no doctrinal test for establishing a religion. Fill out some paperwork, file it, BOOM, you have a church. So, although you state we have ways of determine legitimate vs illegitimate religions, you are in fact wrong. We do not.
Now, even if we did, that might be worse. Remember that pesky document you seem bound and determined to ignore, shred, and otherwise destroy? Most people refer to it as the constitution. It is filled with language about there being no religious test (for office, but it has been broadly interpreted), and not establishing a religion.
BUT, you want to determine the validity of religions for purposes of determining whether or not they can be exempted from the law. Sounds an AWFULLY lot like establishing a preferential religion. You have not simply slid down the slippery slope of violating the constitution, you jumped off the cliff.
The Fourteenth Amendment has been ruled to apply to corporations because they are organizations of people, and that people should not be deprived of their constitutional rights when they act collectively.
Sometime corporations are treated as people, sometimes they are not. Yes, corporations have the right of speech (I disagree with this finding, but I accept the authority of SCOTUS).
Bottom line is that sometimes corporations are treated as people, other times they are not. Nobody has found that a corporation can have a religious viewpoint.
Mystic, I have to agree with fishbrains on this, I think what a lot of people seem to forget is that a public school is a government building, it's built with gov't money, whether it be Local, State or Federal it's still gov't money and when you stop and think that it is the people, the ordinary citizen that pays their taxes to support these gov't buildings and pay the salary and wages of the administrators and the teachers of the school's, then they are bound by the laws and the constitution of this country, not those of any particular religion.
That is a bogus argument. Public property is part of the public square, period. If freedom of speech and freedom of religious expression is to have ANY meaning . . . it must exist on public property and in the public square. Establishment of religion is NOT the same as merely acknowledging a generic God on public property.
It is not a bogus argument to think that a publicly owned building - that is a building owned by all the public - should not be endorsing the religion of any subset of that public over any other set. Especially in (but not limited to) situations where it is further public money used to engage in that endoresement.
Frankly, I don't get why ultra religious people feel the need to be constantly reminded of their faith every place they go. Is it really that weak?
They're not worried about their own faith. The target here is other people's children while they're held as a captive audience.
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.
