• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Are Islam and Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhs and Pagans protected by the First Amendment?

Arjay81

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
2,207
Reaction score
223
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Prove what?

Religion is mentioned in the 1st?

That is self evident if you can read.
Mentioned in a negative context, such as no state religion allowed. Even one such as you should be able to puzzle out what that means. If you have further difficulty, seek help.
 

Fledermaus

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
72,782
Reaction score
13,308
Location
Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Mentioned in a negative context, such as no state religion allowed. Even one such as you should be able to puzzle out what that means. If you have further difficulty, seek help.
Hey, look...

Moving goalposts.

You really don't realize how silly you look at this point. Do you?

Post #11 makes no mention of negative context. It is just plain wrong and you look silly trying to defend that which is clearly wrong.
 
Last edited:

Chagos

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2015
Messages
26,035
Reaction score
6,627
Location
in expatria
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Hey, look...

Moving goalposts.

You really don't realize how silly you look at this point. Do you?

Post #11 makes no mention of negative context. It is just plain wrong and you look silly trying to defend that which is clearly wrong.
What you refuse to understand is that mention of religion in a negative context is like it not being mentioned at all.

Like I never wrote this post.:mrgreen:
 

FastPace

DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2017
Messages
1,842
Reaction score
243
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It seems that many who call themselves Christian in America, believe that only their faith is meant to be protected under "religious freedom" laws?

There are some who openly state that nothing but Christianity should be allowed out in public in this country. Others are a bit nicer, just saying that only Christianity and perhaps Judaism, should be favoured by government.

We have outspoken groups blaming every disaster upon the lack of prayer and Bible study in public schools, of course those same groups would freak out if the Rig Veda or Quran were read in public schools.

There are Americans screaming about "creeping sharia laws" while at the same time demanding the Bible be the foundation for all laws.

Back in 2014, while still, Chief Justice on the Alabama Supreme Court, Roy Moore was saying these things.

Your post is Christian-phobic. And Sharia law is not the equivalent of the Bible. And atheist can read the Bible. Sharia law is equivalent to say... Catholic Canon Law. Sharia law is not the Quran no more than Catholic Canon Law is the Bible.
 

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
14,582
Reaction score
5,905
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Your post is Christian-phobic. And Sharia law is not the equivalent of the Bible. And atheist can read the Bible. Sharia law is equivalent to say... Catholic Canon Law. Sharia law is not the Quran no more than Catholic Canon Law is the Bible.
Sorry if you read my words as being "Christian-phobic". I should have been more specific and described those specific sects who call themselves Christian while behaving in very un-Christ like ways.

Depends upon one's definitions I suppose as to whether or not Sharia is Quranic. My point being that there are certain groups who claim to be Christian that would like to impose Biblical law upon our nation, of course each group has it's own definitions as to just what fits their "Biblical laws" category.

Like some guy named Gandhi supposedly said, "I like your Christ, your Christians not so much."
 

FastPace

DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2017
Messages
1,842
Reaction score
243
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Sorry if you read my words as being "Christian-phobic". I should have been more specific and described those specific sects who call themselves Christian while behaving in very un-Christ like ways.
Yeah, there are some sects or denominations of Christianity that "go off the deep end" if you ask me. I know some will say that is subjective. Maybe so. But is certain some of those sects or denominations have very different views and perceptions of things than myself. Like some of those that militantly support Zionism not because they love Jewish people but because they think it will usher in some apocalypse that will cause the return of Christ.

Depends upon one's definitions I suppose as to whether or not Sharia is Quranic. My point being that there are certain groups who claim to be Christian that would like to impose Biblical law upon our nation, of course each group has it's own definitions as to just what fits their "Biblical laws" category.
Sharia draws from the Quran of course. But what I'm saying is that Sharia is a sophisticated legal system that has been developed by Islamic scholars with backgrounds in Islamic theology and philosophy and probably even jurisprudence. The Christian equivalency of it therefore is Canon Law which likewise is a sophisticated law system. You have to actually obtain a university degree in Canon Law with a prerequisite being you have to JD secular law degree, or an advanced degree in theology I believe. At least for Catholicism.

And I would not say every aspect of Sharia is bad. In fact, historically it had a more well formed out stance against usury than Catholicism did. I'm no expert on Sharia but it would not surprise me if some aspects of Sharia in some countries had more evolved and "Christian" positions on certain things than modern American Constitutional Law.

