Post by goz on Jun 25, 2019 21:22:55 GMT
overtaking all the news channels,
AND the most important topic we can discuss here. This is my third thread about it as it is THE most topical thing in religion right now in a modern Western society.
www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/comment-it-makes-me-feel-sick-last-night-the-israel-folau-debate-raged-across-every-tv-channel/ar-AADnKtz?ocid=spartandhp
Basically it boils down to which right can and should override which. Please read the whole article.
As I have said before, this example is local and proving VERY divisive in my community. In the US, you had the wedding cakes and the woman who refused to process gay marriage certificates.
To me each society is going to have to come to grips with where they mandate on individual rights.
To me it also comes down to which is the active participant 'telling other people what to do' in the name of THEIR religion and views which are their right to have butt NOT impose on others as universal.
The passive participant is just trying to live their lives as best they can and doesn't NEED this harrassment.
At best it is unChristian and at worst hypocritical and immoral.
In short, in our modern Western secular societies just WHY should religion 'freedom' ( which can be used to vilify others)
trump ( I love using that word in its proper sense)
the rights of others?
AND the most important topic we can discuss here. This is my third thread about it as it is THE most topical thing in religion right now in a modern Western society.
www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/comment-it-makes-me-feel-sick-last-night-the-israel-folau-debate-raged-across-every-tv-channel/ar-AADnKtz?ocid=spartandhp
Basically it boils down to which right can and should override which. Please read the whole article.
Rugg said these comments made her feel sick.
"They make me feel a bit sick, they make me feel tired, I feel confused as to why in 2019 we’re having this sort of esoteric discussion about whether it’s really harmful for these words to just be bandied about in our society."
As a rebuttal to Tehan's suggestion that a religious discrimination act was needed, Rugg said an act such as this could take away "the protective shield" of anti-discrimination laws.
A law like this would tread a fine line: It could, potentially, trump laws that prohibit hate speech and discrimination on the basis of sexuality and gender identity.
"Protections are there to protect people" she said. "Protections are meant to be shields. And so I wouldn’t want to see any sort of religious protection act that takes away the protective shield that anti-discrimination laws have for people like me, and the more vulnerable members of my community."
"They make me feel a bit sick, they make me feel tired, I feel confused as to why in 2019 we’re having this sort of esoteric discussion about whether it’s really harmful for these words to just be bandied about in our society."
As a rebuttal to Tehan's suggestion that a religious discrimination act was needed, Rugg said an act such as this could take away "the protective shield" of anti-discrimination laws.
A law like this would tread a fine line: It could, potentially, trump laws that prohibit hate speech and discrimination on the basis of sexuality and gender identity.
"Protections are there to protect people" she said. "Protections are meant to be shields. And so I wouldn’t want to see any sort of religious protection act that takes away the protective shield that anti-discrimination laws have for people like me, and the more vulnerable members of my community."
As I have said before, this example is local and proving VERY divisive in my community. In the US, you had the wedding cakes and the woman who refused to process gay marriage certificates.
To me each society is going to have to come to grips with where they mandate on individual rights.
To me it also comes down to which is the active participant 'telling other people what to do' in the name of THEIR religion and views which are their right to have butt NOT impose on others as universal.
The passive participant is just trying to live their lives as best they can and doesn't NEED this harrassment.
At best it is unChristian and at worst hypocritical and immoral.
In short, in our modern Western secular societies just WHY should religion 'freedom' ( which can be used to vilify others)
trump ( I love using that word in its proper sense)
the rights of others?