Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TlalocW

(15,378 posts)
1. The first time a non-Christian uses them at the expense of a Christian
Sun May 12, 2019, 09:17 PM
May 2019

You can expect whining like you've never heard before... except for the last time it happened.

These barely pass Constitutional muster (and shouldn't in my opinion) because they're couched in terms of RELIGIOUS rights. Even the most rabid Evangelical nutjob knows that they can't specifically mention Christianity - though they want to... and they would probably go so far as to make the bills apply to their particular sect if they could.

I remember news stories about churches who somehow got permission to send material home with kids at public schools having fits when other religions and atheists demanded that they be allowed to do it too. Shit regularly hits the fan when non-Christians open up state legislation sessions with a prayer. I've brought Evangelical relatives to the point of having a fit by telling them if prayer were brought back to school like they want, if their kids' teacher were Muslim, they could all be bowing down to Mecca, and they couldn't do anything about it. There was that whole thing with the Satanists trying to bring Baphomet to the lawn of the Oklahoma State House to share time with the Ten Commandments monument they had placed there, which the OK Supreme Court solved by having the 10Cs removed. And of course, any time a Christmas display goes up on public property, Christians go apeshit when that privilege has to be given to others.

When I lived in Tulsa, there was a guy who had been fighting to be allowed to build a display (at his own expense) at the Tulsa Zoo that showed the Biblical story of creation (he was upset about one that showed evolution). He argued that a Native American quote on the fountain and the inclusion of the Indian god, Ganesha, who has the head of an elephant, in a display of elephant iconography near the elephant area gave him the right to do so. After years of haranguing, eventually there was a city council either sympathetic to his demands or tired of his bullshit, and they initially gave him permission... until the calls started coming - bother serious and not - about including their religion's mythos. I called them a few times asking what I needed to do to build a display there as Tulsa's only Caucasian practicing Mayan, saying I had a great idea for showing how my gods sprinkled their blood on corn to create mankind. The council reversed their decision in a week.

TlalocW

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»These "religious freedom"...»Reply #1