Skip to comments.When 'Tolerance' Backfires
Posted on 03/05/2005 7:20:03 AM PST by Pendragon_6
How did America go from Pilgrims seeking freedom to express their Judeo-Christian beliefs to today's discrimination against those very beliefs in the name of tolerance?
The journey of the evolution of tolerance began in England. When Henry VIII's divorce was not recognized by the pope, he decided to be his own "pope" of the Church of England and eventually had six wives, their fates being divorced, beheaded, died, divorced, beheaded, survived.
His advisers suggested that to solidify his break with Rome, he should replace the Latin Bible with an English Bible so people there would look to England for their spiritual heritage. Henry did so, but something unexpected happened people began to read the Bible and compare what was written in it to the king divorcing and beheading his wives.
This group wanted to purify the Church of England, resulting in their nickname, "Puritans."
There are laws against human sacrifice -- that is murder, the laws are the same as those against murder. And the Pilgrims and Puritans? Not el mismo.
I don't know if there were Jews with the Pilgrims since Jews had been banned from England since the 13th century but I do know that Cromwell brought the Jews back when he took power since he regarded them as 'People of the Book'.
That was exactly my point. Killing a human is against our civil, democratic code of laws.
No one knows, but I seriously doubt it.
We could pass laws banning both. Neither law would violate the First.
Murder is covered already -- but just to be sure -- we could pass additional laws banned both cultic murder and cults that advocate such.
"Tolerance, the inability to say yes or no. The inability to take a stand"-A Great Historian 1888
Once it reaches the center, fine, but at present it has swung to a hateful and vicious anti-Christian extreme.
We are light years away from a "Christian theocracy" and fearing such is a paranoid delusion (but just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they aren't out to get you).
We are very close to an "atheist theocracy," where Christians are denied jobs and access to public spaces. Where jail awaits any believing Christian who dares to actually read aloud what it says in the Bible. It's already a hate crime in Canada and we came very close with the attempt in Philadelphia this last few months.
If that does not constitute an infringment of the most fundamental meaning of "free exercise of religion" then we don't speak the same language at all.
Now, let me be very clear, I do not share the position of those protestors in Philadelphia. I have what I belive is a very modern view of the Bible and the stories and lessons in it. That's beside the point. I would feel the same way about someone denying a person the right to read aloud from a Buddhist Terma.
Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, short of incitement to violence. Same with freedom of religion. Once you allow anyone to criminalize religious belief then all free thought is doomed.
Read this and was struck by how it reminded of the rebellious children of Israel who were commanded to Love God with all their heart soul and mind. And were commanded
to NOT take the inhabitants of that Promised land into their tents--or to be unequally yoked to the unbeliever.
As seen in America the ancient Hebrew children were
rebellious and stiffnecked, and chose to be humanistic and
tolerant and those they left in th eland became a prick and a goad and troublesome The FOudners had habit of reading and trusted the authority of Scripture far more than we
who have rebelled against God.and are now recieving the reward for our sins.
Very unlikely. Most Christian Americans believe in the principles of the Founding Fathers, one of the most basic among them being the freedom of religion. I think we are well past the point of forcing religious conversions (unlike the islamists).
Now, the persecution of anti-christians, that's another matter. I think matters may well come to the point where self-selected soldiers for the faith strike out "with great vengence and furious anger."
Should we outlaw this group? Pass a law forbidding human sacrifice? No and no. Either law would violate the First Amendment.
Acts 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
So, if you belonged to a religion that sacrificed babies as an intergal part of worship, and this law was passed, would you stop?
Daniel 3:16 Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to the king, "O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. 17 If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand, O king. 18 But even if he does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up."
As a Christian, I choose to follow God and accept the consequences.
As an American Voter, I also try to prevent that conflict from occuring.
Do you mean murder based on religious zeal? The Holy Scriptures do not condone such acts. In fact they are condemed. Murder is murder no matter if it is done by a Christian or Islamic terrorist.
