@sportsfan you were the one to first equate good governance with the
predominant form of religion not me. I merely pointed out that if you wish to
make such claims then you need to do so based on the full historical facts.as to your claims about teen pregnancy, from the CDC Birth rates per
10000 1950 59.5, 1951 65.0, 1952 64.2, 1953 66.2, 1954 68.00. from the most
recent data available starting in 2008 40.2. 2009 37.9, 2010 34.2, 2012 29.4.
From reading this article, it appears "millennials" know exactly what
"religious liberty" means. Emily Hardman, president of Amicus
Communications, is the one who doesn't seem to get it.
@tolstoyFirst of all one govt taking advantage of another one for
resources is not a true christian endeavor, govt's are corrupt no matter
where they are, and is not hardly a true comparison of moral culture of its
people.And to your other point, stating teen pregnancies and
abortions are at record lows. Sure I will agree with that based on the records
and stats.However before 1950 teen pregnancies and abortions were
almost non existent. Infact in 1950 the teen pregnancy rate was slightly above
10%, case inpoint, moral values like abstaining from sex until married, no drugs
...etc were a non issue before the 1950's. Since then its been a major
social problem.But if someone cant see the obvious that no sex
before marriage means no unwanted pregnancies, no abortions, the spread of
std's would dwindle significantly - then you are from another planet.@moderateI made no mention of sharia law, you did.But if you support drugs sex and rock and roll, then dont complain about
societies ills, ever, because you contribute to it.
@Furry1993 "Freedom of religion does NOT mean that people can use religion
as an excuse to provide or deny service to people in the civil/secular
marketplace. "And especially it must not be used as an excuse to
deny service when such is contrary to accepted scientific fact. For example a
relative of my wife, a woman, married an Asian man. She was white, he was
Asian. After they married they tried to obtain lodging but were unable anywhere
in the state of Utah. Why? Because it was believed in those days, early
1950's, that such marriage, mixing races, was contrary to the laws of God.
Finally we know differently. We are coming to be enlightened with regard to
homosexuality and transgenderism.
@NoNames wrote, "As the supreme court held unanimously in
Hosanna-Tabar, churches enjoy absolute freedom in hiring and firing ministers
and in determining which positions are ministerial vs which are secular."Nobody's claiming otherwise. Why bring this up?"Individual business owners must be given the widest possible latitude in
running their businesses in accordance with their religious beliefs."Why? Are you suggesting that a Muslim shopkeeper should be legally able
to stone a woman entering his business because she was not accompanied by a man?
Or because she didn't cover her hair?"Simply denying to
employ creative talent for another does not harm the other and must be
protected."Are you in favor of overturning the laws that protect
people from being discriminated on the basis of religion? Or race? As in,
"we don't serve [or "use our creative talents"] for *your kind*
here"? Decorating a cake to match a stock picture is a skill,
not a "creative talent". 13 LikeReport
"Millennials approve of religious freedom as a choice, but don't know
what it means"A more accurate statement would be that most
millennials don't see discrimination against LGBT people as acceptable. It
doesn't matter whether it's blatant bigotry or described as
"living my religion". "Living my religion" is the
excuse for female genital mutilation. But in this country, that's
illegal, no matter how fervently the parents believe in it. You do
NOT have the legal right to treat other people badly, and use the
"participation" argument as an excuse. The cake bakers are finding
@Patriot "I also understood the dangers of Communism because I grew up as a
baby boomer and the Cubian Missle Crisis and Viet Nam and so on.... I went
through nuclear bomb drills in grade school so I understood that Communism was
an enemy of freedom and liberty. I also saw the Berlin Wall and all the people
murdered by the Communist Khmer Rouge after the Viet Nam war ended."I get where you are coming from Patriot, but you should also appreciate
the American economy was built on black slavery - this is literally true. And
in capitalism profits are made from the exploitation of labor. Can we have a
free society with equality and no exploitation? That is the challenge.
