• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

What Jefferson Got Wrong About Freedom of Religion

AGENT J

"If you ain't first, you're last"
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
70,951
Reaction score
22,717
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
...but that's the problem.

When their belief becomes popular enough, the people will vote to give them that right.
are you from america? Because thats not how it works at all.
the constitution and our rights cant nearly be voted on by the populous and one person cant change them.

if all the religious A people got together and voted that all the none and other religious people are lesser the constitution and government doesn't care
nor does it care if a president, governor or mayor thinks that, they have no power to make it so
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
20,080
Reaction score
5,637
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
You're being hasty. I'm trying to be methodical to take things one step at a time.

There's no point to discuss alternatives until we can agree the status quo deserves to be replaced.

Actually, the reason that there’s no point to discuss alternatives is because the status quo is just fine as it is. In fact, the Founding Fathers made it that way so that the new nation did not experience the religious persecutions that often resulted when the church was allowed to interfere in the state and vice-verse.
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
are you from america? Because thats not how it works at all.
the constitution and our rights cant nearly be voted on by the populous and one person cant change them.

if all the religious A people got together and voted that all the none and other religious people are lesser the constitution and government doesn't care
nor does it care if a president, governor or mayor thinks that, they have no power to make it so
That's not true. Lawyers gawk at the Constitution everyday, and people use pragmatism as an excuse to tell you to sue then or charge them if you disagree while anticipating authorities will treat the case as a frivolous application of Constitutional law.

If you think the Constitution is really upheld, then you don't get how justice in America is subject to convenience.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
80,490
Reaction score
47,913
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
20,080
Reaction score
5,637
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
...through scholasticism like I said before.

The Congress, politicians, and the general public are not known for their “scholasticism”. If that’s your recommendation, consider it DOA. And the “scholasticism” is not even working in this thread since yiu refuse to fulky explain and expound on your recommendations.
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Actually, the reason that there’s no point to discuss alternatives is because the status quo is just fine as it is. In fact, the Founding Fathers made it that way so that the new nation did not experience the religious persecutions that often resulted when the church was allowed to interfere in the state and vice-verse.
...which is exactly what I was disputing in the OP to show how religious persecution was really prosecution. When people have hostile beliefs, those beliefs must be punished or else people will act on those beliefs to be hostile.
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
20,080
Reaction score
5,637
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
...which is exactly what I was disputing in the OP to show how religious persecution was really prosecution. When people have hostile beliefs, those beliefs must be punished or else people will act on those beliefs to be hostile.

What hostile beliefs do the citizens of the USA have and how are they being acted on to be punished?
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
The Congress, politicians, and the general public are not known for their “scholasticism”. If that’s your recommendation, consider it DOA. And the “scholasticism” is not even working in this thread since yiu refuse to fulky explain and expound on your recommendations.
Are you saying just because something isn't in practice means something cannot be practiced? o_O
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
What hostile beliefs do the citizens of the USA have and how are they being acted on to be punished?
Pragmatism.

Everyday, people violate each other's consent in little ways, telling each other to change or else they're making things unnecessarily difficult.
 

BirdinHand

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
5,021
Reaction score
4,106
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Once freedom of religion is eliminated, we can discuss how to carry out a mandate responsibly instead.
How about no?

Freedom of Religion is one of the most fundamental basics of American society. It should not be touched in any way, shape or form.
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
How about no?

Freedom of Religion is one of the most fundamental basics of American society. It should not be touched in any way, shape or form.
Why is American society justified?
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
The electoral system is the biggest flaw.
I didn't ask about what is flawed. I asked about how is it flawed.

We can have opinions about what we don't like, but we need to explain why something is wrong.
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
5,784
Reaction score
2,626
Gender
Male
Why is American society justified?
Freedom of religion is one of the biggest reasons that people came to America in the first place. To be able to believe what you want to believe, to practice and preach whatever faith you please. It's an extremely attractive concept to people who have never known anything other than religious persecution. Take that away and what do we have left to recommend ourselves? It's liberty that makes America a nice place to live. Nothing else.
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Freedom of religion is one of the biggest reasons that people came to America in the first place. To be able to believe what you want to believe, to practice and preach whatever faith you please. It's an extremely attractive concept to people who have never known anything other than religious persecution. Take that away and what do we have left to recommend ourselves? It's liberty that makes America a nice place to live. Nothing else.
That isn't justified though.