Beginning of a Wikipedia article on Canon Law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_law

Canon law is a set of ordinances and regulations made by ecclesiastical authority (Church leadership), for the government of a Christian organization or church and its members. It is the internal ecclesiastical law, or operational policy, governing the Catholic Church (both the Latin Church and the Eastern Catholic Churches), the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox churches, and the individual national churches within the Anglican Communion.


Like some guy named Gandhi supposedly said, "I like your Christ, your Christians not so much."
Gandhi is an American hero. He is not my hero. Gandhi was an East Indian Hindu and lawyer that while living in South Africa referred to black South Africans in racist terminology. Essentially, Gandhi was racist, viewed himself as superior to black Africans, and took umbrage at whites in South Africa treating him like he was on par with blacks.

And Hindus have their own issues (the Apostle Thomas was martyred in India in the South of India by Hindus) past and present. So do Muslims in India. Because Western people think all human history after the death of Jesus has only taken place in the Western world, said Western people have little clue that cruelty and injustices have gone on across the Eastern world in say... India, Afghanistan (one a part of India I think), and in Buddhist countries like Vietnam for example. Christian women in the West yap their bimbo mouths about how cruel they have it in Christian Churches and how feminist the Buddhist East is but that is because bimbos rarely know what they are talking about. If say... reincarnation is real then I pray I'm never reborn as a girl in say... Muslim Afghanistan or Buddhist Vietnam. It's better to be a limp wrist, flamboyant homosexual male, in the "Christian West," than it is to be a regular girl in either Muslim Afghanistan or Buddhist Vietnam.

(I'm enamored with India by the way--you have to accept the bad comes with the good to be found in India too)

So, currently in India:

NDTV
Published on Dec 19, 2017


First priests were attacked while singing carols, now Hindu right wing groups warn schools in Aligarh in UP not to celebrate Christmas.


Part of India's historical past, a movie that is kind of historical fiction about a certain period in India. But the Muslim emperor was supposedly bisexual and cruel and had like over 10,000 or 30,000 people slaughtered in one day in some town or kingdom. He lived during the Western Crusading Era but he was part of the Muslim Conquest of India.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padmavati_(film)

 

Arjay81

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
2,207
Reaction score
223
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Hey, look...

Moving goalposts.

You really don't realize how silly you look at this point. Do you?

Post #11 makes no mention of negative context. It is just plain wrong and you look silly trying to defend that which is clearly wrong.
With your mindset you truly belong in "The Basement" as it is the only place where stupidity such as your is tolerated by those as stupid as you./
 

Fledermaus

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
72,782
Reaction score
13,308
Location
Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
With your mindset you truly belong in "The Basement" as it is the only place where stupidity such as your is tolerated by those as stupid as you./
You really don't realize how silly you look at this point. Do you?

Post #11 makes no mention of negative context. It is just plain wrong and you continue to look silly trying to defend that which is clearly wrong.
 

Angel

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2017
Messages
18,001
Reaction score
2,908
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Are Islam and Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhs and Pagans protected by the First Amendment?
This is a rhetorical question, it seems to me. All religion is protected.
Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are bedrock rights for any liberal democratic political organization.
 

FastPace

DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2017
Messages
1,842
Reaction score
243
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Eh... I never heard of this East Indian scholar Dr. Ambedkar until I scrolled through some you youtube posters under that NDTV video in post #33. One of the posters there--presumably Indian from his comments--attacked Gandhi bad when some right-wing Hindu argued in a post that Gandhi was against Hindu conversion to Christianity. And the guy that attacked Gandhi mentioned Dr. Ambedkar as India's far greater national hero. And he insinuated Gandhi and Ambedkar were on opposing lines.

So, I googled the guy up. Very well educated man. Then I came across this woman who was giving some lecture in Ambedkar, but the sound quality was terrible, so I switched to this video of her's that focuses Gandhi. And I rolled the dice she might mentioned Ambedkar in it. And she does.

According to her Gandhi was sexually active with his niece when he was in his 70s and had views about women we would find intolerable today. So, liberals or Democrats think Roy Moore is bad but Gandhi is the greatest saintly man ever.