It has long been the case the young people return to the Faith of their
upbringing once they start having their own families. Large numbers of
millennials remain childless. I expect their understanding and valuing of Faith
will increase as they raise families.
@Yar;There is nowhere in your religion that you are required to deny
products or services to ANY customers. NOWHERE. Quite the opposite in fact.
Jesus, the founder of your religion, COMMANDS you to treat ALL other people in
the manner you would like to be treated by them. THAT is the way you should be
"practicing" your religion - to use your own words: "Why is that
not obvious?"Asking to be able to refuse the products and
services you willingly provide to ALL other "sinners" is actually the
action of bigotry. Only bigots want to practice bigotry; if you don't like
the label, don't practice the cat.If you don't want to
"make us miserable" then why do you ask for the ability to make us
@ Yar"It's not like we want to make your life miserable or
anything..."Okay. If you were to learn that, despite a lack of
intention, the manner in which you were exercising your beliefs WAS making LGBTs
miserable, would you still argue that you have this right?
I still maintain that the politically correct dogma of millennials is freedom
FROM religion not freedom OF religion. I think people are grownups and have
the ability to decide whether or not they want to involve themselves with
religion or the practice of it thereof or not. There are all sorts of behaviors
going on all around me that I neither believe in nor agree with, but I respect
others right to choose what they want to do. Too many people confuse judgment
of behavioral practices with judgment of a person and I posit that these are not
one and the same as commonly thought. I can’t tell you how many times I
have deeply cared for someone but hated what they do or have done.
Pretty much anything couched in the terms of "freedom" and
"tolerance" is acceptable to millies.They will eventually
learn to look deeper and learn to use sound judgment. Every generation is dissed
by the previous. In spite of the challenges, America is mostly going strong and
I do know some millies that are very impressive.
The more I hear Millennials talk the more worried I am for America. Granted I
wasn't exactly on top of my US history at age 19 but I at least understood
what religious liberty meant because I understood that is one of the main
reasons for the Pilgrams coming to the new world and then later the US
constitution. Freedom to practice religion without government interference as in
China or Russia. I also understood the dangers of Communism because I grew up as
a baby boomer and the Cubian Missle Crisis and Viet Nam and so on.... I went
through nuclear bomb drills in grade school so I understood that Communism was
an enemy of freedom and liberty. I also saw the Berlin Wall and all the people
murdered by the Communist Khmer Rouge after the Viet Nam war ended. Finally I at
least understood that Communism and Socialism were ugly cousins built from the
same rotten foundation of BIG controlling government and no freedom. The
majority of Millennials are clueless about all of this. Very scary.
@YarNo one is trying to make gay people miserable?You do know
that Utah still has a sodomy law, right? The only reason I'm not a
criminal in Utah is because the Supreme Court.So before we even get
to "miserable", your state is trying to make me a *criminal*.
@ YarYou wrote:" If you want me to have a more positive
attitude towards the civil rights agenda of today, you're gonna have to do
better than label us as "bigots" every single time we practice our
beliefs."Yar, if your religion teaches and demands from you to
live and act as a bigot and yet you feel insulted for being called a bigot. Wow!
that is a tough spot to be in. May be you should consider your options:1.
Re-examine your religion, may be the religion you practice is not for you2. Re-examine the way "you" understand and practice your religion. Do
most of your brothers and sisters in the faith have the same dilemma? 3.
If you are a Christian, perhaps you would like to do the thing that Christ would
do if He were in your place.4. If you practice love even for your enemies
I don't think anybody will accuse you of being a bigot. I hope your
religion allows you to do that.
@Sportsfan123you may also want to take a look at the statistical
historical trends which show that among others things teenage pregnancies,
abortions and crime all remain well below historical highs, so in short no the
world is not falling apart because of a lack of judio chritain influence.
Sportsfan123 "No religion, more secularism means moral decay, its not hard
to see this."Is this a call in favor of Sharia Law? The enforcement
of God's law is intended to end moral decay.
