A country founded to allow freedom from religious persecution is now using religion to persecute freedoms


This entry was posted in Civil Rights, Government, Religion, Secularism. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to A country founded to allow freedom from religious persecution is now using religion to persecute freedoms

  1. Not a racial issue at all. it is about what kind of behaviors we are willing to teach our all children in public schools is right and wrong.
    because we all know this is what is already happening and will increase if allowed to.


    • The difficlty is that you are claiming homosexuality has to do with being right or wrong, instead of just a condition no different than being right- or left-handed or -footed, having blue, brown, green eyes, or any other actual physical conditions.

      What is what is already happening? That schools are teaching scientific facts that homosexuality is natural? You do know that it IS natural, right? Just in the mammalian line of the various species, there are more than 1500 different mammalian species with homosexual populations.

      Nobody is attempting to elminate God, either. It is an issue of getting YOUR personal faith-based belief about God out of the public domain, because it is a personal issue, not a public commandment that the Christian perception of the God of Abraham is the “only true God”. Could it be that you WANT the US to be a Christian theocracy? Would that make you happy, maybe?

      • We are born right handed and left handed, with green eyes or blue eyes. We are not born gay.
        We are however born knowing right from wrong but we don’t quite have the capacity to admit what is right when what we really want is wrong.
        Which is what you have proven repeatedly in this dialogue.

    • Why do you demand one is not born homosexual or heterosexual? What empirical evidence do you have to validate your assertion?

      Do you believe it is a choice everyone makes, maybe? If so, at what age did you decide that you were going to be heterosexual?

  2. Isn’t it interesting that a country who’s freedoms are based on God given rights are now using those rights to eliminate God ?

  3. Your point #2.
    “Why do you think it is a good thing to discriminate against any given group? Are you old enough to remember when “people of color” could not even eat at the same table or counter as those who are “white”?”
    I appreciate your this question and it is a good question.
    So believe me when I say I’m sorry for saying this in short form.
    I’m not for hate or racial discrimination. But this issue is not about race, it’s about behavioral choices.
    Race is genetic.
    Homosexuality is not genetic and therefore not racial.
    People are people regardless of race, but race is always genetic.
    The roots of homosexuality are different.
    Homosexuality is not biological.
    For every test that claims to hint a biological cause for homosexuality the next test will prove the opposite is true. This is true for hormonal theory as well.

    Your point #3
    You can live as you choose.
    This is what I believe.
    Celebrating diversity is not accepting other people’s ideology, but accepting other people despite differences in ideology.
    I believe sexuality is sacred.
    Marriage is sacred.
    And I believe homosexuality wrong and certainly not right or good or natural as the LBGT community has forced our public schools to teach and indoctrinate our children.

    • I believe you have been ignoring the findings about homosexuality. Yes, there is no evidence that it is genetic, however it has been shown in many studies that it is hormonal in nature. It is not just a choice someone makes. If it were, please tell me at what age you decided to be heterosexual.

      Studies at research centers at Northwestern University, University of North Dakota, Tokyo University of Medicine, and many others have shown that homosexuality is AT LEAST hormonal, developed during prenatal development stages.

      What is it specifically that you find wrong with homosexuality? Is it because of the misunderstandings of the Bible where many people think it is talked about as an abomination? Romans 1:26, maybe? How about Leviticus 18:22? 1Cor 6:9? If those are what you are thinking, those are NOT about homosexuality at all. Even the story in Genesis about Lot and the visiting angels – not about homosexuality in the least.

      Believe what you like. I just happen to disagree with your perspectives.

      • These same studies sought yo confirm the hormonal theory and found that many with the imbalances chose heterosexual life and others without hormonal imbalance chose homosexuality. Something else is causing this.

  4. Your Point #1.
    “Facts are what are true regardless of perception. Truths are subjective and are variable, depending on the culture.
    What is right and wrong? Most of the time, it depends on what a particular society agrees upon.”

    Facts are true and truth is subjective? No offence, but this is a contradictory statement.

    A thing is either true or false and cannot be both true and false at the same time, true and subjective also.

    If cultures dictate right and wrong then by your thinking California voters who voted against gay marriage were right, an outcome I suppose you do not agree with.

    • First, let us talk about the last issue. You claimed that because the majority of the residents of the state of California voted against gay marriage was right. That is a fact. The difficulty is that when popular vote goes against constitutional rights, the constitution trumps popular vote.

      Apparently, you are thinking that “truth” and “fact” are the same thing. They are not. It is a truth with a tribe in New Guinea that, before going out among their tribe, they must wear a small “belt” which is more like a gold chain around their waists. If they do not, they believe they are excessively naked. Is that YOUR truth? Is that how you live – going out in public wearing only a gold chain around your waist?

      Yes, I do not agree with ANY discrimination, regardless of gender, reflectivity of skin, being left-handed vs. right-handed, or for any other reason, including color of eyes. Why do YOU think it is good to discriminate willy-nilly?

  5. The “will of the people is the law of the land” is good so long as the people are good. Then its bad. Freedom of from religious persecution was based on religious beliefs. That all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. Christian beliefs gave us this worldview.
    The point you make here is like biting the hand that feeds you.

    • Sorry to correct you, but Christian beliefs did NOT give this world view. It comes from way before even the Code of Hammurabi, back to the oldest “written religion” which happens to be Hinduism, and even before then, from Animism, which predates Hinduism by many millennia.

      Are you implying, maybe, that the U.S. is a Christian-based nation?

      • How can that be?? Hindi gave you the caste system base on reincarnation births of twice or three time born? The Dalit are forced to serve like slaves to their landlords and forbidden to own property or get schooling.
        Hindi varna locks people out of growth by honoring lineage above ability. Hindus would not say all men are equal.