She also says Black-Americans would not like Gandhis views about blacks. Apparently, aside from using a racial slur for blacks in South Africa he also referred to the black Zulus as savages.




Now, long before Gandhi and his non-violence thing, there was the Irish political actor in Daniel O'Connell in the 1800s. He advanced a non-violence, politically active, campaign for the advancements of Catholics under British imperial rule. He's mainly unknown outside of Ireland. The mid-20th century IRA became far more well known internationally. The IRA were pretty much socialists too. Political leftist. I think the Muslim Hezbollah are socialists, political leftist, as well if I remember correctly.

Daniel O'Connell - New World Encyclopedia




Daniel O'Connell (August 6, 1775 – May 15, 1847) (Irish: Dónal Ó Conaill), known as The Liberator,[1] or The Emancipator,[2] was an Irish political leader in the first half of the nineteenth century. He passed the bar examination in 1798, among the first Catholics to qualify as a barrister. That year, he opposed the violence that broke out against the British. He campaigned for Catholic Emancipation - the right for Catholics to sit in the Westminster Parliament, denied for over 100 years - and Repeal of the Union between Ireland and Great Britain.

O’Connell’s achievements as a pioneer of non-violent political protest is less well known than those of such later men as M. K. Gandhi and Martin Luther King, although he influenced both. He richly deserves his place in the history of how change for the better can be brought about by peaceful means. He also defended the rights of Jews, and condemned slavery telling the citizens of the United States that they were hypocrites for dishonoring their freedom by tyrannizing others.[3] Despite its adverse affect on financial support for the Irish cause from the USA, he did not abandon his principled opposition to slavery wherever it was practiced.

The Irish were poor even into the 20th century. Well before the mid-20th century. As the author of his autobiography for which this movie was based off of (based off the book) kind of depicts. Angela's Ashes. If I recall correctly Angela was the author's mother's name. This is not a work of fiction but a work of autobiography and reality.



 

FastPace

DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2017
Messages
1,842
Reaction score
243
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
So, Hindu Gandhi called the black Zulus savages.

Well, the Catholic IRA (Irish Republican Army), a politically socialist bunch like the Black Panther Party of the 1960s and '70s USA, mention the Zulu in one of their favorite songs they like to sing. The British cops/enforcers used to were tan uniforms. And black uniforms too I think. That's what they mean in the song when they call out the "black and tans."



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party

The Black Panther Party or the BPP (originally the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense) was a revolutionary socialist organization founded by Bobby Seale and Huey Newton in October 1966.

If the IRA embraced socialism | SocialistWorker.org

Tommy McKearney was a senior member of the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) from the early 1970s until his arrest in 1977. Sentenced to life in jail, he served 16 years, during which he took part in the 1980 hunger strike in the Maze. Now a freelance journalist and an organizer with the Independent Workers Union, he has written a book called The Provisional IRA: From Insurrection to Parliament. He spoke to Mat Ward about some of the themes in his book.
During the early years of the Provisional IRA's development, the movement was "pro-socialist" in an unscientific sense. The membership was working class, empathized with the less well-off and had a "democratic socialist republic" as its headline demand. What it didn't have was a tangible socialist program as distinct from socialistic aspirations.
 

it's just me

Ugly bag of mostly water
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
15,054
Reaction score
2,214
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It seems that many who call themselves Christian in America, believe that only their faith is meant to be protected under "religious freedom" laws?

There are some who openly state that nothing but Christianity should be allowed out in public in this country. Others are a bit nicer, just saying that only Christianity and perhaps Judaism, should be favoured by government.

We have outspoken groups blaming every disaster upon the lack of prayer and Bible study in public schools, of course those same groups would freak out if the Rig Veda or Quran were read in public schools.

There are Americans screaming about "creeping sharia laws" while at the same time demanding the Bible be the foundation for all laws.

Back in 2014, while still, Chief Justice on the Alabama Supreme Court, Roy Moore was saying these things.
So that's one out of 325 million.
 

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
14,582
Reaction score
5,905
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Quote Originally Posted by FastPace View Post
Yeah, there are some sects or denominations of Christianity that "go off the deep end" if you ask me. I know some will say that is subjective. Maybe so. But is certain some of those sects or denominations have very different views and perceptions of things than myself. Like some of those that militantly support Zionism not because they love Jewish people but because they think it will usher in some apocalypse that will cause the return of Christ.



