You have NO right to exercise your religion

[KokomoJojo]

The state telling you that you cannot pray is infringing upon the free exercise thereof. What the Constitution does is ban theocracy or the state appointing a religion as a state religion while allowing individuals to believe and practice their religions as they see fit.

yes it was common belief and practice in the ME to stone ones child for adultery.

The dummies thought they could exercise their religion here!

The state exercised their religion and gave them life.

The dummies thought the constitution meant what it said.

 

[maquiscat]

you lose, use paypal and send it to me

Paypal wouldn't process them so here you go. Enjoy. 10 bucks as promised.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Paypal wouldn't process them so here you go. Enjoy. 10 bucks as promised.

View attachment 67167112
View attachment 67167113
View attachment 67167114
View attachment 67167115
View attachment 67167116

Thanks but those are 'pictures' of 10 bucks not 10 bucks as you promised.


So how about the way the deMOBcracy violated the rights of those people from the ME to "EXERCISE' THEIR religion and instead forced and exercised the state religion upon them?

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Thanks but those are 'pictures' of 10 bucks not 10 bucks as you promised.


So how about the way the deMOBcracy violated the rights of those people from the ME to "EXERCISE' THEIR religion and instead forced and exercised the state religion upon them?

So what's this forced religious edict you speak of? I still don't follow your point.

No one's forcing anyone to accept or take a religion. Simple.

 

[KokomoJojo]

So what's this forced religious edict you speak of? I still don't follow your point.

No one's forcing anyone to accept or take a religion. Simple.

the substantial meaning of exercising your religion is the ability to act in accordance with your beliefs based on YOUR religion.

Praying is not acting upon the beliefs of your religion. However the people who stoned their daughter despite that I feel its an archaic practice is in fact exercising THEIR religion, based on THEIR beliefs, NOT the MOBs dogma and beliefs.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

the substantial meaning of exercising your religion is the ability to act in accordance with your beliefs based on YOUR religion.

Praying is not acting upon the beliefs of your religion. However the people who stoned their daughter despite that I feel its an archaic practice is in fact exercising THEIR religion, based on THEIR beliefs, NOT the MOBs dogma and beliefs.

So you're talking about a recent event that occurred in the US?

Rights taper down when they interfere with other people's individuals freedoms and eventually reach a point at which they cease altogether - and that's something that some people don't quite understand.

Just because a religion tells you to kill someone doesn't mean you're permitted to do it.

New religious aren't formed often - but a few have popped up over the years. If murder was ever condoned accepted by the government when under the guise of religious then all one would need to do is stir up a new religion, gain some followers, just to commit murder and other crimes.

So - to the zealous individual, they might think it's all in compliance with their religion. Yet that's not what matters at that point.

And so this is a balance that the states and the US Supreme court are always in a tug-of-war over. At what point do religious right end and begin - and individual rights end and begin.

Creationism in schools and Prayer are the two hot-spots. Only the religious zealots think that murder is permissible 'because I believe my holy book says so'.

 

[KokomoJojo]

So you're talking about a recent event that occurred in the US?

Rights taper down when they interfere with other people's individuals freedoms and eventually reach a point at which they cease altogether - and that's something that some people don't quite understand.

Just because a religion tells you to kill someone doesn't mean you're permitted to do it.

New religious aren't formed often - but a few have popped up over the years. If murder was ever condoned accepted by the government when under the guise of religious then all one would need to do is stir up a new religion, gain some followers, just to commit murder and other crimes.

So - to the zealous individual, they might think it's all in compliance with their religion. Yet that's not what matters at that point.

And so this is a balance that the states and the US Supreme court are always in a tug-of-war over. At what point do religious right end and begin - and individual rights end and begin.

Creationism in schools and Prayer are the two hot-spots. Only the religious zealots think that murder is permissible 'because I believe my holy book says so'.

No, 50 years ago when flag waving was a national pastime.

The government is chartered to protect corporate entities, not man and woman, despite the fact your name is construed as a sole corporation in law.

Freedom is not what you think it means, it is the 'presumed' franchise agreement of permissions (liberty) between yourself and the governing body.

If murder was ever condoned accepted by the government

Electric chair, hanging, firing squad, gassing, every way imaginable.

when under the guise of religious

its not a guise, it is a religion.

So - to the zealous individual [or STATE], (which acts as an individual) they might think it's all in compliance with their religion. Yet that's not what matters at that point.

Only the religious zealots think that murder is permissible 'because I believe my holy [mob (legislature)] book says so'.

Just because a religion tells you to kill someone doesn't mean you're permitted to do it [within the state imposed religion].

I rest my case

 

[shrubnose]

Where I live a teacher cannot even cover her head with a religiously motivated carrée in class. You are fined as a women in Paris, if you ware a burca, though

rich Saudi women seem to be immune.

Rich people all over this planet seem to be exempt from a lot of rules that others must obey.

 

[shrubnose]

I like pie.

Big pie or small pie? Fruit pie or meat pie?

Cold pie or hot pie?

 

[shrubnose]

More like:

Christians have been persecuting others since the time of Constantine.

Including other Christians.

They've even fought wars to enforce their ideas on others.

 

[Jerry]

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

And congress didnt, however a state religion was nontheless established.

They dont prohibit a specific religion they prohibit the EXERCISE of specific actions destroying the intent to get around it in the courts by thousands of narrowly chosen prohibitions.

So the feds do not prohibit the free exercise but the states refuse to acknowledge it and pass laws prohibiting it and "We the Dummies" are non the wiser.

