Archive for August, 2007
Why don’t some people understand the difference between freedom OF religion and freedom FROM religion?
Friday, August 31st, 2007Maid Mesmera asked:
Don’t people understand that freedom of religion doesn’t mean banning religion from the public? When our Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment, I don’t they meant absence of all religion from the public. Having religious symbols in public places is not implying preference or imposition of one’s beliefs on others. They’re just symbols for crying out loud! It’s completely innocent and harmless! No one is forcing anyone to believe in or conform to Christianity! I would have no problem with insignificant, little Islam symbols being displayed in public places because I understand the difference between freedom OF religion and freedom FROM religion! Doesn’t anyone else understand that difference?
No, Strattz. I wouldn’t mind Satanist symbols being displayed. People should allowed to display their beliefs or symbols of them wherever they want. It’s called freedom of expression.
RedsForever: Yes, I do understand separation of church and state. All separation of church and state means is the government not imposing religious beliefs of people and not forcing them to conform to a certain religion’s doctrines or practices. The harmless, innocent act of putting religious symbols up in public does not fulfill that criteria.
Daniel
Don’t people understand that freedom of religion doesn’t mean banning religion from the public? When our Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment, I don’t they meant absence of all religion from the public. Having religious symbols in public places is not implying preference or imposition of one’s beliefs on others. They’re just symbols for crying out loud! It’s completely innocent and harmless! No one is forcing anyone to believe in or conform to Christianity! I would have no problem with insignificant, little Islam symbols being displayed in public places because I understand the difference between freedom OF religion and freedom FROM religion! Doesn’t anyone else understand that difference?
No, Strattz. I wouldn’t mind Satanist symbols being displayed. People should allowed to display their beliefs or symbols of them wherever they want. It’s called freedom of expression.
RedsForever: Yes, I do understand separation of church and state. All separation of church and state means is the government not imposing religious beliefs of people and not forcing them to conform to a certain religion’s doctrines or practices. The harmless, innocent act of putting religious symbols up in public does not fulfill that criteria.
Daniel
Is financial freedom a good price to pay for a society with the equal distribution of wealth?
Friday, August 3rd, 2007pnatt89 asked:
We all know that communism doesn’t work, neither does capitalism. Communism takes away people’s unalienable rights as human beings too much and capitalism has little restrictions on the distribution of wealth.
We all know that communism doesn’t work, neither does capitalism. Communism takes away people’s unalienable rights as human beings too much and capitalism has little restrictions on the distribution of wealth.
I value freedom in everything with the exception of the free market.
mzz p: I agree. Capitalism just makes people empty and sad as it drives people to want more and more through peer pressure.
Most people my age want cars and shit. I got low expectations however I’m in a financial mess. Capitalism rewards peer pressure.
Well what if you’re not a goal setter?
Katelynn
What is more important , freedom to do or a law to restrict?
Friday, August 3rd, 2007Maria Dolores asked:
Iam asking about the babies born to drug addicted women ,these babies have no opportunity of being a person of mora lvalues as being brought up in the drug culture is what they learn as they themselves are addicted born , I think ther needs to be a law on controlling this horrible freedom convinient to the women on drugs and the goverment welfare!In other words what is important to you , should these babies be allowed to be born into this drug culture , or do we need to make a law saying that women who are drug addicted can not bring babies into the world under these deplorable conditions? This is a nasty cycle that ends up hurting us all! Babies desrve a healthy environment , not born addicted !
Mckenna
Iam asking about the babies born to drug addicted women ,these babies have no opportunity of being a person of mora lvalues as being brought up in the drug culture is what they learn as they themselves are addicted born , I think ther needs to be a law on controlling this horrible freedom convinient to the women on drugs and the goverment welfare!In other words what is important to you , should these babies be allowed to be born into this drug culture , or do we need to make a law saying that women who are drug addicted can not bring babies into the world under these deplorable conditions? This is a nasty cycle that ends up hurting us all! Babies desrve a healthy environment , not born addicted !
Mckenna