Why not just throw us a bone and let us worship as we please, you know?
It's not like we want to make your life miserable or anything (at least
I'm pretty confident that religious believers in general want the best for
Religious freedom is a personal right, not an institutional right. Most
churches, including the prevailing one here in Utah, don't see it that way.
They think that the interests of the institution are paramount. This attitude
actually leads to less religious freedom.
@Sportsfan123if you look at those "third world countries history
you will see that almost everyone of them was until at least the mid to late
20th century subject to rule by western Judo-Christian countries that exploited
their people and resources leaving them far behind the rest of the world in
terms of development, I would hardly call that a ringing endorsement for judo
"There is a difference between a business serving people equally and forcing
a business to participate in a ceremony that violates their religious beliefs.
We should respect religious freedom of these people."Why is that
not obvious? If you want me to have a more positive attitude towards the civil
rights agenda of today, you're gonna have to do better than label us as
"bigots" every single time we practice our beliefs.
Look at history to figure out what direction society is going.Look
at all of the modern westernised countries, almost all have a thick history of
judeo christian values, not all but most.Now look at the difference
between 3rd world countries and others ruled by totalitarianism, or dominated by
a specific religion and you'll these countries are behind in development
either because of political totalitarism or religious stagnation or lack of
religious diversity.Obviously too much of one thing is not good in
society.So lets look at todays society of the westernised world, and
you'll see that most people thru several generations have forgotten the old
core values of judeo christian lifestyles the ones where everyone is expected to
get married have large families and get educated and religion played a big part
in this culture. All of these countries including ours have progressed further
than the others because of this culture.Now because of progressive
and liberal ideals our cultures are faced with major social problems, less
strong family units, drug and alcohol abuse, alternative lifestyles. No
religion, more secularism means moral decay, its not hard to see this.
I am unaware of any religion which has a ceremony to bake and sell cakes to the
public. Those who craft cakes are operating a business, not practicing
religion. Business is a privilege (not a right), so you are "enslaved"
by the rules of commerce.If your religion teaches that you not wash
your hands when preparing food, that you use expired ingredients, and never
clean the kitchen, you may practice that religion as you wish. However, you may
not sell the products of that unhealthy environment to the public. The rules of business state that you must serve all of the public. You are
not participating in the ceremony. You are not invited to the wedding. It is a
cake. Who cares if the customer calls it birthday, wedding, retirement, or just
plain dessert. Its is only a cake.
Good, well presented valuable article. Now the writer should reframe it in the
honest context of differing the seperation of religious freedom, church laws,
rules and regulation, church tax exemption and business practices, and public
works financially supported community infrastructure that support churches and
businesses. When these are thrown into the mix one clearly sees that the true
issue of religious freedom is prejudice, ignorance, money: all with nothing to
do with the wishes or will of a god.
"We we refuse business to Mormons. We will not bake your cakes and we will
not decorate your cakes because you are Mormons." But the law
says you cannot discriminate against a person's religious beliefs or sexual
preference."Millennium's have no moral compass because of
liberals and Democrats."Interesting statement. Trump talked to
our Boy Scouts about orgies on a yacht and how about Dennis hastert former
Speaker of the House and then there's Jerry Sandusky, all fine examples of
moral compass on the Right, conservative values/republicans.There is
nothing wrong with millennium's. They are their own people and they're
picking their own future. They will learn from their mistakes the same as we
did. They will pick themselves up when they fail and they will move forward the
same as we did. How stupid to keep picking on these millennium. How
ridiculous to blame political parties. I don't blame them for diconnecting
from religion.My former neighbor, a bishop, would not let my
daughter play with theirs because I'm not affiliated with their church. Now
tell me how valuable religion is?
