DUmmie: Should religious display be banned in public? (Criminalize Wearing a Cross in Public!)

DUmmie Land | May 21, 2005

[RWR8189]

Mairead  (1000+ posts)	Sat May-21-05 01:15 PM Original message
Should religious display be banned in public?

Edited on Sat May-21-05 01:16 PM by Mairead

(I'm posting this here because this is a political question, not a religious one) I think most of us would agree that we're having a national problem with rampant religiosity, and that if we don't figure out how to solve it in a permanent way we're going to end up with a pseudo-theocracy as our form of government. There are scriptural exhortations to make one's prayer and religious affilation a private matter. So: how about making public religious display a misdemeanor? It would be similar to drinking alcoholic bevvies in public, or driving without having your licence with you, or having a bonk in the bushes. If you go around wearing a visible cross/magen david/pentagram/whatever, or handing out tracts, or walking up to strangers and asking whether they're 'saved', then you get a ticket, a fine, and perhaps a scolding for a first offence. And if that doesn't work and you keep on doing it anyway, then after awhile maybe the court decides that you've won the prize of having your head read to see if you're wrapped tightly enough to be wandering around loose. Let me emphasise this again: I'm talking about public display, not private practice. I'm not talking about making religious membership or practice itself an offence!! The First Amendment guarantees that government isn't allowed to meddle with our religious practice. But the right to practice in public is not unbounded: one couldn't, for example, get away with holding an impromptu service using a bullhorn in the middle of a busy intersection or in an expensive neighborhood. So that would be the legal basis behind it: your religious choices cannot be messed with, but your public practice can be. (This is a question I posed in another forum, too; I'm interested to see whether/in what way the responses are different here)

[RWR8189]

God these people disgust me.

See the rest of the thread here.

[Petronski]

Right of of Soviet Russian hell!

[West Coast Conservative]

Stalin would be proud.

[MikefromOhio]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Ahh the DUmmies, showing us that their reading comprehension is at an all time low, again....

[Choose Ye This Day]

What is this "Constitution" of which you speak? Is this some extreme, right-wing Fascist invention?

[Asphalt]

well, as i've always said, even if worst comes to worste and all this crap happens, and they get cameras on every corner, there will always be sensible people who can go off and start their own country on some island. Is it just me, or does this creep people out?

[MikefromOhio]

LOL

it's gotta be LOL

[muawiyah]

Yes, ban -he le--er -!

[Asphalt]

actually, alot of the replies seem to think it rediculous, but there are still I'd say 35 percent that like the idea.

[keat]

Well, the replies are pretty sensible. Just the idea, though, that an idea such as this could be hatched in someone's head, scary. Something very much like this was nearly enacted in France not too long ago.

[Asphalt]

A post on DU: Somebody wants to wear a cross, or Star of David, or Sikh turban, or Muslim headscarf, they should be able to do so, and it's NOT your or my or the government's &#$%ing business to tell them they can't. To ban such things is totaliarian. And just plain wrong. In America, anyway. What else do you want to ban? Should French people not be allowed to wear berets? Scotsmen not kilts? Mexicans not guyabera shirts and peasant blouses? Canadians not rubber overshoes? (Sorry, Canadians. I was runniing out of examples.) How about that evil lipstick? Eye makeup? Oh no, those two men are shaking hands! Better arrest them, they might be exchanging that secret Masonic signal or something else religious! I guess we have to admit that a few Dems have brains, even if they only ever use them once in a blue moon.

[Roscoe Karns]

This Mairead person is a real nut. But, to be fair, it looks like the rest of the DUmmies on that thread strongly disagree with him/her.

[StonyBurk]

35 % isn't that about the same numbe rof hard core Democrats
in this country?

[ALPAPilot]

A post on DU: Somebody wants to wear a cross, or Star of David, or Sikh turban, or Muslim headscarf, they should be able to do so, and it's NOT your or my or the government's &#$%ing business to tell them they can't. To ban such things is totaliarian. And just plain wrong. In America, anyway. What else do you want to ban? Should French people not be allowed to wear berets? Scotsmen not kilts? Mexicans not guyabera shirts and peasant blouses? Canadians not rubber overshoes? (Sorry, Canadians. I was runniing out of examples.) How about that evil lipstick? Eye makeup? Oh no, those two men are shaking hands! Better arrest them, they might be exchanging that secret Masonic signal or something else religious! I guess we have to admit that a few Dems have brains, even if they only ever use them once in a blue moon.

In other words in the USA that's the way we have it so it's OKAY; if some other country wants to have a genocidal maniac dictator, we're OKAY with that too. Note to dummies: A self evident TRUTH is true always and everywhere. What a dummie nitwit.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

We've got our DUmmies, now it looks like our Free Dominion friends have to put up with LUsers...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x3300693

Do I get credit for coining that term or did someone else find the site and coin it already?

[rikkir]

They'll get my Cross right after they pry my cold dead fingers off my gun!
All I can say is they better pack a lunch!

[dirtbiker]

They'll get my Cross right after they pry my cold dead fingers off my gun! All I can say is they better pack a lunch!

I'm with you, brother! I may loose, but I will not go down easy, and I will not go down alone.....

[muawiyah]

The "what would Jesus do" school of thought is essentially idolotry, and idolotry of the worst kind ~ that of the self.

A Christian most correctly searches through Jesus' words and asks "what did Jesus say". Putting yourself in Jesus' place and figuring out what He would do is to make a God of yourself.

I'm not saying this to be cruel to you, or even highly critical ~ it's just to point out what the fundamental problem is in doing this.

Most folks tend to back off from idolotry.