Sharia draws from the Quran of course. But what I'm saying is that Sharia is a sophisticated legal system that has been developed by Islamic scholars with backgrounds in Islamic theology and philosophy and probably even jurisprudence. The Christian equivalency of it therefore is Canon Law which likewise is a sophisticated law system. You have to actually obtain a university degree in Canon Law with a prerequisite being you have to JD secular law degree, or an advanced degree in theology I believe. At least for Catholicism.

And I would not say every aspect of Sharia is bad. In fact, historically it had a more well formed out stance against usury than Catholicism did. I'm no expert on Sharia but it would not surprise me if some aspects of Sharia in some countries had more evolved and "Christian" positions on certain things than modern American Constitutional Law.

Beginning of a Wikipedia article on Canon Law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_law

(remainder deleted as it isn't what I wish to respond to)
There are other Americans who see sharia law as un-American and Biblical law as essentially American.
https://www.adn.com/opinions/nation...erica-but-its-christians-who-are-bringing-it/

Much-dreaded "sharia law," or something resembling it, may well be coming to the United States.

Just not in the form many Americans expected.

That is, the religiously motivated laws creeping into public policymaking aren't based on the Koran, and they aren't coming from mythical hard-line Islamists in, say, Dearborn, Mich. They're coming from the White House, which wants to make it easier for hard-line Christians to impose their beliefs and practices on the rest of us.

A few days after declaring his intention to impose a religious test upon refugees so that Christians would be given priority, President Trump gave a bizarre speech at the National Prayer Breakfast. In between a plug for "The Apprentice" and boasts about his disastrous calls with heads of allied states, he made some less-noticed policy news.

He vowed to help blur the line between church and state by repealing the Johnson Amendment.
 

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
14,582
Reaction score
5,905
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
So that's one out of 325 million.
From a 'survey' conducted in 2015 by Lifeway Research
One in Three Americans Worry About Sharia Law Being Applied in America

“ISIS has stirred an odd religious debate in America today,” said Ed Stetzer, executive director of LifeWay Research. “In a nation that has long espoused religious freedom, Americans are thinking long and hard about the kind of society Islam fosters – especially the more radical groups that say they are Islamic – and whether Sharia law would ever be adopted here.”
 

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
14,582
Reaction score
5,905
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
I see that as being much more of a threat than a creche in the in the town square.
What do you see as "a threat"? That one third of Americans (supposedly) prefer believing preachers and talking heads over factual information? Or that sharia law is actually a threat?
 

FastPace

DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2017
Messages
1,842
Reaction score
243
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
There are other Americans who see sharia law as un-American and Biblical law as essentially American.
What is Biblical law, thou shall not steal and men are not allowed to have more than one wife?

So, it is un-American to oppose theft, to making it illegal to marry multiple women at once, and un-American to honor your mother and father and to subscribe to the conduct taught by Jesus on the Sermon on the Mount. Well, that explains modern American society with its prophets in the Democratic Party and Republican Party who obey the US oligarchy and try to push the US to nuclear war with Russia and China if by no other means through using North Korea as cover for its real aim at China and Russia.



https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5-7&version=NIV

Introduction to the Sermon on the Mount


11 “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
The Fulfillment of the Law

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven...
Is Biblical Law the law Jesus taught?

Or is Biblical Law just anything a certain crowd cheery picks to be "Biblical Law" and claim said "law" is "un-American"?

I have no idea what the hell "Biblical Law" is. Canon Law is as easy as looking up as the laws of say... the State of Wisconsin. The Bible on the other hand is a personal guiding tool or a guide for larger institutions like say... the Catholic Church to draw upon when composing their own internal laws.

So, when a Christian in America wants to vote on whether stealing from crippled people ought be made legal or if a man ought take more than one wife legally, then they might look to the Bible for their personal guidance before casting their vote. Modern Americans are probably mad because the Bible does not explicitly say... "Before any future person called an American casts a vote in their democracy, they must obey the laws of the LGBTQ and the laws of the NRA, and place any and all American politicians above Jesus as their master, above Jesus as their Lord."

