Avatar feed
Responses: 3
SPC Angela Burnham
2
2
0
Just my two cents, but no rights are absolute, even those enshrined in the constitution. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater, you can't own a firearm if you're a convicted felon, etc. Being religious shouldn't exempt you from having to treat other people equally.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SCPO Morris Ramsey
2
2
0
This is a good post Chip. You continue to amaze me. I find your post inspiring and always thought provoking. So where is the Red Haired Boy?
(2)
Comment
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
>1 y
SCPO Morris Ramsey Shhh, Shhh Senior, You're Giving Away My Secret Weapon! I talk about My German Prussian Heritage but The Mean Orneriness is Just as Much My Red Haired Scottish Heritage. LOL! One Look at Family Pictures Kind of Gives it away. My Cousins, My Sister, Granny Sandy, My Children. All Red Haired Demons! Yeah they are Clan Dawes, Davis, Davidson. (Granny Sandy is a Scott which Just Makes it Worse).
(1)
Reply
(0)
SCPO Morris Ramsey
SCPO Morris Ramsey
>1 y
Have a good evening Chip. PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
1
1
0
With respect, what's the suggested solution?
(1)
Comment
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
>1 y
LCDR Joshua Gillespie Sure Wish I Knew. All I Can Do is Fight for the Oppressed.
(0)
Reply
(0)
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
>1 y
Well, let's talk a bit about "oppression". Everyone on RP knows I'm pretty vocal about being a person of faith. I've had some folks here say rather unflattering things about my beliefs... and that's alright; their disagreement doesn't represent "oppression" to my mind. I've lived among Muslims, and didn't find their prayers "oppressive"; I even joined them once or twice. I've had neighbors who were homosexual. I may believe that their chosen lifestyle is sinful... but again, their presence wasn't "oppressive" to me . "Oppression" isn't disagreeing with someone, or refusing to support, condone, or accommodate their choices... it's forcing someone to comply with something beyond the "reasonable" standard of law. If law is ever used to "force" a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu, or heck.. a Jedi, to behave in a manner contrary to their religion, then we're violating the 1st Amendment... it's as simple as that. Those who suggest that laws prohibiting "religious" practices that go against established law (say, ritual sacrifice or "honor" killing) establish a precedent for forcing a business owner to do "a", or a public official to do "b", are exposing an important and fragile compromise. My fear is that we're moving towards actual oppression of religion based on an ever expanding sense of "fairness".
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close