Topic: Limitations in Freedom of Religion???
Redykeulous's photo
Sat 11/13/10 06:38 PM
Limitations in Freedom of religion

When does accommodating religious beliefs become a burden to society as a whole?

If a Muslin truck driver refuses to transport alcohol & tobacco, and those items only consist of 5% of products transported by the company – should the employer be responsible to accommodate the driver?

What about persons who object (on religious grounds) to working in a team environment with someone of a different faith or a gay, lesbian or transgender?

And what about emergency room staff that refuses to treat a transgender or person with AIDS due to deeply held religious beliefs?

What about Congress – can they refuse to seat a newly elected member on the basis of their belief in polygamy?

If a public high school allows its facilities to be utilized for Boy Scout meetings and participation, should they also allow Wiccan clubs, Christian clubs, and GLBT clubs the same usage?

Should the owner of a business be allowed to discriminate in employment practices to accommodate a religious belief?

Should public schools be allowed to offer public invocations at school functions?

Should Federal & State funds be used to reimburse parents of parochial school children for public bus transportation to school, or to supplement parochial school teachers who are only supposed to teach secular courses?

What about the door to door solicitation of religious perspective?

JUST A VERY BRIEF LIST – I’m sure you can all think of many more situations.

One Chief Justice, in 1879, made the following statement:


Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices.
1879 (January 6), Chief Justice Morrison Remick Waite, court opinion in Reynolds vs. United States:
98 U.S. 145


In another case, Reynolds v U.S. (98 US 145 [1879]), the court rejected the claim that criminal laws against polygamy could not be constitutionally applied to those whose religion commanded the practice included in the opinion of the court, written by Chief Justice Morrison Waite

Lars are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices. . . . Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.


So respond to the question When does accommodating religious beliefs become a burden to society as a whole? and provide your reasoning.

Thomas3474's photo
Sat 11/13/10 06:49 PM
We have been accommodating them with out problems for hundreds of years.It has only been the last 15 or so years that we have been having problems.The problems are largely and nearly always brought on by Atheist who demand people only worship in their own home.

KerryO's photo
Sat 11/13/10 07:29 PM

We have been accommodating them with out problems for hundreds of years.It has only been the last 15 or so years that we have been having problems.The problems are largely and nearly always brought on by Atheist who demand people only worship in their own home.


Just declare the Constitution of the United States as being null and void, then. Problem solved.

Atheism is an anathema to your religious way of seeing things? With the Constitution out of the way, just pass laws that prohibit Unbelieve. Problem solved.

BTW, wasn't it Christ himself who admonished against praying like the Pharisees did, of making a big public show of one's personal dialogue with the Almighty?

-Kerry O.

boredinaz06's photo
Sat 11/13/10 07:30 PM




Religion is a personal choice, if you are hired to do a job your religion doesn't matter. Personally I think if someone is a position where they take an oath like say a doctor and they don't want to prescribe birth control then they should have their license pulled.

Dragoness's photo
Sat 11/13/10 07:43 PM
Edited by Dragoness on Sat 11/13/10 07:43 PM
I think that some of the conflicts come from people taking things personally.

Who marries who is not a personal issue.
Who drinks or smokes is not a personal issue.
Etc...

If in your personal life you would not marry a same sex partner that makes absolutely no difference on the job if your job would require you to prepare marriage certificates for same sex partners, for example.

I personally believe that in our enlightenment we have discovered that some of our traditional practices have been discriminatory and we have had to fight the sticks in the mud to get them changed.

Redykeulous's photo
Sat 11/13/10 09:52 PM
Edited by Redykeulous on Sat 11/13/10 09:52 PM

We have been accommodating them with out problems for hundreds of years.It has only been the last 15 or so years that we have been having problems.The problems are largely and nearly always brought on by Atheist who demand people only worship in their own home.


FROM WIKI: - Christian discrimination against Atheists

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists
Atheists note that few politicians have been willing to identify as non-theists, since until recently such revelations would have been "political suicide",[46][47] and welcomed Democratic California Representative Pete Stark's 2007 decision to come out as the first openly nontheistic member of Congress.[29]

In 2009, City Councilman Cecil Bothwell of Asheville, North Carolina was called "unworthy of his seat" because of his open atheism.[48].

Indeed, several polls have shown that about 50 percent of Americans would not vote for a well-qualified atheist for president.[49][50]

A 2006 study found that 40% of respondents characterized atheists as a group that did "not at all agree with my vision of American society", and that 48% would not want their child to marry an atheist. In both studies, percentages of disapproval of atheists were above those for Muslims, African-Americans and homosexuals.[51]

Prominent atheists and atheist groups have asserted that discrimination against atheists is illustrated by a statement allegedly said by George H. W. Bush during a public press conference during his campaign for the presidency in 1987.[25][52][53][54] When asked by atheistic journalist Robert Sherman about the equal citizenship and patriotism of American atheists, Sherman reports that Bush answered, "No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."[25][54] The accuracy of the quote has been questioned, however, as Sherman did not tape the exchange and no other journalist reported on it.[25]


ALSO FROM WIKI – CHRISTIAN DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ANOTHER RELIGION went so far as to force disincorporation of the entire religion and confiscate their holdings – all for practicing (peacefully) their religious expression of “deeply held” religious beliefs.

The Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act (37th United States Congress, Sess. 2., ch. 126, 12 Stat. 501) was a federal enactment of the United States Congress that was signed into law on July 8, 1862 by President Abraham Lincoln. Sponsored by Justin Smith Morrill of Vermont, the act banned bigamy and limited church and non-profit ownership in any territory of the United States to $50,000.[1]

The act was designed to target the Mormon practice of plural marriage and the property dominance of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the Utah Territory.

The measure had no funds allocated for enforcement, and Lincoln choose not to enforce this law; instead Lincoln gave Brigham Young tacit permission to ignore the Morrill Act in exchange for not becoming involved with the Civil War.[2]

General Patrick Edward Connor, commanding officer of the federal forces garrisoned at Fort Douglas, Utah beginning in 1862 was explicitly instructed not to confront the Mormons over this or any other issue.[2]

The Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act was amended in 1882 by the Edmunds Act, and then again in 1887 by the Edmunds–Tucker Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmunds%E2%80%93Tucker_Act
The Edmunds–Tucker Act of 1887 was passed in response to the dispute between the United States Congress and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) regarding polygamy. The act is found in US Code Title 48 & 1461, full text as 24 Stat. 635, with this annotation to be interpreted as Volume 24, page 635 of United States Statutes at Large.

The act is named after its congressional sponsors, Senator George F. Edmunds of Vermont and Congressman John Randolph Tucker of Virginia. The act was repealed in 1978.

The act disincorporated both the LDS Church and the Perpetual Emigration Fund on the grounds that they fostered polygamy. The act prohibited the practice of polygamy and punished it with a fine of from $500 to $800 and imprisonment of up to five years. It dissolved the corporation of the church and directed the confiscation by the federal government of all church properties valued over a limit of $50,000. The act was enforced by the U.S. marshal and a host of deputies.

