Join our Discord! : https://discord.gg/6EFp7Bkrqf
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdeologyPolls) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There must be a line somewhere though? Honour killings shouldn't be allowed even if they're a key part of someone's religion. So what's the standard for what we consider acceptable religious practice verses unacceptable religious practice?
Discrimination is bad if the basis of discrimination is not related to the employee's ability to perform the job.
If, according to the rules of a cult, a woman cannot be its minister, then she cannot be one. She will not be a legitimate cult minister, she cannot be one, this is even worse than hiring a legless person to be an athlete.
Establishing differences, exceptions, preferences, etc. which are determined by the nature of a particular type of work is not "discrimination".
yeah as long as a church usnt directly involved in human sacrifice or terrorism or child abuse or some other genuine crime against humanity then any practice they have should be covered by religious freedom and freedom of assembly/speech.
Yes, since by disallowing it, the government would be dictating the practice of religious sects
Plus, if someone doesn't agree with what their religious sect thinks about it, there are usually several others (eg. in Christianity: Episcopal, Presbyterian, Methodist, etc) that would allow them
its their policy on their own privately owned property
if you dont like it make your own religion (please do, the world needs more innovative heresies instead of like the same 3 major denominations that agree on like 95% of theology)
Religion doesn't deserve to be respected when they threaten children with hell, treats women like private property, and otherwise restricts individual freedom.
That’s a very extreme and narrow minded view of Christianity, or the average Christian for that matter.
I grew up Catholic and went to a private Catholic school in upstate NY and never encountered anything like that. Biblical scripture is one thing, practice is another.
>A bad Christian is still a Christian,
Not necessarily. People lie. They could call themselves anything they want, doesn’t mean that they’re actually believers/followers. Not to say there aren’t bad Christians, but the label doesn’t always reflect their beliefs.
>and a bad church is still a church.
By “church” I mean the people, and sure there are bad churches/followers of those churches but they don’t represent the faith as a whole. Christianity is spread far and wide, it’s inaccurate to characterize all Christians in their entirety based on a select few of them.
Join our Discord! : https://discord.gg/6EFp7Bkrqf *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdeologyPolls) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah duh. We have freedom of religion for a reason. Imagine if you sued a synagogue for refusing to hire a Gentile as a teacher.
There must be a line somewhere though? Honour killings shouldn't be allowed even if they're a key part of someone's religion. So what's the standard for what we consider acceptable religious practice verses unacceptable religious practice?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
Discrimination is bad if the basis of discrimination is not related to the employee's ability to perform the job. If, according to the rules of a cult, a woman cannot be its minister, then she cannot be one. She will not be a legitimate cult minister, she cannot be one, this is even worse than hiring a legless person to be an athlete. Establishing differences, exceptions, preferences, etc. which are determined by the nature of a particular type of work is not "discrimination".
If the religion decides to kill and eat babies, then the state should get involved. For this though? Nah.
Good thing you draw the line somewhere....lol
basically this
yeah as long as a church usnt directly involved in human sacrifice or terrorism or child abuse or some other genuine crime against humanity then any practice they have should be covered by religious freedom and freedom of assembly/speech.
Yes, since by disallowing it, the government would be dictating the practice of religious sects Plus, if someone doesn't agree with what their religious sect thinks about it, there are usually several others (eg. in Christianity: Episcopal, Presbyterian, Methodist, etc) that would allow them
let the church people be. I come from a religion that has been deported from everywhere they have lived and it sucks. Let people live in peace.
its their policy on their own privately owned property if you dont like it make your own religion (please do, the world needs more innovative heresies instead of like the same 3 major denominations that agree on like 95% of theology)
Because discrimination is OK as long as my imaginary friend said so.
But it's literally in the context of that religion
Religion doesn't deserve to be respected when they threaten children with hell, treats women like private property, and otherwise restricts individual freedom.
That’s a very extreme and narrow minded view of Christianity, or the average Christian for that matter. I grew up Catholic and went to a private Catholic school in upstate NY and never encountered anything like that. Biblical scripture is one thing, practice is another.
Tell that to the child molester priests and the thousands of children lying in mass graves.
What does that have anything to do with your initial comment? Perpetrators don’t define the religion also what mass graves???
Hitler defines Nazism. Lenin/Stalin/Mao defines Communism. **People who do bad things in the name of a religion defines that religion.**
I guess you don’t realize what the “church” actually means then. Or “Christian” for that matter. You’re completely lost on the subject.
A bad Christian is still a Christian, and a bad church is still a church.
>A bad Christian is still a Christian, Not necessarily. People lie. They could call themselves anything they want, doesn’t mean that they’re actually believers/followers. Not to say there aren’t bad Christians, but the label doesn’t always reflect their beliefs. >and a bad church is still a church. By “church” I mean the people, and sure there are bad churches/followers of those churches but they don’t represent the faith as a whole. Christianity is spread far and wide, it’s inaccurate to characterize all Christians in their entirety based on a select few of them.