Michael Medved was talking to some liberal caller about the 10 commandments and why it is okay to keep them up. Medved mentioned that most of the founding fathers were religious zealots. But they all had their different views and couldn't come up with a "theocracy" that they all would agree on. So-----worship who/what you want!
To the pillory with thee!
Maybe I am a little paranoid. I think it's that whole "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" thing.
The only Christians I'm nervous about are the ones who are led astray by the Adversary into judgement, hatred, and violence.
Strange as it may sound, I find I follow Jesus' teachings more closely than a lot of self-named Christians.
I definitely agree that there's a strong anti-Christian and anti-religious bias creeping into the country. And it's collateral damage from a massive popular reaction against this that I worry about (just a tiny bit.)
If a Christian is denied a job because of religion, they have the same remedies under law that a Jew, Muslim, Buddhist or Wiccan has in the same circumstance.
And as far as access to public space, it has to be all-or-nothing. Either allow access to all religious groups equally, or deny access to all religious groups.
Does the law care if 20 friends get together in a public park, read Dr. Seuss and sing nursery rhymes? Of course not. Why should the law say then say the same 20 people can't get together in the same public park, read bible verses and sing hymns? Under the First Amendment, the law shouldn't care- and the Supreme Court should affirm this.
My only gripe would be if the Baptists get let in the park early for Easter sunrise, but the Unitarians can't get in early for Solstice sunrise. This would violate the principle of equal protection under law.
And yeah, as much as this may upset some folks on this board, if we let the Baptists and the Unitarians in the park outside regular hours, we have to let the Wiccans in on full moon nights too- so long as they obey the laws on public nudity, weapons possession, open burning, etc.
We have civil laws against polygamy. This is equally inconvenient to Muslims, Pagans and certain splinter sect Mormons. The law prohibits a certain action- taking more than one wife. This is because- and only because- a majority of Americans think this should be the law.
If a sufficient majority of Americans ever decide that that particular law needs to be changed, it can be- that's democracy.
And the incest laws have a valid basis. The State has an interest in protecting public health- in this case, protecting unborn children from genetic disorders resulting from inbreeding. This makes no mention of religion.
And as much as I love and treasure the Constitution, the will of the people is NOT subservient to it!! How many amendments are we up to now?
No, we are not a pure democracy- that's mob rule. We are both a representative democracy and a constitutional republic, with a unique system of checks and balances that has kept us more free and more prosperous than any other people on earth for over 225 years. The fact that this diverse nation of rebels, outcasts and malcontents from all across the globe is still holding itself together is a wonderful thing indeed.
The significance of Jesus Christ as the "faithful and true witness" is that He not only witnesses against those who are at war against God, but He also executes them.
R.J. Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical Law (Nutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1973), p. 574.
So let us be blunt about it: we must use the doctrine of religious liberty to gain independence for Christian schools until we train up a generation of people who know that there is no religious neutrality, no neutral law, no neutral education, and no neutral civil government. Then they will get busy in constructing a Bible-based social, political and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God.
Gary North, "The Intellectual Schizophrenia of the New Christian Right" in Christianity and Civilization: The Failure of the American Baptist Culture, No. 1 (Spring, 1982), p. 25.
But .. Christians are the ones being attacked. It isn't the Christians who are trying to restrict anything. Christians just want - what they always wanted - the FREEDOM to worship GOD - in their own way.
I have a mosque a few miles away from me. I don't picket them, I don't disparage them when I see them in the stores. Quite the contrary - I find their children adorable and smile at them when I see them. I don't fellowship with them, but I don't try to stop them from worshiping their god in the way they choose.
However, LIBERALS, DEMOCRATS, COMMUNISTS, and other left-leaning organizations do not like any religion that worships ALMIGHTY GOD - because they want to be "god-like" to the people; that's why these groups do not have a problem with Muslims, and do have a problem with Christians.
Are you saying there is no arrogance in the New East U.S.?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.