Good for Obama and Ms. Clinton. Religion is a ruse, a lie.
Inquisition Crusades Child sex abuse 9/11 While
personal religion is fine, many use it as an excuse for much violence.
To IakoSan:Re: "Religion is a ruse, a lie."Does that include
your anti-religious religion? Or maybe you have some new scientific evidence
supporting your stated hypothesis?Sadly, the most rabid, inflexible,
Taliban-like true-believers are those faithful anti-believers that make
unfounded vitriolic attacks on faith -- based solely on faith.No
proof. No study. No evidence. Just blind, unyeilding, unquestioning faith.
Re: IakoSan @ 3:59I cannot believe that the majority of religions
are a "lie" as you so bluntly put it. Whether or not you believe in organized
religion, I would say that the greater majority of religions are only interested
in the betterment of mankind. I wince when I think of someone WITHOUT religion
simply because I am fully aware of the role that religion is supposed to play in
an individuals life. I am astounded at the lack of humility your comment
displays toward the greater part of mankind. You act as though you are
all-knowledgeable by your expression as though those who have religion aren't
smart enough to understand it is a lie. Your belief, to society, holds as much
water as my belief that religion is true and a good thing to have in ones life.
One thing is for sure.... at the end of this life, one of us will be surprised.
I hope, for your sake, it isn't you.
Re: Pagan @ 4:11True. Terrible acts are performed in the name of
"religion". That is regrettable. However, simply because one does something
terrible in the name of religion doesn't necessarily negate the importance of
religion in society. I am not sure what your personal beliefs are, but I
strongly believe every individual benefits personally from having a belief in a
religion in one way or another. If one has NO religion, what would that person
be living for outside of themselves? I think most religions, and I guess I'm
focusing on Christian religions here, make the individual, and thus the total
society, better as a whole.
It's all Obama's fault. Kind of makes Bush seems less picked on every day. I
don't remember anyone questioning his stance on religious tolerance for mixing
the words worship and religion. Is there a book of rules for every
subtle thing you have to say and how to say it as president? I'm sure Obama
would like a copy.
It's Obama's fault. Gov. Charlie Crist defected from the Republican Party on to
run as an independent for U.S. Senate after months of being ripped by
conservatives as too supportive of President Barack Obama. He said "I don't
have either party helping me. But I need you." Crist said after the
announcement in his hometown of St. Petersburg that he will change his voter
registration from Republican to "no party affiliation." He claimed the middle
ground during his short speech, saying politics had become too divisive.
Crist's fall from the GOP's favor has been dramatic. Once considered a shoo-in
for the seat, the prized recruit of the National Republican Senatorial Committee
now trails by more than 20 points to an upstart former House speaker. Crist,
strategists say, failed to take Republican challenger Marco Rubio seriously.
His decline is also one of a handful of examples of GOP races across the country
in which the Republican Party’s internal ideological battle a tug of war
between the pragmatists and the purists has been on full display. The GOP's
ideological fight has raged since President Barack Obama was elected in November
"Does that include your anti-religious religion?"How is that
possible? Is bald a hair color now?"Sadly, the most rabid,
inflexible, Taliban-like true-believers are those faithful anti-believers that
make unfounded vitriolic attacks on faith -- based solely on faith." Whaaaa?"No proof. No study. No evidence. Just blind, unyeilding,
unquestioning faith."There you have my argument against any current
religion."You act as though you are all-knowledgeable by your
expression as though those who have religion aren't smart enough to understand
it is a lie"I am positive you are smart enough. Yet you still
believe in fairy tales written by goat herders from 4000 years ago."If one has NO religion, what would that person be living for outside of
themselves?"That is a good question. I try to be a good person
because it feels good. Wait, in a way that would be for myself.Nevermind, just be good (according to the 4000 year old goat herder book) or
the angry magician in the sky will smite you.
One need look no further than his/her own mirror to find religious intolerance.
Many of the people who claim to be living tenets of their religion (yes, I'm
speaking of Christians) are those who also dislike/hate anyone who doesn't look,
speak, dress, think like they do.
Obama's wording change is very appropriate. "Freedom of worship" rather than
“freedom of religion” is not a narrowing, but a widening of the
discussion! Worship, belief, and opinion are matters of individual conscience.
When individuals get together to form an organizational entity based on their
shared worship practices, beliefs, and opinions, then they are entering the
realm of “organized religion.” In the US, individuals are protected
in their individual rights and their right to peacefully assemble, by the 1st
Amendment. There are corresponding “protections” in the resolutions
adopted by the UN Commission on Human Rights (2005). The idea that only those
who are members of a formal organizational entity (a “religion”)
deserve protections and “freedom,” or deserve some higher and better
level of freedoms, is too narrow! In this regard, religions have a narrow view
that strives to protect their “corporate” interests at the expense
of individual worship and belief. They want to systematically discriminate
against individual worship and belief, trying to force everyone into their
formalized, politicized “nets” by scare tactics (“you are not
protected if you are not a member”).
Personally, I don't understand the criticism regarding "freedom of worship"
instead of "freedom of religion." Would someone care to explain it to me? In my
mind, freedom of religion advocates protecting organized religion, while freedom
of worship advocates protecting organized religion AND
unorganized/personal/unorthodox religion; why wouldn't they support the broader
(and in a sense, 'more free') wording? Although I don't know it matters one way
or the other ... certainly not a strong reason to criticize Obama.
