Comments about ‘New foundation promotes religious freedom as good for business’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Feb. 3 2014 8:00 a.m. MST

Updated: Tuesday, April 15 2014 1:40 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Hutterite
American Fork, UT

The trouble is that religious freedom, as it is promoted in Utah, wants a bit more than freedom of thought and conscience. By definition, religion here wants to impose upon the freedom of thought and conscience and rights of others, and is willing to claim it is not free unless it is able to do so.

skeptic
Phoenix, AZ

A real bad idea. Religion in the work place will poison the waters of business.

Ranch
Here, UT

Might it be that there are more factors involved than simply the freedom to practice one's religion? When religion is restricted, it is almost certain that many other freedoms are also restriced, religious freedom being only one of them.

There You Go Again
Saint George, UT

"...New foundation promotes religious freedom...".

Ok.

"...as good for business...".

With a healthy dose of skepticism?

Ok.

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

Religious freedom (not to be confused with freedom of thought & conscience) is an oxymoron.

We can find no example in history of religious institutions gaining political power and subsequently making the protection of freedom & liberty a priority (both Jefferson and Madison recognized this fact which was the entire basis for the separation of Church & State).

And why would they – when you believe you have the prescription for life given to you by God, why wouldn’t you seek to model a society based on those precepts, with conformity to those precepts “promoted” as the greatest good.

Protecting freedom - why would this be a concern when souls are at stake?

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "Hutterite" I assume you are talking about the gays. The LDS church does not force its ideas onto people that are not LDS. In fact, Utah is know to be more tolerant of people with different backgrounds than many other places around the US.

Ranch
Here, UT

RedShirt says:

"The LDS church does not force its ideas onto people that are not LDS."

--- Check Utah's liquor laws.

--- Read Amendment 3.

Are you able to make your statement with a straight face?

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

to paraphrase one vote's earlier post
the bitter labelers are out in force today.

Tyler,
I beg to differ with your assessment of Jefferson's motives for the freedom of religion statutes he championed. I believe you are partially correct; Jefferson viewed the Church of England's position as the official religion of Virginia as a bad thing. But the main motive behind his passage of freedom of religion statutes was to ensure ALL religions had access to the public square. he saw the state-sanctioned persecution of the anabaptists as wrong, and wrote statutes to correct that situation.

Unfortunately, many from the left abuse Jefferson's position to demand exclusion from the public square of any religious reference. I use as the basis for my comment the excellent biography, "Jefferson: A Life" by Willard Sterne Randall. Jefferson's writings from late in life show a fairly religious man. His own person version of the New Testament and his letters to Adams touting "the God whom you and I adore" indicate this

My reading of some of Madison's writings lead me to believe was anti-religion, though I have not read much on him.

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

@lost in DC – “I beg to differ with your assessment of Jefferson's motives for the freedom of religion statutes he championed.”

You make some good points – I would just add that ensuring all religions have the freedom to participate in the public sphere would imply that no one religion has a right to dominate the public arena, or at least have that domination sanctioned by the state (i.e., codifying into law respecting the establishment of its beliefs).

Jefferson was quite an enigma and what I find most compelling about him is it is virtually impossible to attached easy left/right labels to his thoughts… he’s far too smart.

And the fact that he edited his own version of the gospel suggests you’re right – or that he at least thought deeply about religion. Although we should keep in mind his version striped out all miracles and supernatural occurrences.

He was a scientist and a naturalist through & through he did not believe in a God that intervened in the natural world in any way (a Deist).

Your “bitter labelers” comment notwithstanding, thanks again for your cordial and well-reasoned points.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "Ranch" did the LDS church write that Ammendment? Did they tell their members to vote specifically for that? Did the LDS church force the Utah state government to implement that? Did they prevent any non-LDS person from voting?

You claim that the LDS church forced that through, but where is your evidence. All proceedings and evidence shows that it was approved by a majority of Utah. You are just targeting the LDS church because you want to force 60% of the state of Utah to accept YOUR religion, whatever it may be.

The people with your ideals lost the vote when Ammendment 3 was proposed, so now you are using the courts to eliminate religious freedom for those that oppose your views. You and others like you are using the power of government to force acceptance of your lifestyle.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

Tyler,

I hope you noted that I did not coin the term "bitter labeler", that came from "one vote" who commonly makes liberal comments.