The act:
• Dissolved the LDS Church and the Perpetual Emigrating Fund Company, with assets to be used for public schools in the Territory.[1]
• Required an anti-polygamy oath for prospective voters, jurors and public officials.
• Annulled territorial laws allowing illegitimate children to inherit.
• Required civil marriage licenses (to aid in the prosecution of polygamy).
• Abrogated the common law spousal privilege for polygamists, thus requiring wives to testify against their husbands[2]
• Disfranchised women (who had been enfranchised by the Territorial legislature in 1870).
• Replaced local judges (including the previously powerful Probate Court judges) with federally appointed judges.
• Removed local control in school textbook choice.[citation needed]

In 1890 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the seizure of Church property under the Edmunds–Tucker Act in Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States.
This act was repealed in 1978.[3][4][5][6]


TODAY - many Christians us the polygamny platform to argue against same-sex marriage stating that SSM would open the door to polygamy.

But what is it that scares Christians about polygamny? Is it the relgious beliefs that might adhere to it, or other issues more pertinant to human rights?

Redykeulous's photo
Sat 11/13/10 09:55 PM

Religion is a personal choice, if you are hired to do a job your religion doesn't matter. Personally I think if someone is a position where they take an oath like say a doctor and they don't want to prescribe birth control then they should have their license pulled.


There is certainly a lot to consider in the area of employment. I honestly have no problem at all with any doctor who practices openly with deference to any specific religion.

If a doctor wants to limit his/her practice only to those who hold similar values – that’s great. In fact, I appreciate that kind of honest because if a doctor feels that strong a conviction to certain religious values, it would not be advantageous for some to seek his/her services. Knowing that up front is a lot easier.

The problem is that some people pursue professions in the medical field knowing there will eventually be a direct conflict in what they might be asked to do and what they believe.

I personally think that if an individuals’ beliefs are so strongly held that they would deny certain treatment to certain individuals that he individual should have the courtesy of making that information known and undeniable understood.

In that way a person is taking full responsibility of personal actions and respecting the rights and decisions of others at the same time and not putting anyone in danger or in an uncomfortable situation.

But too often that doesn’t happen because the person is more concerned about getting the job that he doesn’t intend to fulfill only to seek accommodation later, often at a critical time in someone’s life. That’s not only a very selfish perspective, but what does that say about that person’s ethics or his ‘deeply held’ beliefs?

msharmony's photo
Sun 11/14/10 06:49 AM

Limitations in Freedom of religion

When does accommodating religious beliefs become a burden to society as a whole?

If a Muslin truck driver refuses to transport alcohol & tobacco, and those items only consist of 5% of products transported by the company – should the employer be responsible to accommodate the driver?

What about persons who object (on religious grounds) to working in a team environment with someone of a different faith or a gay, lesbian or transgender?

And what about emergency room staff that refuses to treat a transgender or person with AIDS due to deeply held religious beliefs?

What about Congress – can they refuse to seat a newly elected member on the basis of their belief in polygamy?

If a public high school allows its facilities to be utilized for Boy Scout meetings and participation, should they also allow Wiccan clubs, Christian clubs, and GLBT clubs the same usage?

Should the owner of a business be allowed to discriminate in employment practices to accommodate a religious belief?

Should public schools be allowed to offer public invocations at school functions?

Should Federal & State funds be used to reimburse parents of parochial school children for public bus transportation to school, or to supplement parochial school teachers who are only supposed to teach secular courses?

What about the door to door solicitation of religious perspective?

JUST A VERY BRIEF LIST – I’m sure you can all think of many more situations.

One Chief Justice, in 1879, made the following statement:


Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices.
1879 (January 6), Chief Justice Morrison Remick Waite, court opinion in Reynolds vs. United States:
98 U.S. 145


In another case, Reynolds v U.S. (98 US 145 [1879]), the court rejected the claim that criminal laws against polygamy could not be constitutionally applied to those whose religion commanded the practice included in the opinion of the court, written by Chief Justice Morrison Waite

Lars are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices. . . . Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.


So respond to the question When does accommodating religious beliefs become a burden to society as a whole? and provide your reasoning.



I think wherever something is not public, but rather a contract is involved, there should be no reference to religious belief but an employer should not be forced to bend the contract for certain employees BASED upon their personal beliefs (religious or otherwise). If the contract is against your beliefs, dont apply for or take the job. I have considered jobs in the adult industry but always stop short of going there because of my PERSONAL BELIEFS.

In cases of public access, people should have similar access to public facilities and services regardless what faith they are or are not a part of.

Milesoftheusa's photo
Sun 11/14/10 05:24 PM


Limitations in Freedom of religion

When does accommodating religious beliefs become a burden to society as a whole?

If a Muslin truck driver refuses to transport alcohol & tobacco, and those items only consist of 5% of products transported by the company – should the employer be responsible to accommodate the driver?

What about persons who object (on religious grounds) to working in a team environment with someone of a different faith or a gay, lesbian or transgender?

And what about emergency room staff that refuses to treat a transgender or person with AIDS due to deeply held religious beliefs?

What about Congress – can they refuse to seat a newly elected member on the basis of their belief in polygamy?

If a public high school allows its facilities to be utilized for Boy Scout meetings and participation, should they also allow Wiccan clubs, Christian clubs, and GLBT clubs the same usage?

Should the owner of a business be allowed to discriminate in employment practices to accommodate a religious belief?

Should public schools be allowed to offer public invocations at school functions?

Should Federal & State funds be used to reimburse parents of parochial school children for public bus transportation to school, or to supplement parochial school teachers who are only supposed to teach secular courses?

What about the door to door solicitation of religious perspective?

JUST A VERY BRIEF LIST – I’m sure you can all think of many more situations.

One Chief Justice, in 1879, made the following statement:


Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices.
1879 (January 6), Chief Justice Morrison Remick Waite, court opinion in Reynolds vs. United States:
98 U.S. 145


In another case, Reynolds v U.S. (98 US 145 [1879]), the court rejected the claim that criminal laws against polygamy could not be constitutionally applied to those whose religion commanded the practice included in the opinion of the court, written by Chief Justice Morrison Waite

Lars are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices. . . . Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.


So respond to the question When does accommodating religious beliefs become a burden to society as a whole? and provide your reasoning.



I think wherever something is not public, but rather a contract is involved, there should be no reference to religious belief but an employer should not be forced to bend the contract for certain employees BASED upon their personal beliefs (religious or otherwise). If the contract is against your beliefs, dont apply for or take the job. I have considered jobs in the adult industry but always stop short of going there because of my PERSONAL BELIEFS.

In cases of public access, people should have similar access to public facilities and services regardless what faith they are or are not a part of.




I have to disagree with that. Because then anyone who has a job who finds that a certain faith they believe in wholeheartedly and now certain aspects of the job goes against thier inner core.. Thier has to be adjustment.

Not everyone enters a job and never sees things differently than when they began..

how many young people really make a good solid choice for them and thier familioes untill they may of been on the job for 10 years or so then finds Elohim.

Things have gone fine for many many years until recently.

Then all of a sudden things change.

Lets take i worked for the power company in the 90's.

