Quote: Originally Posted by karrie
Well, since vocal disagreement with gay marriage is dwindling, not growing, is this not an okay case then?
See, I doubt you see it that way.
What's an ok case? Fighting against Hetrosexual Marriage?
So, let me further the question to something that I think you WILL identify with.... Should atheists be allowed to discuss their desire to see religion abolished? Banned? Kept from having a voice in government? That is them attempting to change my rights, and limit my speech, how I'm treated in the world. Should I be able to charge them for it?
Considering I've never suggested in the past (in a serious manner that is) that all religions should be abolished/banned and religious beliefs and practices are protected by existing laws and rights..... yes, those people should be charged just as much as the next person for the same hate speech issues mentioned in this topic.
However in regards to having a voice in the Government, religions shouldn't have a voice in the government in the first place.... nor should atheists. The only voice, the only rules, the only laws and the only beliefs to be voiced in our government should be those that can be equally applied, agreed upon and believed to be justified by all, regardless of their religious affiliations or lack there of..... let people do what they want to do in their own personal lives with their own personal beliefs, but don't force those beliefs unto others as if everybody should or will agree with your position simply because your religion says so.
And the reason why I don't believe religions should have any involvement in government has mostly to due with the fact that once you start bending over backwards for one religion, you have to do it for all.... which means Christian values and beliefs/laws/rules will be applied to everybody...... which also means Jewish values, beliefs/laws/rules will be applied to everybody...... which also means Muslim values, beliefs/laws/rules would be applied to everybody as well (among all the other religions out there)...... and I already know a number of people in these forums alone would have issue with things like Sharia Law being enforced across the country.
And I doubt some religious people in here would also have an issue with Atheists forcing their beliefs and values onto others to follow by law too..... which is why there should always be a separation of church and state, always...... because things get way too messy, way too confusing and would cause more problems then they would solve.
I'm what one would consider as atheist, but I have no issue with people believing what they want to believe and practicing what they want to practice...... and I know for a fact you wouldn't like me to shove my way of life and my personal beliefs onto you to follow without question, because I wouldn't want you to do that to me.
I have no issue with Religious organizations interacting with the government and passing certain things which relate solely and directly to their religion and to their followers.... same with atheist..... but not when it comes to laws and practices that everybody in this country are supposed to follow.
See, it sounds to me like you don't think it's right when religious groups do it, but you'll support gays doing it BECAUSE religious groups get away with it. Which seems like the definition of hypocritical.
Not quite..... The difference is that I don't see swaths of homosexuals fighting to take down religions or ban certain people with certain religious beliefs from working certain jobs or making false claims that religious people are somehow unequal to everybody else.
What I find hypocritical is when one group does one thing that's wrong for such a long period of time without any consequences and has had years of government protection to allow them to continue to do these things and that group continually plays the hate-speech card whenever things don't go their way..... but then when another group get's fed up and starts playing the same game and the other group cries foul..... yet keeps doing what they're doing as if they're entitled to do so when the other isn't..... that's not just a double standard, it's hypocritical..... a Do as I say, Not as I do situation.
For me, it has more to do with who starts the mess in the first place and who's willing to end it.
I see the hypocrisy you speak of on both sides..... but when it's a comparison between one group just trying to get to equal status as everybody else compared to another group who's always had equal status, if not more status, for so long and uses their position in society to continually keep that other group down because of their ignorant and prejudice views with no legal or factual basis to back up such beliefs..... in my eyes, one's far more worse then the other.
Or another way to put it, is the old Eye for an Eye.....
Some people think executing someone for murdering one or more people is wrong and is no better then what the murderer did.... yet when looking at the bigger picture, the Execution is the execution of a guilty
person who has been proven to have committed grave offence towards an innocent
person who is no longer alive, and therefore, not the same. It would be the same if the state executed another totally innocent person for the crimes the murderer committed...... but linking it back to the topic at hand, for people using their religious beliefs to keep down a particular group of people in an unjust manner and then using the hate-speech or freedom of religion card to further expand on keeping that group down is not the same as people in that group being kept down using hate-speech arguments to defend themselves.
One is using it for offense, the other is using it for defense and because of that, while similar, I don't believe they're exactly the same.
I might not have nice things to say about one particular religion or religion in general, I might even say a few things that may or may not offend a few in here towards my views of religion, but it's usually due to how I'm feeling at that moment or responding to something that was said that I really don't agree with or usually, something I found just as offensive..... You don't see me going around sticking leaflets on people's cars, in their mailboxes or in their email promoting these things and/or suggestion methods of oppressing said religion or making religious people 2nd class citizens and unable to obtain certain job professions.... nor do you see me going around telling people to talk to their MP's to force some stupid law that would do any of the above.
Nor do I see any homosexual groups doing the above to religious groups..... that's the difference.
Last edited by Praxius; Oct 29th, 2010 at 02:43 PM..