Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (21332)	7/19/2005 11:31:59 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

A"ll of these types are a potential threat to our freedom. They may, of course, hold whatever perverted, hateful opinions they like, but we should be diligent in watching out for them to step over the line - becoming violent, fomenting violence, or seeking to oppress those whom they hate because of their beliefs. So let me get this straight: You are diligent in watching out for people like longnshort, right?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (21332)	7/20/2005 1:31:12 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 28931

"Others, as we know, vehemently oppose particular (or all) religions with their own peculiar zeal, demonstrating deep-seated intolerance" Fortunately, we can rely on the Constitution to contain such behaviour within law. People have a right to worship as they choose and to argue for and against their beliefs. They do not have a right to impose their opinions on others. While the attempt to take hate and violence and absurdity out of religion (as Jefferson did in the Jeffersonian Bible) is certainly laudable, it must not be confused with any attempt to prevent free expression--nor the right to follow ANY superstitious path based on visions or revelation or "revealed word"...provided it is within the law.