To Thomas Jefferson @ 5:38PM 4/29:I think procuradorfiscal's point
about non-religion being a religion is that believing in no religion requires a
measure of faith, because you cannot prove that God doesn't exist, just as you
can't prove He does. Either way, you are living by your beliefs, not
knowledge.You dismiss everyone who follows an organized religion as
blind sheep. I would have to say that you have not bothered to get to know too
many religious people. I don't just mean the ones who go to church every Sunday
- I mean the ones who live their religion every day. Sure, there are some folks
who hear from their leaders and follow blindly. But in my experience they are
outnumbered by those who study what is taught, really think it through, and come
to a personal commitment about its worth.I am LDS. Living my
religion requires a great deal of sacrifice, in time and effort. It's not
something that sheep do.
re: PaganYou are absolutely right, and that's why I love the 3rd
commandment."You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your
God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name."Those who
have done those evil acts in God's name have not only committed the evil, but
have violated that commandment. That's evil times two.Now wouldn't you
admit that religious philosophy is even better than your lack of one?
I don't know the answer, but did Bush appoint a religion ambassador? Was any
attention given to the near elimination of Christianity under the U.S.'s
occupation of Iraq? How much control should the U.S. government try to exert
over other countries, particularly those which are rogue states and even getting
them to respect any human rights or responsible behavior in the international
community is difficult? I fear that at least the headline was misleading and
political in nature. And to Brother Chuck Schroeder, what in the world do your
comments on Crist have to do with this article?
think procuradorfiscal's point about non-religion being a religion is that
believing in no religion requires a measure of faith, because you cannot prove
that God doesn't exist, just as you can't prove He does. Either way, you are
living by your beliefs, not knowledge.----------I do not
understand your thinking. I am agnostic. I do not belong to any religion.
They may be right and they may be wrong. It is impossible to prove either way.
Tell me how that is faith of any kind...
Whose fighting to keep Prayer Day? This is another collection of whining
Freedom of belief. I believe there is a God. I believe there isn't a God.
Believe whatever you want to believe and don't tell me what to believe.
Believe, conclude, trust in, rely on, have faith in, have confidence in, and
even swear by. Belief is a human right worth fighting for.Worship
is belief in action. Worship God. Worship famous people. Worship idols.
Worship cars. Worship flesh. Worship fantasy. Worship science. Worship, honor,
glorify, idolize, revere, love, esteem, and even sing/chant praises to. The act
of worshipping is not a carte blanche human right like belief. All actions (no
matter what actions) should always be judged against the rights those impacted
by those actions.Religion is a system/organization/doctrine of
beliefs. Religion is beliefs organized or some may say true religion is a
grouping of beliefs that happen to be true. Living your religion is
once again an action. And once again, all actions (no matter what actions)
should always be judged against the rights those impacted by those actions. I disagree with those who say, "My system of beliefs is not a religion."
The possibility of having "no belief in anything" is zero.
Religion is a system/organization/doctrine of beliefs. Religion is beliefs
organized or some may say true religion is a grouping of beliefs that happen to
be true. -----------I belong to no organization. I have
no doctrine. I live by my own sense of self worth and what will make me whole.
I know what actions make me feels less than and try to avoid them. I do allow anyone to feel, worship, or preach whatever they want to. It is
their right as a human being but I will not join any 'RELIGION."
When beliefs collide with reality then you have delusion.
@ 1:07 Kind of reminds ya of the religion of "man made" global warming beliefs.
The reality of a conjured and theorized belief in a hoax collides with the
reality of true evidence.
The issue of religious intolerance for others is always wrong, every teacher of
the great world religions has taught that Jesus, Buddah,Confusious, Mohamed all
preached love and acceptance of others. The sad truth is that far too many
countries persecute those who choose to believe a faith that may not be in line
with what they perceive as truth. China and Saudi Arabia are two well known
offenders in this area, I sadly don't see this changing any time soon. The
majority rules and sometimes it rules unjustly and with an iron fist and will
not tolerate any "non-believers" to live amoung them. The outside world knows
what is going on and outside of condeming it and praying for an easing of the
persecutions there is sadly really not much more that can be done. I would hope
that leaders of nations would continue to keep pressure on the leaders of those
nations that are clamping down on the free agency of their people.
to pete in texasgood and true do not mean the same thing. a
religion may be a good thing in the sense that it helps someone be a better
person but does not mean that their particular belief in diety an method of
worship are true. religion can help people just like therapy can. but
organized religion as a whole is one of modern society's greatest travesties, in
my humble opinion.
This Commission is playing games with words by pitting the words of "Freedom to
Worship" against "Freedom of Religion." As a Christian and a devout
member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints I only have to go to
the 11th Article of Faith to find my answer to this game playing.11th Article of Faith: We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God
according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same
privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.As far as I
am concerned President Obama and Hillary Clinton are right to use the term
"Freedom of Worship."
I don't have an issue with "Freedom of worship" v/s "Freedom of religion". In
the words of that great statesman, Stuart Little, "What's the dif'?"I do
have issue with those like Pagan who blame all the worlds problems on religion.
Most of the human abuse I have seen has been caused by trying to eliminate one
religion or all religion. For example, the holocaust. I suppose you could blame
the jews for that since it was a result of their religion. The Soviet Union
gulags, China's laogai. All the result of a system that was trying to abolish
religion and worship of any but the state. You could say more killing has been
done in the name of atheism than has been done in the name of all religions put
together. Just because someone says they are killing in the name of God doesn't
make it so any more than saying they are killing in the name of Barack Obama, or
Ronald Reagan, or anybody else.
This is just semantics. I frankly think the far right has done more for
intolerance than Ms. Clinton and Mr. Obama.