Fullypresent says:"Others are so anti-religious they have no
tolerance for people of faith. They persecute them as much as they feel
persecuted for not being religious."--- I have to disagree with
that. I'm probably one of those "anti-religious" people you
mention. I'd be more than happy to leave the religious alone if
they'd stop being such jerks to anybody who doesn't adhere to their
favorite mythological being's rules. There is a vast difference
between being "intolerant" of the persecution from religious bigots and
fighting back.Those persecuting the religious are actually other
'religious' people who seem to think that theirs should be the only
based on the data and constitutional law I would say Millennial's
understand religious freedom quit well what they do not do is agree with the
DN's expansive belief that people can use claims of religious belief to
violate others rights.
"'They think it (religious freedom) is merely just a choice, and
it’s troubling to see that so many don’t know what it means more
than just choosing — it means practicing that faith in a meaningful and
authentic way,' said Hardman."History shows us that every
generation determines what "religious freedom" looks like in practice.
Millennials are consistently telling us that, because they don't have the
same beliefs about LGBTs as their elders, practicing their faith in a
"meaningful and authentic way" isn't going to include asserting the
right to refuse them service or employment.
A Quaker - Brooklyn, NYJuly 30, 2017 8:24 p.m.There are two bedrock
pillars of freedom of religion. Not three, not five, two. FIRST, is the right to
avoid religion... SECOND, is the right to practice your faith free of government
oppression or control. You are so right. There are many people out
there that are spiritual but not religious. There are people that get so rigid
and rabid about their religion they can't see any other point of view.
Their extremism is dangerous as evidenced in the Middle East and some parts of
the United States. Others are so anti-religious they have no tolerance for
people of faith. They persecute them as much as they feel persecuted for not
being religious. It isn't just gov't that can be that way but people
with each other.
Hope & Faith: A century ago, there was little over one and a half billion
people on this planet. We've since grown five-fold, to seven and a half
billion. We are at extreme risk from that most unprecedented growth. Our
agriculture is more dependent than ever on everything going just so. Our
resources are strained to the max.We're more likely to wipe out
Mankind by overbreeding than underbreeding. So, please consider that in your
overwrought analysis of marriage and morality in America.Further,
I'm wondering if your parents had that "birds and bees" talk with
you. Marriage doesn't make babies, people do, and they all too frequently
do this outside of marriage. No, it doesn't make the most financial sense
or the strongest family units, but we're in no danger of ending our future
from a failure to mingle genetic material. Only from a failure to protect our
There are two bedrock pillars of freedom of religion. Not three, not five,
two.FIRST, is the right to avoid religion. The reason this is first
is because without it, the government can decide which religion you WILL follow,
and exactly HOW you will follow it, under penalty of law. (cf Saudi Arabia, for
example.) And, obviously, once the government decrees which religion you must
follow, you won't be free to enjoy the second pillar:SECOND, is
the right to practice your faith free of government oppression or control. Where so-called "religious conservatives" of certain
denominations err is in thinking their religious beliefs allow them to impact
other people's rights. They do not. Civil law in a free nation provides a
framework that gives equal rights to citizens of all religions and to no
religion.If you can't live within that framework, move to a
country that has your religion as its official religion, or otherwise sequester
yourself away from the secular world.
"Millennials accept a general view of religious freedom as being important,
but they struggle to understand what religious freedom really means."Probably just means that multiple groups are defining it as different
ways. [58 percent of millennials agree that “Religion is
personal and should not play a significant role in society.”]The rough translation of this is that people think religion shouldn't be
infringing on other people's rights and laws should protect people from
that. It's why people (including I imagine a large portion of people who
disagree with that statement) react negatively to the idea of Sharia Law. Now
opposing an entire religious system of law is obvious, but what about an
individual piece or two of laws that make up Sharia? It'd probably depend
issue by issue as to whether or not they restrict the rights of others, right?
Maybe one piece we'd be 95-5 against, maybe another we'd be 90-10 for,
maybe another would be like 50-50.
There are Islamic doctors being accused of FGM here in the US that are using the
freedom of religion mantra as an excuse and there are also some who would argue
that honor killings, amputation for theft, and the stoning of adulterers should
be acceptable because they are long held religious beliefs.