Tell that to the Irish who were enslaved from freedom of religion. As Catholics, they were oppressed since Henry VIII's Plantation of Ireland, Cromwell's war against the Irish Confederacy, and the Williamite War from the Glorious Revolution.

They were enslaved because as Catholics who believed in the universal grace of humanity, those who wanted to play favorites said they were pushing their values onto others, so they played favorites against the Irish.
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
5,784
Reaction score
2,626
Gender
Male
That isn't justified though.

Tell that to the Irish who were enslaved from freedom of religion. As Catholics, they were oppressed since Henry VIII's Plantation of Ireland, Cromwell's war against the Irish Confederacy, and the Williamite War from the Glorious Revolution.

They were enslaved because as Catholics who believed in the universal grace of humanity, those who wanted to play favorites said they were pushing their values onto others, so they played favorites against the Irish.
But how is that an argument against freedom of religion in America? The entire point of the concept is to not have religious persecution. That's what made emigrating to America so popular among the Irish.
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
20,080
Reaction score
5,637
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Pragmatism.

Everyday, people violate each other's consent in little ways, telling each other to change or else they're making things unnecessarily difficult.

It’s called life. You still haven’t said how the Constitution should be changed.
 

AGENT J

"If you ain't first, you're last"
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
70,951
Reaction score
22,717
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That's not true. Lawyers gawk at the Constitution everyday, and people use pragmatism as an excuse to tell you to sue then or charge them if you disagree while anticipating authorities will treat the case as a frivolous application of Constitutional law.

If you think the Constitution is really upheld, then you don't get how justice in America is subject to convenience.
sorry ill be sticking with facts and reality instead of the fantasy and false narratives you are trying to sell
everything i said was a fact, The constitution can not just be randomly changed by a vote of the populous nor does a president, governor or mayor have the power to do so.
 

JasperL

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
55,593
Reaction score
24,667
Location
Tennessee
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

For those who don't know, the Lee family (as in the family of the Confederate general Robert E. Lee), has a notorious legacy which goes back to the French and Indian War from its ancestors founding the Ohio Company of Virginia which sparked conflict along the midwest frontier. Not only did they settle in lands long claimed by the French, but their abuse of native populations gave the French a justification to declare war to defend those abused. A lot of people will reduce this down to simple colonial imperialism, profiteering, and racial prejudice, but it's not that simple. The reality was the Lee Family has always been a low church Episcopalian family. It explicitly condemned the sacraments of Anglo-Catholic tradition as it came to be known under the Oxford Movement which again has implications when considering the Catholicism of the French.

The problem Jefferson had is he overreacted to this problem when pursuing the disestablishment of the Church of England in Virginia. Instead of filtering between the low and high church to understand where oppression really came from, he treated religion in general as a problem. He couldn't be bothered addressing the spirit of faith, but rather overgeneralized by simply blaming the institution of faith. This is quite the shame when considering how Jefferson had such French sympathies as well.
The problem, generally, is the U.S. was then and now a country of many different faiths, and in many cases the law reflecting the priorities and beliefs of one required the law to conflict with the priorities or beliefs of another. You say Jefferson couldn't be bothered addressing the 'spirit of faith' but then how could he? Whose faith? Which faith? And the faiths as he knew them don't reflect the faiths present in the U.S. today.

You appear to want to condemn "low church" people and their beliefs, but why should your preferences matter? And who decides whether the "low" or "high" church has a more favorable set of sacraments versus some standard that you can't define?

The principle in this country is simple enough. All faiths are welcome and no faith should have the 'right' or authority to impose its values on those of other faiths. It's worked wonderfully on balance. On the same short section of a road near me, you have Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Jews, Church of Christ, Seventh Day Adventists, Presbyterian, Greek Orthodox, and Unitarians, along with at least two other 'independent' churches. Just off that road is the Episcopalian Church. Every weekend all those churches fill up with people peacefully exercising their religions. That's what Jefferson sought and he succeeded.
That isn't justified though.

