Attack on Religious Freedom?
It would seem the GOP, here in the Old Dominion, has ruffled the feathers of some religious groups;
http://hamptonroads.com/2012/02/bill...ws-rile-groups What do you guys make of it? Dave |
Hi Dave.
One bill, HB825 from Republican Del. Bob Marshall of Prince William County, would have prohibited judges and state administrators from using any legal code established outside the United States to make decisions. It was one of two proposals this year to address that issue. I don't see anything wrong with that. Why should any legal code from another country have precedence over the host countries legal code? |
With that, there is nothing wrong.
Except it was originally designed to restrict the exercize of laws based on tenets of a specific religion, the target not really being the foreign laws but the religion itself. This why the Jewish have joined in the suit. Some rules of the Jewish faith are law in other countries (Such as Israel.) as I understand it. Consider the current flap going on here in the U.S.. Conservatives are trying to claim it is an attack on religion to require the Catholic Church (Based in Italy) to pay for insurance policies that include coverage for contraception devices and drugs. Even though not all of the Catholic Churches employees are Catholic and most Catholics in this country really pay little attention to the Vatican pointy hats these days, anyhow. Bear in mind that under the "Faith Based Initiative", the Catholic Church receives public funds. And AFAIK, that subjects them to financial regulation under our laws. Yet we can pass a law making it illegal for a judge to consider the religious implications of faith when hearing a case, because the basic tenets of a given religion were formed and are backed by written law in foreign countries? (Last I checked, Italy is still a foreign country.) Also consider that the only difference between this latest bill and the previous bill is the fact that the previous failed bill singled out a specific religion, Islam. Omitting the singular name of Islam only makes it applicable to all religions. Hence the objections now eminating from the Jewish Community. What are we doing here? Are we trying to keep judges from enforcing foreign law? Or, are we attempting to use the power of the government to favor one religion over others? That's the question. Dave |
Dave, considering the timing, perhaps the question is who benefits politically with this bill and the hype that comes with it?
(cynicism alert) |
Quote:
Dave |
The vast majority of our body of law had its origins outside of the US. The common law, from which we get much of the law governing contracts, personal injury and property, originated in England.
I wouldn't be surprised if some of the advocates of this law would also advocate the display of the Ten Commandments in public buildings. As I recall, Mt. Sinai is not within the borders of the US. Regards, D-Ray |
Well there is this;
http://www.lacanadaonline.com/news/o...193,full.story . . . and attacks on christians in muslim countries have increased markedly. My attitude is if they want to practice sharia law go back to the middle east. |
Quote:
My point was; How can they complain about the government attempting to regulate one religious institution while insisting that the same government regulate another and consider themselves to be the champions of "religious freedom"? :rolleyes: Dave |
Quote:
Regards, D-ray |
I suppose the jesus fan club should all go back to wherever the heck it was they came from too?
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.