The Glade 4.0

If you actually follow the flow of my comments, you will see that I think you're stupid. Your need to categorize belief in one thing as causing wildly different behavior from belief in anything else is retarded. I recognize this is Hellfire, and even though I expect it, I'm tired of the same dolts grinding their same axes.

_________________

This



Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

You should be careful, too.

_________________

So you think it's wrong that the US Constitution and legal system grant greater protections and accommodations to religious beliefs and practices than to non-religious beliefs and practices?

_________________

The first amendment grants obnoxious liberal **** protesting Monsanto the same protections as obnoxious conservative **** protesting gays.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

I don't "need" to categorize anything. I'm stating what is a pretty obvious fact to anyone who pays the slightest amount of attention.

Well, to start, there are the Free Exercise and Establishment clauses of the First Amendment and the jurisprudence thereon. In particular, check out Wisconsin v. Yoder, which states in relevant part that "[A belief that is] philosophical and personal, rather than religious...does not rise to the demands of the Religion Clauses." Also see Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, which reiterates that "[o]nly beliefs rooted in religion are protected by the Free Exercise Clause, which, by its terms, gives special protection to the exercise of religion."

Beyond the First Amendment, there's the Constitutional prohibition on "religious tests" for holding government office; the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and all the other anti-discrimination laws that prohibit discrimination and require accommodation of religion but not other personal beliefs (e.g., you can fire someone for being an environmentalist or a conservative but not for being a Christian or a Muslim); automatic tax exemption for churches without the need to apply, and so on, and so forth.

No, it really doesn't (assuming you mean religiously-motivated conservative **** protesting gays). They both get the protection of the Free Speech, Press, Assembly, and Petition clauses of the First Amendment, but the Free Exercise and Establishment clauses are only applicable to the religious ****.

No it isn't. You all act the same, which would be pretty obvious to anyone without ideological blinders.

_________________

Meh. My only ideology is - ideologies suck. One should simply support whatever achieves the result they find most acceptable.

As for your statements, first one has to define belief. I believe we are using a definition of belief, in this case, as "faith in a supposition that has little-to-no empirical evidence to support it." Is that common ground?

Not all such "belief" is religious in nature. PETA is full of believing idiots. Most "environmentalism" is founded on such "belief." (Which is not to say legitimate environmental concerns do not exist, nor that people should not be concerned about them. However, most people who profess to be environmentalists have turned it into a religion of Earth-Worship and have dogmas and mantras and moralities every bit as difficult to support as most religions.) "Right" and "Left" wing political dogmas are typically founded on nothing other than how their adherents feel about the issues.

There's an interesting pattern, though - even these secular things begin to take on traits common to religion when they get a certain level of fervor behind them. They essentially become neoreligious claptrap.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

And then there's the Americans with Disabilities Act. We also have the suspension of literacy tests for voting from the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and a number of other protections directed at a number of ethnic and social groupings. Which ones are you interested in taking off the table?

_________________

When was the last time you heard about about someone who wasn't religious going door to door to try and convince people to change their belief system?

Look, just because it's called community organizing...

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Or electioneering...

_________________

November 22, 2013


Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

The tunnel vision is strong with this one...

Right. I've received many, many visitors trying to convince me of this, that, or the other. I have received exactly 2 groups of callers who wanted to discuss religion. It's worth noting that the four religious individuals were some of the nicest, most polite people I have ever met.

So you're attempting to make a point by highlighting Jehovah's Witnesses coming to people's doors to discuss religion, but you haven't said why that makes them bad people? What is wrong with their wanting to discuss religion with you, and why that is somehow making them analogous to the Christian in the comic?

Is it that you feel oppressed if someone brings up a topic that you don't like?

I'm not sure how those examples are relevant. You said it was "retarded" to view behavior motivated by religious beliefs as being significantly different than behavior motivated by non-religious beliefs, so I pointed out that our legal system makes exactly that distinction. The fact that the government also provides protection on a number of other fronts is neither here nor there; when it comes to beliefs, whether or not those beliefs qualify as religious is virtually the whole ballgame. So, I'm just wondering if you think that's wrong/stupid.

I can count on one hand the number of times in my entire life that someone knocked on my door wanting to discuss religion...... they were all Jehovah's Witness...

And the number of times it's happened in the last ten years is ZERO.

Which is the exact same number of times that someone has knocked wanting to discuss atheism (or anything similar).

Not more than a month ago I had to dismiss someone from my property who wanted to discuss global warming (three middle aged women in case you are curious).

Of course the number of politicians I've shoo'd away is freakin countless....

I misread this as "Watchmen" instead of "Watchtower". And couldn't figure out the problem.

I need more sleep.

_________________
When he's underwater does he get wet? Or does the water get him instead?

Where the hell do you people live? In 31 years, I've had four religious door-callers, and one man who was running for...the county treasurer position, I think? That's it.

I have more cable providers knocking on my door than either of the other two groups.

So? People knocking on your door is THAT big a problem? Non believers instead engage in unsolicited rants in inappropriate places like work and casual social gatherings about the evils of belief and religion, relying on others' sense of propriery to avoid contradiction, and pretending believers who DO answer are being intolerant or obnoxious for not letting them have the floor uncontested. This behavior is bad enough from elderly relatives regarding <insert topic here>; its very gauche indeed from co-workers and casual acquaintances

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Something protected under any one clause is as protected as something under all clauses. The clauses expand scope of protection, not degree. The protections from different clauses do not stack.

As for the no religious test, that includes tests for the presence or absence of religious belief. It is not an example of extra protection for religion.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

FIFY.

We used to have someone else that had a hard time knowing the difference between personal perception and fact.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."