As to Jefferson, you are correct, he was enigmatic. I still draw from his letter to Adams, written late in life, referring to "that God whom you and I adore" that he died more of a religionist than a deist. We will not know in this life, and we can reasonably diagree.

Thank you for the civil dialogue

RFLASH
Salt Lake City, UT

Don't we wish it were more simple.IT is religion itself that is the problem! Like the article pointed out, one religion try to have it all and they often try and take religious freedom away from others! In Utah, Mormons use their religious beliefs to ban me from getting married! I GUESS A GAY MAN'S BELIEFS ARE NOT VALID! It truly would be great if we could all care enough to respect each other.

nycut
New York, NY

@RedShirt

The article clarifies religious freedom:
"That doesn't mean advocating a certain belief over others, he said, but accommodating religious freedom and diversity."

Amendment 3 does the *opposite* of this by excluding gay people from legal marriage.

There can be no doubt that the LDS church opposes gay marriages based on its most definitional tenets about creation and eternity.

Though @Redshirt seems defensive when the LDS Church is blamed, its leaders and followers (indistinguishable from the political bodies that govern the state) are the driving force behind its creation, passage and defense.

Attempts to justify their position using non-religious arguments ("best for children" "best for society") consistently fall short: with no proof and no victims, it is impossible to show any harm greater than the demonstrable harm to gay families when they are prevented from the legal protections of marriage and denied equal protection.

US guiding principles of religious freedom and equality make the nature/nurture, born/choice arguments irrelevant.

We are each free to follow our own pursuit of life, liberty and happiness in the way that is right for who we know ourselves to be.

The primary argument for religious freedom is one that supports marriage equality.

Eliyahu
Pleasant Grove, UT

True religious freedom only exists when we are all willing to accord to the religion we most dislike or despise the same freedoms that we desire for our own religion. In practical terms, this means that we can't demand that our own religion get special recognition from the government, laws that accommodate us but limit others, or that our unique beliefs form the basis for legislation. Otherwise, when our beliefs are in the minority, we may find ourselves in a bind as other churches pass laws that limit our own practices in a way we don't want.

If a religion is a good one, God will make it prosper without any help from the State.

Lilly Munster
netherlands, 00

The Author uses Dishonest Statistics to prove a tortured point. If Commerce and the Economy of a Nation improves because that Nation becomes more tolerant, everything improves. Religious freedom, Equal Rights, Women's Rights, Minority Rights. RELIGION does not make that happen, EQUALITY does. The Author conveniently leaves out the important fact that in Nations where Religion is dominant, Equal Rights suffer. Russia is and always has been dominated by one Religion; Russian Orthodox. The oppressions of the Soviet Union were supported by Religion, just as the Roman Catholic Church and it's Pope PiusXII, supported, nurtured, colluded with, and even gave Birthday Parties for Adolph Hitler. Need we point out the suffering of All Minorities right here in the United States, which was perpetrated by Religious Based Bigotry?
Religious Freedom includes the freedom to be free of Religion as well.

Interloper
Portland, OR

Grim is mistaking correlation with cause and effect. The fact China's economy grew by leaps and bounds around the same time restrictions on religious expression were loosened does not mean 'religious freedom' is responsible for China's economic success. The main reasons for that are modernization, trade with West, use of Chinese labor for mass assembly jobs, and allowing private corporations in China.

And, religious freedom means different things to different people. This article is appearing less than a week after Kansas legislators tried to set up segregation by law of homosexuals. They said gays exercising the same rights in public places as other citizens deprived Christians of their religious freedom.

slcdenizen
t-ville, UT

I would certainly not presume that my interpretation of the data is better than the article subject's, but it would seem that a correlation exists between economic flourishment and religion not being brazenly presented or imposed on the citizenry. This is neither groundbreaking nor newsworthy. Where religious preference remains a private matter, citizens rely on alternative methods of building trust and respect, i.e. business relationships. It is also apparent that religious practitioners have no other motive than to boost their own particular brand at the expense of others, as seems to be the case for the new organization being moonlighted.

to comment

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