Tell that to the Irish who were enslaved from freedom of religion. As Catholics, they were oppressed since Henry VIII's Plantation of Ireland, Cromwell's war against the Irish Confederacy, and the Williamite War from the Glorious Revolution.

They were enslaved because as Catholics who believed in the universal grace of humanity, those who wanted to play favorites said they were pushing their values onto others, so they played favorites against the Irish.
Sounds like a great argument for separation of church and state!
 

HangLow

BUFF 52 Nav
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 27, 2020
Messages
7,473
Reaction score
6,088
Location
KCMO & 50K Feet Up 4Reagan4Perot4Obama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The problem, generally, is the U.S. was then and now a country of many different faiths, and in many cases the law reflecting the priorities and beliefs of one required the law to conflict with the priorities or beliefs of another. You say Jefferson couldn't be bothered addressing the 'spirit of faith' but then how could he? Whose faith? Which faith? And the faiths as he knew them don't reflect the faiths present in the U.S. today.

You appear to want to condemn "low church" people and their beliefs, but why should your preferences matter? And who decides whether the "low" or "high" church has a more favorable set of sacraments versus some standard that you can't define?

The principle in this country is simple enough. All faiths are welcome and no faith should have the 'right' or authority to impose its values on those of other faiths. It's worked wonderfully on balance. On the same short section of a road near me, you have Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Jews, Church of Christ, Seventh Day Adventists, Presbyterian, Greek Orthodox, and Unitarians, along with at least two other 'independent' churches. Just off that road is the Episcopalian Church. Every weekend all those churches fill up with people peacefully exercising their religions. That's what Jefferson sought and he succeeded.

Sounds like a great argument for separation of church and state!
1643247508647.png
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
But how is that an argument against freedom of religion in America? The entire point of the concept is to not have religious persecution. That's what made emigrating to America so popular among the Irish.
The only way Catholicism works is if you mandate it upon everyone.

It's like a prisoner's dilemma. Catholics are cooperators. Those who advocate freedom of religion are defectors. You either mandate cooperation or defection takes over.
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
It’s called life. You still haven’t said how the Constitution should be changed.
We don't just live. We live in society.

Discussing changes to the Constitution don't matter until we come to a mutual understanding about how it ought to be changed.
 

XDU

Banned
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
407
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
sorry ill be sticking with facts and reality instead of the fantasy and false narratives you are trying to sell
everything i said was a fact, The constitution can not just be randomly changed by a vote of the populous nor does a president, governor or mayor have the power to do so.
Sticking to facts is utopian. It ignores how every event that happens isn't recorded. People don't have time machines to record the past and future, nor pervasive surveillance equipment to record everything around them.
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
5,784
Reaction score
2,626
Gender
Male
The only way Catholicism works is if you mandate it upon everyone.

It's like a prisoner's dilemma. Catholics are cooperators. Those who advocate freedom of religion are defectors. You either mandate cooperation or defection takes over.
Catholicism seems to work just fine without being mandated. It's survived into the age of secular governance and it's still alive and kicking. In fact I would argue that there are other religious sects which are much more controlling in nature. Although that is not to say that catholicism does not have its own problems in this regard. That is where religious freedom becomes important, to prevent one faith from growing too powerful and suppressing the others.
 

AGENT J

"If you ain't first, you're last"
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
70,951
Reaction score
22,717
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Sticking to facts is utopian.
by defintion you are factually wrong and that doesnt even come close to making sense LMAO
It ignores how every event that happens isn't recorded.
no, it doesnt because those events if they happened would also be fact
People don't have time machines to record the past and future, nor pervasive surveillance equipment to record everything around them.
more tinfoil hat nonsense that adds nothing of value to the points you are trying to make and failing at

like i said
ill be sticking with facts and reality instead of the fantasy and false narratives you are trying to sell
everything i said was a fact, The constitution can not just be randomly changed by a vote of the populous nor does a president, governor or mayor have the power to do so.
 
Top Bottom