Christians Reveal 'Double Standard' Regarding Religious Liberty, Poll

Jan 24, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Huffington Post

WASHINGTON Half of Americans worry that religious freedom in the U.S. is at risk, and many say activist groups -- particularly gays and lesbians -- are trying to remove "traditional Christian values" from the public square.

Comments
1 - 14 of 14 Comments Last updated May 27, 2013
DaBroad

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jan 24, 2013
 
It's like the evangelicals think they're at the Mad Tea Party...no room, move down! You can't have any tea at OUR table! Tea for all, no tea for you!
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jan 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The sooner the fundies go out of business; the sooner they'll quit using gays as scapegoats
buck

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Feb 10, 2013
 
and where does the term "double standard" fit in?
everyone and every place nowadays lives by the code of double standards. even churches do and how sad is this.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

From the news article:
.
"WASHINGTON (RNS) Half of Americans worry that religious freedom in the U.S. is at risk, and many say activist groups -- particularly gays and lesbians -- are trying to remove "traditional Christian values" from the public square."
.
Well; duh!
.
If they would keep their nagging fantasies contained inside their government subsidized tax-free buildings; churches would 'not' have this problem
.
Ultimately; their buildings will need to be converted to insane asylums for evangelical fundamentalists; if they continue threatening American liberty and freedom
buck

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

well yeah, the right for USA citizens to have freedom of religion is being threatened.
The large allowance in the US of foreign religions to congregate who btw are not US citizens is outgrowing tremendously.
The gov't should not get involved unless there is lawless action or proper justification.
What gets me is that the foreigners get together almost anywhere to worship, in the streets even.
sorry but this is deemed interference with everyday life of USA citizens who walk the streets and stand around just to chat or whatever.
Church should be in a building.
and the law regarding Freedom of Religion is for
USA citizens, it was written for USA policy. it is not for foreigners to wreek havoc with their religion who are living in the USA.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

People standing up for the constitution are " activist groups"? well, i guess they are. someone has to take the constitution back from these religious whackjobs. they have destroyed our nation...
buck

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Feb 11, 2013
 
yeah, and who let them in?

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
May 14, 2013
 
religion is always a sensitive issue..
DaBroad

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
May 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

buck wrote:
well yeah, the right for USA citizens to have freedom of religion is being threatened.
The large allowance in the US of foreign religions to congregate who btw are not US citizens is outgrowing tremendously.
The gov't should not get involved unless there is lawless action or proper justification.
What gets me is that the foreigners get together almost anywhere to worship, in the streets even.
sorry but this is deemed interference with everyday life of USA citizens who walk the streets and stand around just to chat or whatever.
Church should be in a building.
and the law regarding Freedom of Religion is for
USA citizens, it was written for USA policy. it is not for foreigners to wreek havoc with their religion who are living in the USA.
And here we have a perfect example of that double standard. Are all those Christian preachers who stand on the corners in nearly every city, often with bullhorns, yelling out bible quotes, a bunch of foreigners? Or are they OK in your mind, because they're "American citizens"? You know, Christianity is a foreign religion. You are correct in one thing, we should not be subjected to people shouting about how everyone is going to go to hell if they don't convert. When I'm on my lunch break, I neither want nor need that nonsense. I saw someone yelling at a bunch of smokers, telling them that they're going to go to hell because they smoke. The smokers looked at the guy like he was nuts (which he likely was - he had written quotes all over his clothing, was wearing a sandwichboard and carrying two signs) and kept puffing.
I have seen only one non-Christian bunch of street preachers, and they were Nation of Islam, which is as American as most evangelical groups are.
You know, if you only want religions that are not "foreign", you'd have to get rid of all non-Native American religions. People who want "majority rule" when it comes to religious rights really need to be careful what they wish for. They may not be in the majority forever. By then, it might be too late to preserve their rights.
buck

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
May 15, 2013
 
well as it was pointed out the activists for whatever reason & purpose destroy our constitutional rights.
our ancestors dealt with with all the changes fine.
If we allow them to change the constiution one tilt or of slightness
that would mean giving those in charge the liberty to change anything & everything about the constitution that's been upheld until now.
The gay activists have the freedom to get married etc.
Marriage was declared one man & one woman, and that's what you need to make a baby not.
& they're planning to change the right to protect ourselves with whatever is necessary. Stricter gun laws will not stop anyone from committing a crime with a gun.
DaBroad