There are more Christian martyrs today on planet earth than there were in something like the first 300 years of Christianity. And American and European Christian-phobes as well as their anti-Christian Christian liberals, are part of the global massacre of Christians. I'm not joining this game of offer modern forms of sacrifice to the New Rome's (American and European) pagan secular gods, blame Christians for all and every problem on planet earth, and deny Jesus for the New Judas coins (American dollars).




I prefer Daniel O'Connell's fire in the belly, Malcolm X-like, telling the poor not to cry for the rich British politician that is gunned down, reminding them it's the chickens coming home to roost.


Week 6, Lecture 26 - The Rise of Daniel O'Connell

Trinity College Dublin
Published on Nov 6, 2015


The 26th part of the 'Ireland in Rebellion: 1782-1916' lecture series delivered by Professor Patrick Geoghegan, Department of History, Trinity College Dublin
 

FastPace

DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2017
Messages
1,842
Reaction score
243
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
If it so interests anyone... here is that earlier woman from India contrasting Dr. Ambedkar to Gandhi. The audio in this one is very good.

Arundhati Roy: The Doctor and the Saint

WeAreManyMedia
Published on Oct 16, 2014

The Doctor and The Saint: The Ambedkar—Gandhi debate: Race, Caste and Colonialism
with Arundhati Roy

An event to celebrate The Annihilation of Caste, by by B.R. Ambedkar, with an extensive introduction by Arundhati Roy, published by Verso Books.

Dr. Ambedkar in his own words, own voice, in a recorded interview. He speaks about his impressions of judgments of Gandhi when he met him.

Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar BBC Interview 1955 - Exposin


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar



Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (14 April 1891 – 6 December 1956), popularly known as Baba Saheb, was an Indian jurist, economist, politician and social reformer who inspired the Dalit Buddhist Movement and campaigned against social discrimination against Untouchables (Dalits), while also supporting the rights of women and labour.[3][4] He was Independent India's first law minister, the principal architect of the Constitution of India and a founding father of the Republic of India.[5][6][7][8][9]

Ambedkar was a prolific student, earning doctorates in economics from both Columbia University and the London School of Economics, and gained a reputation as a scholar for his research in law, economics and political science.[10] In his early career he was an economist, professor, and lawyer. His later life was marked by his political activities; he became involved in campaigning and negotiations for India's independence, publishing journals, advocating political rights and social freedom for Dalits, and contributing significantly to the establishment of the state of India. In 1956 he converted to Buddhism, initiating mass conversions of Dalits
Apparently, according to Arundhati Roy in the video above, Dr. Ambedkar was born an dalit or that is to say an "untouchable." He was in the "untouchable" caste. He rose--through means of the Christian West at the time--through university education. But was treated no better than any Black-American that was college educated in the 1950s USA once he returned back to India, due to his low caste lineage. Probably treated even worse since co-workers from higher caste supposedly would roll up the carpet so his "polluted" feet could not touch it.

Apparently, he eventually converted to Buddhism, in part to escape the religious position of his caste.

Arundhati reminds us in her video that the Indian Christians and Indian Muslims participate in India in keeping the caste system going, treating the Dalits like trash.

When she said the Dalits are still forced to eat s__ I was wonder to how literally she meant. So, I googled that up.


https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Dalit-tortured-forced-to-eat-human-faeces/articleshow/42945561.cms

Dalit tortured, forced to eat human faeces
Arindam Ghosh | TNN | Sep 20, 2014, 04.20 AM IST


JHANSI: A dalit man was allegedly held in captivity, tortured and forced to consume human faeces and urine due to a land dispute in Khaira village in the district on Thursday by some influential villagers. The police have lodged an FIR in the case.
The incident occurred late on Thursday night, and the victim, Sujan Singh alleged that the accused inserted a stick wrapped with cloth and doused in petrol into his rectum. He was set free on Friday morning.
Now, this is not all nor most East Indian Hindus. No more than Muslim terrorists represent all or most Muslims.

But Christian-phobic Americans, Christian-phobic Hindus, Christian-phobic Muslims... have no problem trying to take the most extreme cases of Christians and insinuating or flat out saying all or most Christians are like them.
 

it's just me

Ugly bag of mostly water
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
15,054
Reaction score
2,214
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What do you see as "a threat"? That one third of Americans (supposedly) prefer believing preachers and talking heads over factual information? Or that sharia law is actually a threat?
What a waste of time.
 
Top Bottom