I found faith and had to make a choice. My 1st line supervisor wanted me to hit the hyway if i practiced my beliefs.

That was keeping the Feast of Tabernacles when I did not have the vacation time to do it.


I was looking at a delima. So i went through the channels and luckily we were Union or i would not of had a channel to go through.

I wrote a letter explaining I had to keep these 8 days to Yahweh and i needed time off without pay.

My 1st line superviser said noway even after he sent it to his boss.. He was so blantant that he told me he had an Uncle who made up his religion too.

I just let that go and had faith all would work out. Super denied me our Dept manager denied the request and it went to the office downtown..The VP's.

They came back and said if i was willing to take the time off for my religious beliefs without pay the company would allow me to.

I had to do what my mind and heart told me to.. Yet going on faith because i had a very good job and was married with children..just call me AL..haha

To say you can not accomindate a persons beliefs when u can prove thier is one.. saying this because of what i was told.

Then you give employers and the Gov.. the ones in control of the MONEY..Total control can't do anything for anyone.. Compassion and caring leaves.

This same company when aids was in the headlines because people were associating aids with Gays came out with a HIV policy.

Now in Missouri where i lived thiers lots of Amish people and they quaranteen them all the time for diseases like measels and Small poxs which can be treated with drugs.. Hiv i do not know of a cure.

Anyway thier policy was to give us training on how to use a 1 way valve for cpr and a shield like cloth for blood to try and stop the bleeding.

NO ONE coul;d know if a co worker had HIV against the law.. Against thier rights.

But I can tell u when someone gets hurt in the Power company many times its so bad and gross to see that 1 way valve and cloth were the furthest from your mind.

You helped your friend as fast as possible.

Why I am saying this they did not make anyone with HIV take a different job even though they could spread a horrible diseace to someone.

No instead the ones who had nothing to do with anything was left in the dark wether or not helping thier friend may kill them.

Not good since but it was seen as compassionate to who may have HIV.

So who did they hurt? Just put me at another risk.

So saying an individual who has a life changing experience whether disease or anything else should not disqualify them from employment with the company.

We are getting into a gray area thier that only the Big Bosses win.. They have more control and we give it to them..Shalom...Miles


RainbowTrout's photo
Sun 11/14/10 05:58 PM
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:


4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Romans 13:1-7

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Ignorantia juris non excusat or Ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Latin for "ignorance of the law does not excuse" or "ignorance of the law excuses no one") is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because he or she was unaware of its content. In the United States, exceptions to this general rule are found in cases such as Lambert v. California (knowledge of city ordinances) and Cheek v. United States (willfulness requirement in U.S. federal tax crimes).

European law countries with a tradition of Roman law may also use the expression nemo censetur ignorare legem: nobody is taught to ignore the law.

Plato wrote similarly in Minos_(dialogue):

"What’s right is right and what’s wrong is wrong. And isn’t this believed by everyone ... even among the Persians, and always? ... What is fine, no doubt, is everywhere legislated as fine, and what is shameful as shameful; but not the shameful as fine or the fine as shameful."

Redykeulous's photo
Sun 11/14/10 07:53 PM
I think it’s in the best interest of any organization to make the attempt of accommodating the critical needs of its employees. Many large organizations already devote a substantial portion of their resources toward recognizing and accommodating the diverse needs of individuals.

Religious belief is not a tangible thing so it defies objective verification. Quite literally, if an employer sets a precedent of review and accommodation for the religious belief of one individual, then all employee requests must be equally treated.

Typically most of these requests involve taking time away from a regularly scheduled work day. For most organizations time off requests can be the easiest to deal with. Many organizations have set up a policy regarding floating or flex days in addition to other time off benefits.

The larger issue involves religious beliefs that affect the structural policies of an organization. A job description involving the tasks, duties, and responsibilities of an employee have repercussions that can extent throughout the organization. Therefore, such cases must be reviewed as they occur. But again, the organization has to be careful not to set a regretful precedent.

For example, if an individual claims that a deeply held religious belief inhibits their ability to work with a specific individual or group of people – or if that belief inhibits their ability to do some facet of a job simply because doing so benefits a person or group, the organization has a dilemma.

But if accommodating a person’s religious belief would make the organization, and other employees, facilitators to discriminatory actions against the freedom of others – to me – that is undue hardship and declining to accommodate that person’s request should be viewed as a responsibility to uphold the laws that prohibit such discrimination.


Thomas3474's photo
Sun 11/14/10 10:07 PM


We have been accommodating them with out problems for hundreds of years.It has only been the last 15 or so years that we have been having problems.The problems are largely and nearly always brought on by Atheist who demand people only worship in their own home.


FROM WIKI: - Christian discrimination against Atheists

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists
Atheists note that few politicians have been willing to identify as non-theists, since until recently such revelations would have been "political suicide",[46][47] and welcomed Democratic California Representative Pete Stark's 2007 decision to come out as the first openly nontheistic member of Congress.[29]

In 2009, City Councilman Cecil Bothwell of Asheville, North Carolina was called "unworthy of his seat" because of his open atheism.[48].

Indeed, several polls have shown that about 50 percent of Americans would not vote for a well-qualified atheist for president.[49][50]

A 2006 study found that 40% of respondents characterized atheists as a group that did "not at all agree with my vision of American society", and that 48% would not want their child to marry an atheist. In both studies, percentages of disapproval of atheists were above those for Muslims, African-Americans and homosexuals.[51]

Prominent atheists and atheist groups have asserted that discrimination against atheists is illustrated by a statement allegedly said by George H. W. Bush during a public press conference during his campaign for the presidency in 1987.[25][52][53][54] When asked by atheistic journalist Robert Sherman about the equal citizenship and patriotism of American atheists, Sherman reports that Bush answered, "No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."[25][54] The accuracy of the quote has been questioned, however, as Sherman did not tape the exchange and no other journalist reported on it.[25]


ALSO FROM WIKI – CHRISTIAN DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ANOTHER RELIGION went so far as to force disincorporation of the entire religion and confiscate their holdings – all for practicing (peacefully) their religious expression of “deeply held” religious beliefs.

The Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act (37th United States Congress, Sess. 2., ch. 126, 12 Stat. 501) was a federal enactment of the United States Congress that was signed into law on July 8, 1862 by President Abraham Lincoln. Sponsored by Justin Smith Morrill of Vermont, the act banned bigamy and limited church and non-profit ownership in any territory of the United States to $50,000.[1]

The act was designed to target the Mormon practice of plural marriage and the property dominance of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the Utah Territory.

The measure had no funds allocated for enforcement, and Lincoln choose not to enforce this law; instead Lincoln gave Brigham Young tacit permission to ignore the Morrill Act in exchange for not becoming involved with the Civil War.[2]

General Patrick Edward Connor, commanding officer of the federal forces garrisoned at Fort Douglas, Utah beginning in 1862 was explicitly instructed not to confront the Mormons over this or any other issue.[2]

The Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act was amended in 1882 by the Edmunds Act, and then again in 1887 by the Edmunds–Tucker Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmunds%E2%80%93Tucker_Act
The Edmunds–Tucker Act of 1887 was passed in response to the dispute between the United States Congress and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) regarding polygamy. The act is found in US Code Title 48 & 1461, full text as 24 Stat. 635, with this annotation to be interpreted as Volume 24, page 635 of United States Statutes at Large.

