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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (38213)	7/22/2005 1:18:32 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 90947

I do not really think it is fine for Muslim, Jewish, or Christian countries to insist on a state supported religion. I agree with that. I thought the implication was that if your laws allow it, it's fine. THAT was X's take. I do not agree. I agree with you. Such laws are archaic, and until the whole world has the equivalent of the First Amendment, there will be no peace. Amen. These differing beliefs are going to have to live with each other- -and mostly have here. There has been a great brouhaha over displays of the Ten Commandments on public property. I do not see how this in any way discriminates against other religions, because under our laws if the majority votes to put some other monument up on the court house lawn, they can. The majority just does not see it that way and some people can't stand it. I don't think it's worth the fight, although I also don't believe it is correct and is not a violation of separation of church and state. And the will of the majority doe NOT override rights guaranteed in the Constitution. That's one of the reasons the Bill of Rights is there- -to protect the minority against the tyranny of the majority. I think the main reason for the First Amendment was to protect religion from the government, not the other way around. You are right, it is a brilliant idea. It is also to protect the gov't from takeover by a dominant religion. Whether someone is Christian, atheist, agnostic, Jewish, Buddhist, or whatever should have no effect on their dealings with the gov't. Edit: Here's the passage I was referring to. My comments above do not really pertain to it very well, I'm afraid. I think it is fine to close your culture to outsiders if that is what you want to do, and if your laws allow it. The Islamic societies do everything they can to discourage infidels from living in them- other religions are often illegal. That's X. That's not me. I disagree. One part of it that is correct is that Islamic societies often make the practice of other religions illegal. In Saudi, conversion of a Muslim to another religion is a death penalty offense for both.