      • Hinduism states that people are different in personality and skills. The cultural Caste System talks about being with different qualities from birth. Big difference in thinking.

        Please remember that many times, cultural and religious lines cross and blur, making it difficult for those who have not studied the actual teachings to understand the intricacies, making mistakes in beliefs. Look at how many people believe that Hindus worship cows which keep them from eating them. In reality, they do not worship cows. They revere all life, but the reason they do not eat beef is because, to them, it is disgusting – much like people in the US eating cat and dog.

      • This unequal and oppressive belief comes from your oldest texts. You don’t deny it. This is the truth regardless of whether its packaged in the false appearance of piety or tradition, whether ancient or modern. No. Hinduism would never give these rights and it still denies it to it’s own.

      • MY oldest texts? Really? I am Hindu, am I?

        Do you not understand the difference between culture and religion? They are not the same thing.

      • If you are not Hindu and your defense of it and position as a source of equality from it have no personal foundation, why posit such a baseless opinion?
        The religious and cultural ramifications are intertwined in India.

      • When does having both the knowledge of a theology as well as the professional responsibility to hold this knowledge in as accurate a form as possible “baseless opinion”? With that thinking, I guess you would accuse me of being Zoroastrian, Baha’i, Jain, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Animist, Buddhist, Confucianist, Taoist, Shinto and a slew of other religious followers, too, right?

        Do you tell your teachers in high school, or if you have attended university, didi you inform your professors that what they are giving you is “baseless opinion” and therefore holds no intellectual “water”?

      • Interesting how the point you just made smacks of the kind of oppression you first claim caused this post. Will you lord your supposed credentials over us even to the extent that you clearly violate the integrity of your own intellect and that of others?

      • Oh, I see – you have no respect for academic educators, I see. YOU are the one making the assertions that the US is a Christian nation, when it is not. Ask any academic historian in the university environment and they will tell you where Benjamin Franklin got the basic structure of the U.S. constitution. (Hint: It was not from the bible.)

        Since you have not shown adequate evidence as to why you think my understanding of the various religions give you reason to say what I have stated is “baseless opinion” but decided to just mock the facts, I see no more reason to continue with your ranting. If you want to rant, go to a daycare center and whine to the pre-school teachers there how the “big bad professor” picked on you.

      • I see abuse of one’s standing, whether academic or political or religious, is the issue here. Franklin, Jefferson, and Adams appealed to God over King George. One need no academic credentials to posit this fact, and to refute it is to show utter lack of respect for academia and truth.

      • So, you think that Franklin (deist/agnostic), Jefferson (deist) and Adams (who wrote in the Treaty of Tripoli that no way was the US based on Judeo-Christian ethics) were actually Christians? Nothing is saying that what they may have called God was the God of Abraham, was it.

        It also looks as if you need to learn U.S. history, given that it was not about King vs. God which caused the American Revolution.

        If you ever decide to prove that the U.S. constitution was built on Christian morals, merely because it mentions “by their creator” (which does not demand it is the God of Abraham, does it!) then please let me know. Otherwise, I think we are done as it appears you are stuck in your beliefs without any historical or cultural facts to back your claims up. Assumption is very dangerous, especially since it has been and is proven by you currently, to be about 95% wrong.

      • Says your academic credentials ? Did you major in historical revisionism? Or subject deflection ? Or in changing what people say ? Christian beliefs, doctrine, and authority was the common reference in law and government.
        As for what they meant by Creator? Maybe they meant Darwin, or Science. You work over truth like it was play-doe.

      • Notice how you do not back up any of your claims, but lay out attempts at petty insult and pejoratives as if that is all you have.

        Apparently, you are not familiar with Mr. Franklin with his great interest in the Five Great Nations of the Native People (Iroquois tribes) where he got the structure for the U.S. Constitution.


        I doubt you will read this article because it comes from, dare I say it, an academic source which has been peer-reviewed.

      • I doubt you really are an academic. I doubt you have peers with any credibility. And your academic source is probably a comic book. The freedoms you choose to abuse were afforded because of the predominant Christian beliefs at the time the basis for freedom was written. “We find these truths to be self evident, that all men were created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.”
        Now you seek to destroy that sacred foundation. It is what it is no matter how you twist it.
        All states need a law like Indiana. But let me ask you a question so you can show what facts and proof are. How do you arrive at truth ? What is the basis for what is right and what is wrong? You say this law is wrong. On what basis can you make sure its wrong?

      • The term “creator” can apply to any theology (theistic), not exclusive to the Christian God of Abraham.

        Another comment: Just because there are common concepts found in the Constitution that you believe are Christian, they are also located in other theologies as well, both theistic and non-theistic.

        Why do you think it is a good thing to discriminate against any given group? Are you old enough to remember when “people of color” could not even eat at the same table or counter as those who are “white”? Do you know there were different drinking fountains, different toilets, etc? That kind of segregation is the same thing going on today, just with a different group, and you want to discriminate against the group. Why?

        Facts are what are true regardless of perception. Truths are subjective and are variable, depending on the culture.

        What is right and wrong? Most of the time, it depends on what a particular society agrees upon. I believe the Indiana Discrimination Bill against Homosexuals is wrong because it excludes others who are the same as the rest of us. Again, just like back in the US as late as the 1960s and before.

        Why do you believe such hatred is a good thing?

    • Name the sources of your studies you claim show that hormonal evidence is not there.

  6. Shameful isn’t it. Indiana, and now other states are thinking to implement such a plan as well? Two steps forward for equal rights for all people, 2 miles in reverse with the very next step.

What you think about this?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s