Just because one is not prevented from their own worship doesn’t mean that said government will not be extremely biased towards their own, and therefore overly biased against the other religions if forced to choose between one or the other. It’s not right, it’s not fair, it’s a bad idea to hide behind. If all policies reflect one groups’ beliefs, others beliefs will be discredited, harmed, or undermined by the belief that trumps, which is why the best option to go down is one of impartiality between religions and the separation of one specific religion’s values from the rest of the government. If one reigns, no matter what, it will lower the others’ freedoms in the process.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution4mos4MO
How? How would teaching creation in schools infringe upon the rights of atheists and Muslims, etc to worship as they will? How will creating policies that promote civic virtue cause anything but prosperity and integrity to any society? I don’t need to hear what you believe for the third time, I need to hear why you believe it.
@9CJ6CB64mos4MO
Because creationism is straight up false, and unless you teach the creationist ideals of every religion in a HISTORICAL context rather than presenting it as fact, it is, in many forms, unfounded and state-sponsored conversion. Not everyone agrees with said “civic virtues” on a lot of areas. Less than 40% support a gay marriage ban, yet that’s a “civic virtue” of the Bible. Would you ban that? No, it’s a disgusting idea to govern a country by religious ideals because it ALWAYS throws someone, somewhere, someway out of the equation and openly discriminated… Read more
@Patriot-#1776Constitution4mos4MO
"Because creation is straight up false"? Hate to burst your bubble, but that's another fallacy. You're essentially arguing that "Evolution/alternative religions are true because creationism is false," thereby begging the question and reasoning in a vicious circle. Another fallacy you used was the appeal to the majority, claiming that because less than 40% support a "gay marriage" ban than homosexual sodomy MUST be morally upright. Finally, you finished your illogical tirade by (again!) sidestepping my question of how teaching biblical values infringes upon freedom of worship by assuming your own position in a second vicious circle. I'm sick of the fallacies, if you're going to argue with me, than you might as well learn HOW to argue first....
@9CJ6CB64mos4MO
I’m saying that if we do teach creationism, it’s from standpoint of historical context, not as an actual scientific theory, not because it’s controversial, but because it’s not scientific. That wouldn’t be begging the question, that’s stating the obvious. There is no scientific basis behind creationism besides what the Bible (a 2,000 year old book with little evidence it was actually written by the instruction of a god) states, and that is not a basis for a scientific model. Evolution on the other hand has been researched for centuries, and has basis, as… Read more
@Patriot-#1776Constitution4mos4MO
Ironically, in trying to prove you did NOT beg the question you have again begged it by claiming creationism is "not scientific" and your worldview is, which has been established by any logic in this discussion. I won't bother to critique the rest of the paragraph because it really falls apart from the very first line.
For "gay marriage" it is not an issue of liberty vs control, as marriage, by definition, comes with legal recognition, societal respect & praise, and tax benefits. When the LGBTQ cultists ask to "legalise" "marriage" between two… Read more