The act is named after its congressional sponsors, Senator George F. Edmunds of Vermont and Congressman John Randolph Tucker of Virginia. The act was repealed in 1978.

The act disincorporated both the LDS Church and the Perpetual Emigration Fund on the grounds that they fostered polygamy. The act prohibited the practice of polygamy and punished it with a fine of from $500 to $800 and imprisonment of up to five years. It dissolved the corporation of the church and directed the confiscation by the federal government of all church properties valued over a limit of $50,000. The act was enforced by the U.S. marshal and a host of deputies.

The act:
• Dissolved the LDS Church and the Perpetual Emigrating Fund Company, with assets to be used for public schools in the Territory.[1]
• Required an anti-polygamy oath for prospective voters, jurors and public officials.
• Annulled territorial laws allowing illegitimate children to inherit.
• Required civil marriage licenses (to aid in the prosecution of polygamy).
• Abrogated the common law spousal privilege for polygamists, thus requiring wives to testify against their husbands[2]
• Disfranchised women (who had been enfranchised by the Territorial legislature in 1870).
• Replaced local judges (including the previously powerful Probate Court judges) with federally appointed judges.
• Removed local control in school textbook choice.[citation needed]

In 1890 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the seizure of Church property under the Edmunds–Tucker Act in Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States.
This act was repealed in 1978.[3][4][5][6]


TODAY - many Christians us the polygamny platform to argue against same-sex marriage stating that SSM would open the door to polygamy.

But what is it that scares Christians about polygamny? Is it the relgious beliefs that might adhere to it, or other issues more pertinant to human rights?





That tidbit by Wikipedia about the Discrimination of Atheist was a good laugh.50% of Americans would not vote for a atheist?This is discrimination?I guess we should not vote on people by their beliefs.We can just vote on them by hair color or by the car they drive? slaphead

How a study finds that Atheist are considered lower than everyone else is considered discrimination and how someone calls a Atheist unworthy of her seat discrimination(which by the way was called by who?Joe blow down the street)is just as funny.I guess the atheist should take hundreds of millions of people to court and say they can't think that way anymore because???Well I have no idea.Everything you posted from Wikipedia is nothing but a joke written by some 10th grader who has no idea what he or she is talking about.

Christians are strongly apposed to polygamy.It is extremely rare and the only people who practice it always belong to the Mormons who most Christians dismiss as crazy,and believing on false teachings written by a man who added verses to the bible in the 1800's.

You want to see some Christian discrimination?It happens every day all over the world.People are killed because they are Christians.

http://www.jeremiahproject.com/prophecy/warxian.html


Currently, over 200 million Christians worldwide are living under the threat of persecution.Topping the list of countries which have mounted a campaign against Christians are China and Sudan followed by Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Burma, Greece, Ethiopia, and Vietnam. (Washington Watch, May 1998). Increasing persecution is also found in Cuba, Laos, and North Korea.

The militant Islamic Government of Sudan, for example, is waging a self-described religious war against Christian, non-Muslim, and moderate Muslim persons by using torture, starvation, enslavement, and murder. In Pakistan, the government has declared those that who “insult” Mohammed will be put to death. In Communist Laos more than 250 pastors and Christian workers have been arrested; more than 60 churches and Christian institutions have been shut down; and the government has forced many thousands of believers to sign documents to "renounce" their faith and belief in Christianity.

In Saudi Arabia there is no religious freedom. Apostasy is punishable by death. There are no public worship services for non-Muslims. Anyone who does mission work or converts Muslims faces expulsion, jail, or execution.

Increasingly, our children are discriminated against for trying to present their Christian convictions in school.

In 1997 U.S. District Court Judge Ira DeMent struck down a law that required schools to allow voluntary student-initiated prayers at school events, saying it created excessive state entanglement in religion. He ordered the end to school-sponsored religious activities, such as prayers during morning announcements and at school events even though it isn't forced on students.

A high school student in Florida was suspended for handing out religious literature before and after - but not during - school hours. Two high school students in Texas were told by their principal they could not wear rosaries. The Principal claimed that they were symbols of gang activity, even though the boys were not involved in any gang.

http://naacd.com/blog/

In 2002, music teachers in Michigan, Maryland, and Virginia didn't allow students to perform traditional carols like "Silent Night" and "The First Noel" during Chrismas. A New Jersey public school banned the Charles Dickens play, "A Christmas Carol" because of its spiritual overtones and message of redemption.

The trend in the public forum is to replace the word "Christmas" with "Season's Gretings" or "Happy Holidays."

In March 1998, The ACLU put pressure on the small town of Republic, Missouri to remove a fish symbol from its official logo, calling it a "secret sign of Christianity."

In April 1998, Rev. Patrick Mahoney was arrested for praying on the steps of the Supreme Court.

Tourists visiting Washington D.C. in 1997 were ordered by the police to stop praying in the rotunda of the U.S. Capitol.

In 2003, the National Park Service removed 30 year-old plaques inscribed with Bible verses at Grand Canyon following complaints from the American Civil Liberties Union.

You Flunk!…If You’re Anti-Gay!
“Jonathan Lopez, a Christian student at the Los Angeles Community College District, has sued the school saying that a professor kept him from finishing a classroom speech about his religious beliefs and opposition to same-sex unions. Lopez has said he was discriminated against because of his religious views.
Lopez said the professor, John Matteson, told him to ‘ask God’ for his grade and later threatened to retaliate against him for complaining. College officials said in court filings that disciplinary proceedings have begun against Matteson but declined to be
more specific.


Elementary School Blots Out God
“An elementary school in Tennessee, after successfully rebuffing an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit over religious expression on campus, has nonetheless ordered the words ‘God Bless the USA’ and ‘In God We Trust’ covered up on student-made posters in the hallway.
Administrators at Lakeview Elementary School in Mr. Juliet, Tenn., told parents that the posters, promoting the See You at the Pole student prayer event, mentioned ‘God’ and are therefore precluded by school board policy and prohibited in the always as inappropriate.
‘Christian students shouldn’t be censored for expressing their beliefs,’ said ADF Senior Counsel Nate Kellum in a statement. ‘It’s ridiculous as well as unconstitutional to cover up these references to God and prayer—one of which is the national motto.’” (WorldNetDaily. 3/3/09)

School administrators at Colorado's Columbine High School, the site of the 1999 student massacre, picked through and pried loose more than 90 of the 2,100 ceramic tiles in tribute to those killed and placed in a hallway above student lockers. The offense? The tiles were painted with messages such as "God is Love" and "4/20/99 Jesus wept" and were deemed "objectionable."

An "Easter Can Drive" sponsored annually by a Warriors for Christ club at a Hampton, Va., high school was changed to "Spring Can Drive" by administrators because they found the word "Easter" potentially offensive. The can drive was to raise funds for the local YMCA women's shelter.