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
May 16, 2013
 
buck wrote:
well as it was pointed out the activists for whatever reason & purpose destroy our constitutional rights.
our ancestors dealt with with all the changes fine.
If we allow them to change the constiution one tilt or of slightness
that would mean giving those in charge the liberty to change anything & everything about the constitution that's been upheld until now.
The gay activists have the freedom to get married etc.
Marriage was declared one man & one woman, and that's what you need to make a baby not.
& they're planning to change the right to protect ourselves with whatever is necessary. Stricter gun laws will not stop anyone from committing a crime with a gun.
Marriage as "one man & one woman" is nowhere in the Constitution. If procreation was the reason for "marriage", why are infertile couples permitted to marry? Why are people who get pregnant not required to immediately marry? The bible is full of men with multiple wives, and wives and daughters are treated as chatel - property to be bought or sold. That is NOT in the constitution either. Equal protections under the law - you cannot discriminate on the basis of gender. "Making babies" is not in any state's marriage laws. Two non-related consenting adults in full posession of their mental faculties is all that "marriage" requires. It is a legal contract, and does not depend on gender in any way. Separation of church and state permits churches to marry - or not marry - whoever they want. Legal contracts are separate from spiritual contracts, and that is as it should be. I would not want any religion dictating law, because what is in the majority now may not be in the majority forever. What if a state becomes majority strict Muslim? Would you not want laws to be purely secular in that case? I'm guessing you would not want the majority to rule. And we do not live in "majority rule". The minority is protected.
What the FFFF

Santa Cruz, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
May 17, 2013
 
They want the "religious freedom" to do things like this???

http://news.yahoo.com/crowds-break-gay-rights...
DaBroad

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
May 17, 2013
 
Most here are much more sublte. But, yes, that's the sort of "religious freedom" that is being sought. Sure they want religious freedom for everyone - they think everyone should be free to be Christian.

There's a small town where Christian summer camp information was distributed to children in the local public school. Chidren were excused from class to go to the office to pick up Giddeon Bibles. The school felt that that was perfectly alright. A local pagan family submitted pagan holiday gathering information, and donated pagan books that could be distributed just like the Bibles. Boy, did that school district do an about face! Now they're talking about having one day a year when all that information will be available for kids to pick up with their parent's permission, but not as part of the school day.

Remember to be careful what you ask for. If you want prayer in school or at the begining of city council meetings, be prepared to sit through prayers that may not gibe with what you believe. Be prepared for the local Satanists to offer a prayer. Be prepared for the local Wiccans, Asatru, Buddhists, Santos, Hindus, and every other flavor of religion to take advantage of that freedom.

That is why our founding fathers did not want religion embedded in our government. Yes, they believed in a "Creator", but that did not mean they wanted to slap a label or name on that nebulous "Creator". It is called "deism", belief that there is something that could be called a diety, but it is so vast and foreign that we are not able to comprehend the nature of it, we can only observe the effects. How can anyone know the nature of “God”? Holy books and philosophies are found in every part of the world. Most people do not question what they are taught as children, and never bother exploring it, merely taking it as truth without entertaining the possibility of any other potential “truth”. Exactly how much of the actual history of their faith do most people know? I don’t mean the myths and stories in their texts, but the actual history. Why is this or that rule in place? Where did that story come from? Who was this person, and why is his writing included but another person’s writing left out?

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
May 27, 2013
 
DaBroad wrote:
Most here are much more sublte. But, yes, that's the sort of "religious freedom" that is being sought. Sure they want religious freedom for everyone - they think everyone should be free to be Christian.
There's a small town where Christian summer camp information was distributed to children in the local public school. Chidren were excused from class to go to the office to pick up Giddeon Bibles. The school felt that that was perfectly alright. A local pagan family submitted pagan holiday gathering information, and donated pagan books that could be distributed just like the Bibles. Boy, did that school district do an about face! Now they're talking about having one day a year when all that information will be available for kids to pick up with their parent's permission, but not as part of the school day.
Remember to be careful what you ask for. If you want prayer in school or at the begining of city council meetings, be prepared to sit through prayers that may not gibe with what you believe. Be prepared for the local Satanists to offer a prayer. Be prepared for the local Wiccans, Asatru, Buddhists, Santos, Hindus, and every other flavor of religion to take advantage of that freedom.
That is why our founding fathers did not want religion embedded in our government. Yes, they believed in a "Creator", but that did not mean they wanted to slap a label or name on that nebulous "Creator". It is called "deism", belief that there is something that could be called a diety, but it is so vast and foreign that we are not able to comprehend the nature of it, we can only observe the effects. How can anyone know the nature of “God”? Holy books and philosophies are found in every part of the world. Most people do not question what they are taught as children, and never bother exploring it, merely taking it as truth without entertaining the possibility of any other potential “truth”. Exactly how much of the actual history of their faith do most people know? I don’t mean the myths and stories in their texts, but the actual history. Why is this or that rule in place? Where did that story come from? Who was this person, and why is his writing included but another person’s writing left out?
i see your point. thanks for sharing. i respect any religion but when it comes to work, everyone deserves respect and fair treatment.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••