I have seen no state constitution that uses the word "exercise" and the state constitution controls.

You have the right to PRAY and that is where it ends!

The state by it mountain of narrow prohibitions have created a "state religion" and you are forced by these narrow rulings to EXERCISE in accord with the state religion or be jailed or fined or both.

How about that.

Any meaningful way the givernment has to force me to worship in a given way can be neutralized with my personal sidearn.

 

[shrubnose]

Not to mention downright unintelligent. What, with the title of the thread saying people have no right to exercise their religion and the opening statement referring to a passage that states quite clearly that there are to be no laws preventing such,

the complete lack of rational thought is downright laughable.

What's next -- saying women have no right to vote by quoting the 19th amendment?

I agree. But I'm not laughing and I doubt that anyone else is.

 

[shrubnose]

you lose, use paypal and send it to me

Hold your breath while you wait for the cash.

 

[shrubnose]

praying is not "exercising" your religion.

It is if your religion is only about praying and nothing else.

 

[shrubnose]

Thanks but those are 'pictures' of 10 bucks not 10 bucks as you promised.

So how about the way the deMOBcracy violated the rights of those people from the ME to "EXERCISE' THEIR religion and instead forced and exercised the state religion upon them?

Sounds like a personal problem to me.

Don't look for any help around here.

 

[shrubnose]

the substantial meaning of exercising your religion is the ability to act in accordance with your beliefs based on YOUR religion.

Praying is not acting upon the beliefs of your religion. However the people who stoned their daughter despite that I feel its an archaic practice is in fact exercising THEIR religion, based on THEIR beliefs, NOT the MOBs dogma and beliefs

.

Try stoning anyone in the USA and I guarantee that you won't like what happens to you.

 

[shrubnose]

No, 50 years ago when flag waving was a national pastime.

The government is chartered to protect corporate entities, not man and woman, despite the fact your name is construed as a sole corporation in law.

Freedom is not what you think it means, it is the 'presumed' franchise agreement of permissions (liberty) between yourself and the governing body.


Electric chair, hanging, firing squad, gassing, every way imaginable.


its not a guise, it is a religion.

I rest my case

You don't have a case, but if you ever try to stone someone in the USA you'll definitely be involved in one.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I rest my case

You're the only one here claiming that people can do whatever they want so long as they claim it's because of their religion - which isn't true - so you don't have a case.

 

[KokomoJojo]

You're the only one here claiming that people can do whatever they want so long as they claim it's because of their religion - which isn't true - so you don't have a case.

Not at all correct, I have a slam dunk no brainer case, their rights were clearly violated.

It is after all THEIR religion and perfectly legal in the ME.

Hence it goes without saying that I do have a case even moreso demonstrable since it is an ACCEPTED religion in the ME that people live and die by every day and the US mob violated that families right to exercise their religious duties in accord with their religion. (like it or not)

Now if they did the same to you who is not a member of their religion that is a whole nutha story.

What you described can do whatever they want eventually will lead to a "trespass" on another rights if used improperly and that in and of itself protects you from religions of others, thus preserving true liberty as it was intended.

Rights were violated and the state should have been sued, but I forgot they are sovereign kings and they dictate what you can sue them for and thats not on the list.

The beliefs of the state supercede your own, you are worshiping their religion not yours. You have the right to live by any religion you choose, "so do others". If you choose the state so be it. Does not make them any less a religion.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Hey - can't say I didn't try to make sense of your babble.

 

[maquiscat]

Thanks but those are 'pictures' of 10 bucks not 10 bucks as you promised.

I don't remember specifying the form the bucks came in.

So how about the way the deMOBcracy violated the rights of those people from the ME to "EXERCISE' THEIR religion and instead forced and exercised the state religion upon them?

While I am sure there are those who understand your shorthand, ME is not one I have encountered before. Additionally you seem to be citing a specific case yet I've not seen any link or specific reference to such. Sans such things I have to assume that you are creating a hypothetical similar to the one I made not that long ago.

 

[KokomoJojo]

I don't remember specifying the form the bucks came in.



While I am sure there are those who understand your shorthand, ME is not one I have encountered before. Additionally you seem to be citing a specific case yet I've not seen any link or specific reference to such. Sans such things I have to assume that you are creating a hypothetical similar to the one I made not that long ago.

nope, its very real, one I remember from maybe 40 to 50 years ago.

I have known for a long time we can wipe our asses with that constitution.

ME is Middle East

 

[KokomoJojo]

Hey - can't say I didn't try to make sense of your babble.

its not.

the biggest problem I have attempting to discuss salient points in law is that very few people have done their home work and actually looked up the meaning of the words used in their appropriate time frame they were used so its like talking to a wall.

for instance few people understand that freedom is a franchise contract to be governed, not 'free from'.

I forgot to get liberty for you, but I assure you it does a full circle right back to corporate governance.

so they cant wrap their heads around my usage since the actual meanings of the words are foreign to them.

 

[maquiscat]

nope, its very real, one I remember from maybe 40 to 50 years ago.

I have known for a long time we can wipe our asses with that constitution.

ME is Middle East

Link or other reference? Can't exactly respond to a specific situation without details on it.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

its not.

the biggest problem I have attempting to discuss salient points in law is that very few people have done their home work and actually looked up the meaning of the words used in their appropriate time frame they were used so its like talking to a wall.

for instance few people understand that freedom is a franchise contract to be governed, not 'free from'.

No - I think the biggest problem you have is just not making sense.

What is your point?