Coach Can’t Bow Head In Prayer
“The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear a case involving a high school football coach’s effort to respect his players’ tradition of stopping for a moment of prayer prior to games, leaving in place an appeals court decision that essentially mandates a school policy of ‘hostility,’ according to The Rutherford Institute.
‘This decision undermines a time-honored tradition that has less to do with religion than it does athletic tradition,’ said John Whitehead, chief counsel of The Rutherford Institute which argued the case on behalf of Coach Marcus Borden of East Brunswick High School in New Jersey.
‘It’s a sad statement on our rights as Americans that schools are no longer bastions of freedom. We’ve become so politically correct and secularized that religious individuals who seek the same First Amendment rights as others are censored,’ Whitehead said.
A federal court of appeals concluded the high school coach broke the law routinely when he would bow his head or ‘take a knee’ while his team prayed before games—a school tradition of 25 years.” (WorldNetDaily. 3/3/09.)









Thomas3474's photo
Sun 11/14/10 10:23 PM
High School Girls Charged With ‘Hate Crimes’ Against Homosexuals
May 24, 2007 – Police in Crystal Lake, Illinois have charged two 16-year-old girls with committing a hate crime against homosexuals for distributing fliers critical of homosexual conduct.
According to McHenry County State’s Attorney Lou Bianchi, the girls clearly committed hate crimes by distributing fliers showing two boys kissing, along with negative statements about homosexuality.
Under Illinois law, a person commits a hate crime if he targets another person’s race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or national origin.
“This is a perfect example showing why ‘hate crime’ laws are so dangerous to freedom of speech,” said TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty.
“Criticism of homosexual sex acts is protected speech under our Constitution, yet homosexual activists want to silence any factual statements about the health risks of homosexual acts. The First Amendment is being dismantled by homosexual radical.”


Posted on: 2010-11-04 02:21:00
By Joseph C. DeCaro, Worthy News Correspondent

HANOI, Vietnam (Worthy News)-- Back in August, the Vietnamese government initiated a massive military operation involving thousands of soldiers, security forces and local police in what they called "tieu quet" to "wipe out" Degar Christians who refused to join the Evangelical Church of Vietnam.

WASHINGTON, USA (Worthy News)-- Christian leaders were preparing to hold a memorial service later Sunday, May 16, in the Boynton Beach are of the U.S. state of Florida to honor two street evangelists who were murdered there earlier this year.

Stephen Ocean, 23, and Tite Sufra, 24, were shot and killed January 30 after preaching the Gospel on the public sidewalk, police and Christians said.

http://www.christianadc.org/news-and-articles/252-taxpayers-will-pay-but-cannot-pray


A Catholic adoption agency in England is being forced to shut down because it refuses to extend services to homosexuals. Because of their religious convictions and the belief that children need heterosexual parents, the charity only works with normal, married couples.

The Obama administration is resorting to politics as usual, even using the “stimulus bill” as a means of political payback. Besides being packed with the typical political pork, one very troubling provision of the stimulus bill passed by the House of Representative restricts religious liberty.


A nonprofit organization devoted to advancing religious liberty for Christians has scoured the news, sought the opinion of its e-mail subscribers and selected a list of "the top 10 incidents of anti-Christian defamation, bigotry and discrimination in the U.S. from last year."

http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2010/January08/0882.html


1. "The Federal Hate Crimes Bill that attacks religious liberty and freedom of speech."

As WND has reported, Canada's experience with "hate crimes" legislation has caused many American Christians to fear the U.S. will follow a similar path of censoring or even punishing in the name of "hate speech" people who declare the Bible's teachings on homosexuality.

Gerald Chipeur is an attorney working to defend a Canadian pastor whose letter to the editor of a local newspaper prompted a complaint, a $5,000 fine and a court order not to express his beliefs further.

Chipeur told WND he expects the same issues now to be raised in the U.S., because of the expanded "hate crimes" law signed by Obama.


" 2. "President Obama's appointment of radical anti-Christians like homosexual activist Kevin Jennings as the 'safe school czar'; pro-abortion advocate Kathleen Seblius made secretary of Human and Health Services; and Chai Feldblum, pro-homosexual and anti-religious liberty judge nominated for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission."

In May, WND revealed Jennings, Obama's pick to oversee "safety" in the nation's public schools, is founder of the homosexual-activist group GLSEN, which promotes homosexual clubs in public schools and launched the annual "Day of Silence" celebration of homosexuality.

In October, WND brought to light Feldblum's leadership in an organization she said was out to "revolutionize social mores," as well has her signature to a petition pushing for the acceptance of polygamy.

Among other exposes of Obama's radical czars, WND reported on John Holdren, adviser for science and technology, who once predicted an ice age that will kill 1 billion, said abortion can save the planet and believes an adult dog is more 'rational' than a human baby.

3. "The Federal Department of Homeland Security issued a report entitled 'Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate' that labeled conservative Christians extremists and potential terrorists."

As WND reported, the DHS report also labeled as "extremists" citizens concerned about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty. It also singled out returning war veterans as particular threats.

4. "An activist judge ordered a homeschool mom in New Hampshire to stop homeschooling her daughter because the little girl 'reflected too strongly' her mother's Christian faith."

Despite being described by court documents as "well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level," the local court determined Brenda Voydatch's daughter defended her faith too rigorously, suggesting the girl "has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view."

Ten-year-old "Amanda" was therefore ordered to go to public school. In November, the state's Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.

5. "Pro-life activist Jim Pullion was murdered in front of his granddaughter's high school for showing the truth about abortion."

While the nation was commemorating the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the well-known Owosso, Mich., man was shot multiple times in front of the local high school. The police said it was a targeted attack by a man who objected to the anti-abortion signs Pullion displayed.

6. "Police called to East Jessamine Middle School in Lexington, Ky., to stop 8th graders from praying during their lunch break for a student whose mother was tragically killed."

The school later relented and allowed the children to pray the next day.

7. "The overt homosexual participation in Obama's presidential inaugural events by 'Bishop' Vickie Eugene Robinson, the Gay Men's Chorus of Washington, D.C., and a homosexual marching band."

8. "HBO's program 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' aired an episode where the main actor urinates on painting of Jesus. When confronted HBO would not apologize."

The episode depicted the comedian Larry David accidentally splashing on a painting of Christ and then walking away. When the owner of the painting later enters the bathroom, she concludes the image is weeping and kneels to pray.

"Why is it that people are allowed to publicly show that level of disrespect for Christian symbols?" asked Deal Hudson, publisher of InsideCatholic.com. "If the same thing was done to a symbol of any other religions – Jewish or Muslim – there'd be a huge outcry. It's simply not a level playing field."

In a statement to Fox News, HBO answered, "Anyone who follows 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' knows that the show is full of parody and satire. … Larry David makes fun of everyone, most especially himself. The humor is always playful and certainly never malicious."

9. "Rev. Fred Winters was murdered while preaching in his pulpit in Maryville, Ill."

The gunman shot the pastor four times during a church service in March before pulling out a knife. Members of the congregation tackled the assailant and held him until police arrived.

