Comments about ‘Religious liberty advocates call for faiths to join forces’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, June 1 2013 11:15 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Park City, Ut

I see nothing but the most typical anecdotal evidence that religious freedoms are somehow under attack. Kids not being able to wear a cross necklace to public school? Ha, even if that were true, those case are far and few between. Probably the same amount of schools that illegally allow religious groups to come onto the campus of a public school to hand out religious materials and to proselytize. For every isolated incident like the scenario above, I could probably show you the same someone/group in clear violation of the 1st Amendment. For example - school prayer at graduations? Please, imagine if Johny is asked to give a prayer at graduation and then says something offensive to the majority of people in attendance, that could happen, just offering up a Christian prayer when 75% of those in attendance are Christian, why bother? You're not a church, public schools allow all creeds to attend right? Why isolate or offend then? These are no brainers.

Olympia, WA

The overall nastiness and rudeness of those who are anti-religion and/or pro-same-sex marriage is just more evidence that religion is in danger. When people accuse those who oppose same sex marriage as bigots and hypocrites, that is just plain nasty and rude. That is the kind of attitude that I find so prevalent these days. So it's supposedly fair to be accused of being an "intolerant bigot" just because one believes in the traditional definition of marriage. This kind of treatment is just more evidence that our society is becoming less and less tolerant of and more and more nasty towards anyone who does not follow the "politically correct" trends. They just can't grasp the concept that one can be respectful of others without changing their views supporting the traditional definition of marriage. I guess that's the only way they can argue their point, by accusing those who hold opposing views of being bigots. You can be respectful of others without agreeing with them, but I sure don't see that coming from the same sex marriage supporters.

Orem, UT

The idea that religion is under attack is laughable, and inaccurate. What is under attack is someone trying to force their religion on to me. I have no desire, whatsoever, to attack your religion, I really don`t care how/what/when/where you worship. Please afford me the same courtesy.
The problem, as I see it, is that the religious folks want to make their religious devotion public, such as prayers in schools, displays of the 10 commandments in courtrooms, "In God We Trust" on state issued license plates, cross monuments on public land. I do not agree with you inserting your religion into the public arena, of which I am part owner. Why is it that religious people feel the need to make a public spectacle of their faith? Why can they not keep it confined to their homes and churches? Do they feel that they will garner more brownie points in the afterlife by publicly declaring their devotion?

Here, UT


The moment you try to force others who believe differently than you to live BY YOUR belief system and your religious beliefs you become an "intolerant bigot" - absolutely. Tolerance means that you live your beliefs and allow others to live theirs. If you believe in "tradition", by all means, live it YOURSELF. Allow others to live their non-traditional ways. That is what tolerance is about.


Why does it impact you if there is a cross or ten commandments anywhere? This is where I do see infringements on religious rights. I don't use the cross as a symbol in my own religion and I don't have a problem with someone else who does. I can appreciate, or ignore, monuments as I choose, but if I dislike something, should i have the right to make "them" take it down? Why must all signs of religion be abolished from public life?

Orem, UT

The reason that it impacts me is because when people bring their religion into the public forum, they are, in effect, causing me to sponsor, at least partially, their religious point of view. Whatever public venue they choose to display their religious devotion in, as a taxpayer also belongs to me, and I don`t want to participate.
Have you ever given some good, hard, thought as to why you want your religion public? Just why is it that religious people are not satisfied making their religious devotions in private?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments