Quantcast

Comments about ‘Jindal's Reagan Library religious freedom salvo draws fire’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Feb. 14 2014 11:20 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Karen R.
Houston, TX

I think that religion, especially Christianity, has enjoyed privileges DESPITE the First Amendment and these are now increasingly being challenged, as they should be. We truly are getting better at fulfilling the promise of our Constitution. People will continue to be free to believe what they choose. What is getting restricted is the capacity to impose those beliefs on others. The better we do this, the stronger the right to religious freedom will be.

Bob A. Bohey
Marlborough, MA

Yawn, religion in America has never been more free. Anybody catch that story recently about a temple being built in Philadelphia? How about the 100's if not 1000's of temples, mosques and church's currently under construction in America. Doesn't look like there's much of war on religious freedom now does it. Indifference, maybe, war, definitely not. But the indifference is probably what is really bothering the religious types. Get used to it.

Russell Spencer
Boise, ID

If Governor Jindal's drawing fire, then he must be over the right target.

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

Question for conservatives – when you see an article like this that states for the thousandth time that you are being attacked and there is a “war” on something, do you ever ask yourself, “hmmm, I wonder if the ubiquitous use of the word “war” is hyperbolic and meant as a calculated (and cynical) attempt to gain my support by bypassing my frontal cortex and going straight to my limbic brain?”

Or words to that effect…

And does it ever bother you that so much of your media talks to you this way – like they think you’re too dumb to have a rational conversation so they just want to get you mad (or scared) all the time?

Just curious…

Esquire
Springville, UT

What a made up controversy! It's just the far right religious conservatives, who themselves are happy to impose their will on others. This message may sell to radicalized right wing extremists for the nomination, but it won't sell the America. This is pandering and nothing more.

nycut
New York, NY

@Karen R makes a nice point.

Religious groups who have had the social and political power to have their way without meaningful opposition do seem shocked at finally hearing the voices of those they've long dominated.

An exercise in empathy will be required for them to understand why that dominance has been painful and unjust to others.

Another DesNews article today said this of religious freedom:
"[it] doesn't mean advocating a certain belief over others, he said, but accommodating religious freedom and diversity."

Utah's marriage equality situation is prime example where empathy and a willingness to share is needed.

Archer of Paradise
Oklahoma City, OK

The number of religious institutions is not a sole indicator of religious freedom. Gov. Jindal makes a great point that freedom of religion is not just the freedom to worship. I comprehends freedom of conscious and to believe what you will. Many beliefs today (not just the question of homosexual marriage) are ridiculed by media and society to the point that they have and will continue to make it into legislation in order to please constituents.

Freedom of religion is clearly in danger. So long as government is free to define moral freedoms such as right to free contraceptives or the right to marry whomever you want (as examples of more current issues and issues to come), church and state will always be at odds. These differences of opinions will not stop at your local cake shop or Hobby Lobby, despite what we're being told. The secular world will continue to push its view of what is right and what is wrong, whether you agree or not. Nor will challenging "Christian privileges" to this effect provide greater religious freedom to others. Indeed it will suppress ALL freedoms for everyone.

abtrumpet
Provo, UT

@Russell Spencer

Well said. It seems that there is a definite negative attitude floating around about religion these days, and attitudes often lead to actions. The Bolsheviks started as an attitude and eventually destroyed millions of people's freedoms. The best thing is to help society see that religion isn't a "bad" thing, which is becoming a more popular idea, despite plenty of research to the opposite.

Karen R.
Houston, TX

@abtrumpet

"Religion isn't a 'bad' thing..."

I think it's a bad thing to teach a child from very early on that they are inherently "sinful" (whatever "sin" is). I think this sets up a dynamic seen in all abusive relationships: One person in the relationship convinces the other that he/she is guilty of something or somehow can't be trusted and the "unworthy" one spends the rest of the relationship seeking approval and/or trying to prove that he/she isn't unworthy.

I think it's reprehensible that children are subjected to this message at a time when they are hardwired to believe what they are told and thus have no defenses against it.

I think the communities of support that religions construct are a good thing, but when the above is the price to be paid...These communities can exist without all the judgmental, divisive, and brow-beating dogma. And they do. More and more, they do.

Jack
Aurora, CO

@ Karen R,
So, you believe that all religions teach what you claim they teach? Then ridicule them for it? I think you may have just been a party to the very thing you claim not to be. Being religious means that you try to live a life conforming to the tenets of your chosen faith, and teaching your children the same. What you seem to espouse is that there are no morals, no right or wrong, just whatever is popular so as not to upset anyone. That isn't religion, that's pop culture.

I don't teach my children that they are inherently "sinful", rather I teach them that they are children of a loving God who wants them to be happy and to bless them. I teach that there are standards of right and wrong, that morals count and lead to happiness; as opposed to unhappiness and regret from not doing those things. I want to be able to espouse my faith without ridicule and without have the government tell me what is OK to believe in, or try to impose their secular beliefs on me. That is religious freedom....

Karen R.
Houston, TX

@Jack

I don't know where you got your first paragraph out of what I wrote. As to your second paragraph:

I am aware that not all religions teach the doctrine of inherent "sinfulness." I am very happy to hear that you don't teach this to your children.

You said, "I teach that there are standards of right and wrong, that morals count and lead to happiness; as opposed to unhappiness and regret from not doing those things." Me too.

Your definition of "religious freedom" does not match our Constitution's. However, it does accurately describe the privileged position I alluded to in my first post.

Ranch
Here, UT

@Archer of Paradise;

Your argument fails to take into account the fact that denying marriage to LGBT couples violates the religious freedom of churches that believe SSM is okay (not to mention the religious freedom of the LGBT couples themselves).

Allowing an employer to dictate whether or not their employees get the medical attention they need violates the religious freedom of the employees by forcing that of the employer on them.

Businesses are not people. Businesses do not worship. Businesses do not have a right to "religious freedom"; that right is reserved for actual, honest-to-goodness, living human beings.

to comment

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