A doctor declared the murderer, Terry J. Sedlacek, suffers from schizophrenia. Sedlacek is being treated at a state facility operated by the Illinois Department of Human Services.

10. "Pro-life Pastor Reverend Walter Hoye of Oakland, Calif., was jailed for exercising peaceful, pro-life speech."

As WND reported, in May 2008 Hoye filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court, arguing that an Oakland city ordinance banning counselors or protesters from approaching within eight feet of people entering an abortion clinic is a violation of constitutional free speech rights.

Twelve days later, Hoye was arrested for allegedly violating the law he was seeking to overturn.

Hoye was found guilty of violating the law when he was caught holding a sign that read, "Jesus loves you and your baby. Let us help you," outside an Oakland abortion clinic.

He was fined and jailed for 18 days earlier this year.

LifeSiteNews reports one of Hoye's lawyers, Michael Millen of the Life Legal Defense Foundation, has announced his intention to appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

"It is now illegal to stand still on the sidewalk and extend your arm to hand out a piece of literature," Millen said, referring to the city ordinances eight-foot bubble rule. "Mark this day down. … On this day, a federal court judge ruled that it is constitutional to put someone in jail for a year for holding out a hand with a leaflet."

The CADC's other stories that weren't voted into the top 10 included the following:

The ongoing saga of Rifqa Bary, the 17-year-old Ohio convert to Christianity from Islam who fled to Florida because she feared her family would kill her, only to be returned by the courts to Ohio.

The threat leveled by county officials against a home bible study in San Diego County, requiring the group to stop meeting until they get a permit for religious assembly.

The "Antichrist" film, reviled as "the most horrific movie ever seen" for explicit and pornographic sadomasochism, violence and occult content.

A provision in the new stimulus bill would ban money meant for school renovations from being used on facilities that allow "religious worship." This provision is simply religious discrimination, punishing schools for allowing religious groups to meet on their campuses. “Religious groups” could include religious clubs, churches that meet at schools on Sundays, and also universities with divinity programs.

Thomas3474's photo
Sun 11/14/10 10:36 PM
Minneapolis Suspends Police Psychologist for Christian Beliefs

http://www.michnews.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/307/13915

Naperville, IL -- In perhaps one of the most egregious cases of anti-Christian discrimination in America to date, the Minneapolis Police Department, at the behest of pro-homosexual activists, has suspended a "highly rated" psychologist, Dr. Michael Campion, because of his past affiliation with a Christian group, the Illinois Family Institute.

Americans for Truth Corporate Outreach Director Matt Barber decried Campion's suspension as an act of "blatant, illegal discrimination and anti-Christian bigotry--one which should send shivers down the spine of every person of faith."

http://naacd.com/updates9.htm

Boycotting Target

“Buoyed by news that Target Corp. failed to meet holiday sales projections, the National Clergy Council is urging church members to continue to boycott the retail chain because it barred Salvation Army bell ringers during the Christmas season. In December of 2004, Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox and Protestant clergy members and 30,000 lay delegates in all 50 states called on congregations, organizations, family, friends and associates to suspend holiday shopping at Target stores. Rev. Rob Schenck, the council’s president, said: ‘This is not about being vindictive. It’s about teaching proper moral and civic responsibility to corporations that make bad public policy decisions. This isn’t personal, unless, of course, you’re talking about the personal injury Target is doing to the poor who are helped by one of America’s oldest, most reputable and most effective charities.’” (WorldNetDaily. 1/8/05.)

Eliminating Christmas
Birmingham, England, has renamed Christmas 'Winterval.' It is intended to be a catchy phrase for December and New Year's festivities so "there is no slur on anyone or any religious faith," a city spokesman told Reuters news service. The City Council's decision enraged Christian leaders, who called it silly and an example of "political correctness to avoid sensitivities that people do not have." (Religion Today. Current News. 11/1//98.)

School Blocks Bible as Literature

“A school board in Michigan has rejected a Bible course for its public high school, thus ending a year-long debate about the ‘Bible as Literature and History’ class. The National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools insists the content of the Bible class conforms to the law in all respects. However, groups such as the ACLU, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, and the People for the American Way have argued that the biblically-based course illegally promotes religion, and therefore violates the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution.” (Agape Press. 1/12/05.)

The Philly 5 Vindicated

“A judge on 2/17/05 in Philadelphia dismissed all charges against the ‘Philly 5.’ Eleven Christians were arrested in Philadelphia in October, 2004, for peacefully preaching the gospel at a homosexual celebration called ‘OutFest.’ Four men and a juvenile were bound over for trial on criminal charges, which included ‘riot’ and ‘ethnic intimidation.’ The five faced as much as 47 years in prison if they were convicted on all charges. Court of Common Pleas Judge Pamela Dembe quickly and summarily dismissed the charges on the grounds that prosecutors were unable to make even a minimal showing of any criminal conduct. Instead, she ruled that peaceful expressive activities are fully protected by the First Amendment and cannot form the basis of a criminal prosecution.” (American Family Association News Release. 2/17/05.)

Attorney as Christian Bigot

“Most of the country is aware by now of the five Christians in Philadelphia who were charged with numerous ‘felonies,’ while peacefully demonstrating (against a homosexual event) in the ‘city of brotherly love.’ District Attorney Charles Ehrlich charged the defendants were ‘hateful’ and proclaimed that preaching the Bible is tantamount to ‘fighting words.’ It’s unfortunate that an imbecile like Ehrlich hasn’t read Cannon v. City and County of Denver, 998. F.2d 867. (10th Cir. 1993).” (WorldNetDaily. Devvy Kidd. “Imbeciles Who Serve in Public Office.” 2/18/05.)

Christian Bigotry in Schools
“Seven-year-old Sallie loved her school and her classmates. But she felt sad when a teacher at her elementary school told her not to talk about her Christian beliefs on school grounds. She was assigned to a ‘Child Study Team’ where she would be remediated. Her IEP (Individual Education Plan) would be managed and monitored by the Resource Specialist.
Her parents asked a lawyer what rights they had as parents to protect Sallie from religious intolerance. The lawyer warned them that the school might consider Sallie ‘overly religious’ and refer her to Child Protection Services (CPS).
At that point, Sallie’s parents quickly transferred her from the local public school to a Christian school. Perhaps you are wondering how this could be happening in America. What happened to free speech? To religious freedom? To kindness?”

One Nation, Not Under God?
“A teacher attempted to censor the Pledge of Allegiance. An instructor at Faust Junior High School in Chambersburg, Pa., told students he was eliminating the words "under God" from the pledge, which is recited every day at the school. He explained that the school was a public facility and that mentioning the name of God was unacceptable. A parent contacted the Rutherford Institute, which contacted the school’s principal, who quickly made sure there would be no censorship of the pledge. ‘Students and teachers have the right to recite the pledge in its entirety,’ the institute's Ron Rissler said.” (Religion Today. Current News. 10-16-98)

One Nation, Not Under God?
“A teacher attempted to censor the Pledge of Allegiance. An instructor at Faust Junior High School in Chambersburg, Pa., told students he was eliminating the words "under God" from the pledge, which is recited every day at the school. He explained that the school was a public facility and that mentioning the name of God was unacceptable. A parent contacted the Rutherford Institute, which contacted the school’s principal, who quickly made sure there would be no censorship of the pledge. ‘Students and teachers have the right to recite the pledge in its entirety,’ the institute's Ron Rissler said.” (Religion Today. Current News. 10-16-98)

Christian Purging in Education
“Board of Education members in Cleveland, Ohio, can't pray before their meetings. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled March 18 that the practice is unconstitutional, the Associated Press said. The ruling, which overturns a lower court's 1996 decision, says the prayers are similar to those said at high school graduation ceremonies, which it ruled are an illegal endorsement of religion. Attorneys for the school board have not decided if they will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.” (Current News Summary. ReligionToday.com. 3/19/99.)

Thomas3474's photo
Sun 11/14/10 10:46 PM
http://thisistheendoftheworldasweknowit.com/archives/the-frightening-rise-of-christian-persecution-christians-around-the-world-are-being-shot-burned-hanged-tortured-and-stuffed-into-metal-shipping-containers



There is a widely quoted statistic that more Christians died for their faith in the 20th century than in the 19 centuries leading up to it. But as bad as the 20th century was, the 21st century is starting to make that look like a Sunday picnic. In every corner of the globe, Christians are being shot, burned, hanged, tortured and even stuffed into metal shipping containers. Christian clergy are being marked for assassination around the world, hundreds of churches are being burned to the ground along with scores of homes and businesses owned by Christians. Dozens of nations across the globe have now passed strict anti-conversion laws in an attempt to stifle the spread of Christianity. In the countries where Christians are not yet facing physical persecution, they still must deal with open discrimination, lawsuits and increasing ridicule. Christianity is now the most hated and most persecuted religion on the plant. The reality is that the words that Jesus spoke in John 15:18 ring truer today than ever: "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first."

Keep those words in mind as you read the following shocking reports of Christian persecution from all over the world....

China

Chinese authorities have conducted a crackdown on "illegal" Christian churches in recent months that church leaders are calling the harshest in years. Christians in China are required to worship in "churches" run by state-controlled organizations, and Christians who attempt to worship on their own are brutally persecuted.

Recently, hundreds of government police and hired thugs descended on a megachurch that served approximately 50,000 worshippers, smashing doors and windows, seizing Bibles and sending dozens of worshippers to hospitals with serious injuries. The co-pastors of the church are in prison and police vehicles remain parked on virtually every corner of the neighborhood where the church is located. Scenes such as this are regularly being repeated all over China as the Communist government seeks to eliminate all religion that is not government-sanctioned.

Eritrea

In a story that recently made headlines all over the world, thirty elderly women in Eritrea were arrested for simply praying together. But the truth is that this is just the latest episode in an ongoing persecution of Christians that is beyond brutal.

The Pakistan Christian TV website recently described the horrifc persecution of Christians in Eritrea this way....

Today some 3,000 Eritrean Christians are imprisoned for their faith. Some are in underground and solitary cells whilst some are in 'secret' prisons for the 'disappeared'. However, most are herded into unventilated shipping containers in the desert where dysentery and infectious diseases go untreated. Torture is routine.

The truth is that these unventilated shipping containers are extremely uncomfortable. The temperatures in these metal shipping containers can reach well over 100 degrees Fahrenheit, and in many instances Christians are not even let out of them to use the bathroom.

Assassinations Of Clergy

Increasingly, Christian clergy are being targeted for assassination all over the world. The following are just a few of the recent examples....

*A Russian priest that had been highly critical of Islam has been assassinated inside his own church.

*Leftist guerrillas in Colombia brutally executed a Christian pastor just outside his own home.

*Two masked members of the al-Shabaab Muslim militia shot and killed a Christian pastor in Somalia as he drove home from a worship service.

India

Persecution of Christians in India is getting so bad that India actually made International Christian Concern's Hall of Shame.

According to the ICC, 2008 was particularly bad, with "wave after wave of highly coordinated Hindu raids" that resulted in "the worst outbreak of anti-Christian violence in its recent history."

The statistics that the ICC quotes regarding the outbreak of persecution in India are sobering....

"In all, more than 100 Christians are confirmed dead, 4,000 homes have burned down, and over 50,000 Christians have fled their homes."

The following is just one example of what is going on in India. This story was originally posted by The Voice of the Martyrs....

----

On April 25, Pastor Mohan Babu and two other believers were severely beaten by 35 Hindu extremists for holding a Vacation Bible School (VBS) near Bangalore City, in Karnataka State. According to The Voice of the Martyrs contacts in India, the three-day VBS was organized by Ragigudda Baptist Church. VOM sources said, "Around 60 children from different backgrounds were attending the VBS. As they were worshiping, about 35 people belonging to a Hindu extremist group forcefully entered the hut chanting slogans and demolished the hut. The extremists mercilessly beat Mohan, Samuel and Krishna, alleging forceful conversion. The perpetrators chased the children without any courtesy and tore the Bibles. Mohan was severely injured on his lips and was profusely bleeding. The believers are living in fear and did not lodge complaint with the police."

----

Egypt

Hundreds of Muslim villagers in southern Egypt recently burned and looted scores of Christian-owned shops. Christians in Egypt live in a constant state of fear and thousands are being forced to relocate. In fact, the forced deportation of Egyptian Christians from their homes by the government in order to "protect" them is rapidly increasing.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia, of course, strictly forbids the conversion of any Muslim to Christianity. The penalty for conversion is death. Back in 2008, The daughter of a man who works for Saudi Arabia's religious police became a Christian after she joined an Internet chat group. He responded by cutting out her tongue and burning her to death.

The United Kingdom and Europe

All across Europe, "anti-proselytising" laws are being passed. Not only that, but other laws are being adopted that force Christians to deny their beliefs. For example, the U.K. government is being forced by the European Commission to eliminate exemptions that allow churches to refuse to employ homosexual staff.

North Korea

North Korea is one of the most brutally repressive governments in the history of mankind. Tonight more than 200,000 Christians will try to stay warm in horrific North Korean labor camps.

Christians there are considered little more than dogs as the following story from The Voice Of The Martyrs illustrates.....

----

The young brown-eyed girl looked up at her mother. What would she decide?

Earlier that morning, the young girl's mother, their pastor, and twenty-six others in her North Korean village of GokSan were bound and taken before a screaming crowd of Communists.

One of the guards ordered Pastor Kim and the other Christians, "Deny Christ, or you will die." The words chilled her. How could they ask her to deny Jesus? She knew in her heart he was real. They all quietly refused.

Then the Communist guard shouted directly at the adult Christians, "Deny Christ, or we will hang your children." The young girl looked up at her mother. She gripped her and knowing how much her mom loved her. her mother then leaned down. With confidence and peace she whispered, "Today, my love, I will see you in heaven."

All of the children were hanged.

The remaining believers were then brought out onto the pavement and forced to lie down in front of a huge steamroller. The Communists gave them one last chance. "Deny this Jesus or you will be crushed." The Christians had already given up their children; there was no turning back.

As the driver started the heavy piece of equipment, the singing from the villagers started softly. "More love, O Christ, to thee, more love to thee."

Redykeulous's photo
Mon 11/15/10 11:20 AM
Edited by Redykeulous on Mon 11/15/10 11:22 AM
Aside from limitations to freedom of religion, there are many other cases in which people have differences of opinion and often those opinions do not coincide with current law.


For example,in another recent there was a question about advertising in the public domain and what is considered legal. But there are others as well.

What kinds of opininions are there about the following?

If a public high school allows its facilities to be utilized for Boy Scout meetings and participation, should they also allow Wiccan clubs, Christian clubs, and LGBT clubs, or any other clubs the same usage?

Questions about public schools providing public invocations at school functions, even when they are scripted for a non-denominational reading. (Can any prayer really be non-denominational?

Should Federal & State funds be used to reimburse parents of parochial school children for public bus transportation to school, or to supplement parochial school teachers who are only supposed to teach secular courses?

What about the door to door solicitation of religious perspective?
At least one poster has voiced an opinion that the KKK should have the right to bring their message door to door – as he supports Christians going door to door distributing similarly disturbing anti-gay literature.

Milesoftheusa's photo
Mon 11/15/10 01:20 PM
Edited by Milesoftheusa on Mon 11/15/10 01:22 PM
I say we take the tax burden off the parents and the burden of what our child learns off of society and create a pass to Your Own School system merit system

So yours and my taxes will be given as credits to parents of school aged children and let them pick and choose where they send thier kids.

This would get rid of all govt. sponcered Terrorism in school by our laws of just now just what is discrimination anyway?

Now we pick and choose which group has the loudest out cry.. When our country was founded Home schooling and small school houses were all over the place and the Parents were the school board.

You can take for example in a county I lived in Missouri thier was maybe 20,000 people but at the turn of the century in 1900 thier were over 100 schools listed throughout the county.

people got along.. if you do not like this schools parents then find another for your child. or better yet start The GAy School For Better Enlightenment of Social Matters. Then you will not have people always saying they are being stepped on.

Let the Games Begin

Redykeulous's photo
Mon 11/15/10 08:06 PM

I say we take the tax burden off the parents and the burden of what our child learns off of society and create a pass to Your Own School system merit system

So yours and my taxes will be given as credits to parents of school aged children and let them pick and choose where they send thier kids.

This would get rid of all govt. sponcered Terrorism in school by our laws of just now just what is discrimination anyway?

Now we pick and choose which group has the loudest out cry.. When our country was founded Home schooling and small school houses were all over the place and the Parents were the school board.

You can take for example in a county I lived in Missouri thier was maybe 20,000 people but at the turn of the century in 1900 thier were over 100 schools listed throughout the county.

people got along.. if you do not like this schools parents then find another for your child. or better yet start The GAy School For Better Enlightenment of Social Matters. Then you will not have people always saying they are being stepped on.

Let the Games Begin


A school voucher system that would allow parents to choose any school system certainly has its appeal. It also has a major downside.

Currently, public schools have to abide by State and Federal regulations in order to receive their funding. Parochial, private, and home schools have few restrictions, most of which are State compliance regulations.

The implications of utilizing such a system would not typically be well-received by those who prefer unregulated school options. In fact I see little reason to give the Federal government more control over education than they already have.

Many of the privately funded options provide quality education mostly because they are not regulated and because they tend to be smaller environments. Personally I wouldn’t want to see something that’s working succumb to even more Federal oversight.

Voucher systems are extremely problematic in many ways, but I chose to discuss only this one issue, as it’s more in line with the OP regarding limitation of religious freedom. Private schooling is currently an option and it’s still an area in which religious expression is little regulated – can you see any reason to change that?

Thomas3474's photo
Mon 11/15/10 08:55 PM


I say we take the tax burden off the parents and the burden of what our child learns off of society and create a pass to Your Own School system merit system

So yours and my taxes will be given as credits to parents of school aged children and let them pick and choose where they send thier kids.

This would get rid of all govt. sponcered Terrorism in school by our laws of just now just what is discrimination anyway?

Now we pick and choose which group has the loudest out cry.. When our country was founded Home schooling and small school houses were all over the place and the Parents were the school board.

You can take for example in a county I lived in Missouri thier was maybe 20,000 people but at the turn of the century in 1900 thier were over 100 schools listed throughout the county.

people got along.. if you do not like this schools parents then find another for your child. or better yet start The GAy School For Better Enlightenment of Social Matters. Then you will not have people always saying they are being stepped on.

Let the Games Begin


A school voucher system that would allow parents to choose any school system certainly has its appeal. It also has a major downside.

Currently, public schools have to abide by State and Federal regulations in order to receive their funding. Parochial, private, and home schools have few restrictions, most of which are State compliance regulations.

The implications of utilizing such a system would not typically be well-received by those who prefer unregulated school options. In fact I see little reason to give the Federal government more control over education than they already have.

Many of the privately funded options provide quality education mostly because they are not regulated and because they tend to be smaller environments. Personally I wouldn’t want to see something that’s working succumb to even more Federal oversight.

Voucher systems are extremely problematic in many ways, but I chose to discuss only this one issue, as it’s more in line with the OP regarding limitation of religious freedom. Private schooling is currently an option and it’s still an area in which religious expression is little regulated – can you see any reason to change that?




I don't know where this is going but I am going to get back on track...

I think the core problem is that Atheist and others simply do not understand that Christians and others of faith have the right to express their religion no matter where they are and what they are doing.This includes all public buildings including schools,universities,courthouses,etc.

It is not wrong to say that people of faith have more rights then people who do not have faith.Christians and other religious people of this country have all the rights everyone else has but they also have one more right that Atheist and non believers do not have.That extra right is the right to practice their religion with out the Government or others prohibiting it.

First Amendment - Religion and Expression

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF

A student praying in school,drawing posters of Jesus,using God or Jesus in speeches is nothing more than his or her personal expression of their faith.It has nothing to do with the school.The school is not telling children they have to convert to Christianity,endorse Christianity,or to read the bible.A teacher telling a student he or she can not talk about his or her religion is a violation of their first amendment rights.

It is this reason why these cases almost always end up in the Federal Supreme court and why the Christians win them the majority of the time.It has only been in the last two years or so that Christians have been fighting back and fighting back hard.They realize that they don't have to tolerate some school official telling them they can't pray at lunch.They realize it doesn't matter who is offended and who gets pissed off.We still have the right to express our faith anytime we want and there is nothing the Government can say or do about it.


Now I know you are going to read this and complain and say this is unfair,and wrong,and blah,blah,blah.This simple truth is that Atheist,homosexuals,and others are no special than anyone else and deserve nothing more than what the Constitution says they already have.Our founding fathers knew Christians(who are persecuted more than anyone else in this world)would continue to be prosecuted and made sure that in America Christians could worship any way they please.That is why Separation of church and state was written.The Government can't tell anyone what to believe and the Government can not tell Christians what to do.Everyone is happy.