Impartial7,Don't worry, those that turn away from religion will
have kids too. And when their kids don't listen to them, I'll be
calling them pretty smart kids. ;)
"1. There is a difference between a business serving people equally and
forcing a business to participate in a ceremony that violates their religious
beliefs. We should respect religious freedom of these people"--
Businesses once claimed that serving black people "forced them to
participate in an event that violated their 'religious freedom' ";
fortunately, those spurious claims were overruled by SCOTUS.Unless
the business owners refusing LGBT ceremonies also refuse the ceremonies of
fornicators, adulterers, and other "sinners" then all their claims are
proven to be hypocrital and nothing more than bigotry using "religion"
as the excuse.@NoNamesAccepted;Businesses should be
required to serve all customers equally. Period.@Hope;When you choose to open a business, you are not being "enslaved" when
you are ASKED to provide LGBT customers the same product you provide EVERYONE
else. All I can say about your comment is that such a view is absolutely NOT
Christian in any way, shape or form.
Freedom of religion means that people can believe and worship as they choose,
pray as they choose and advocate as they choose. People are also free to refuse
to listen to the prayers and advocacy. Churches are free to determine their
dogma, decide who can join the church and what church rites are available to
its members. People are also free to refuse to belong to any church. People
are free to socialize as they choose.Freedom of religion does NOT
mean that people can use religion as an excuse to provide or deny service to
people in the civil/secular marketplace. If a vendor/provider is going to sell
or provide a product or service to some people, s/he must provide the identical
product or service to all people. If a vendor/provider is going to refuse to
sell or provide a product or service to some people, s/he must refuse to provide
the identical product or service to all people. In other words, treat all
people equally. Do not practice prejudicial discrimination in the civil/secular
marketplace.Easy to understand.
Maybe if religions didn't push an agenda that their "right" to
prevent others from signing a legal document the last forever years ago, us
millennials wouldn't balk at the concept of religion as a whole.For that matter, the new separate but equal isn't helping either. We did
study segregation in school, after all.
Based on the statistics that millennials want very little to do with religion,
I'm betting they approve of freedom FROM religion. Smart kids.
"Religious freedom" may be acceptable as a general proposition, but it
depends entirely and absolutely on the content of the religious freedom being
claimed. Thus, for example, would Christian Science parents have the right, in
the name of their "religious freedoms," to deny their child the right to
medical care without which the child will die? Should a Jehovah's Witness
member be permitted to refuse their child a blood transfusion? Is it acceptable
to sacrifice an animal on an altar in the name of "religious freedom"?
These questions about "religious freedom" become much more serious and
problematical when we involve other sentient beings -- especially children -- in
our religious dogmas.
Millennials are confused because this Country has lost it's moral compass
and that my friends is due to progressive liberals/Democrats.
It is becoming more and more obvious by the day that religious discrimination is
no different than any other kind of discrimination and is at it's
core--festering with self righteousness and bigotry. If your religion does not
"allow" you to serve others (who are--by LAW--doing nothing to harm
you)-because your God wouldn't like what they are doing, you should
consider going into a business that wouldn't present you with these
quandaries and moral obstacles to success and peace of mind. Your religion is
your affair. Equal justice under law is simply more important than you being
allowed to exclude whoever you feel like excluding. Nobody ever went to war to
protect your right to be the moral conscience of wedding cake decorators.
Moral Law & Freedom have a critical dependence on each other.Littering laws weren't formed because it was easy to see how a single
discarded can of coke would destroy life on Earth. We don't know what the
tree will look like in 30 years. What we do know is that it won't even
exist in 30 years without water.Mankind as a whole cannot survive
without fathers and mothers. That's not some oppressive religious dogma.
It's the natural order of our existence. Religious involvement in
government may not have a perfect track record. Every century on Earth has seen
people invent new kinds of stupid. But we won't even have a future to call
a history if we keep discouraging people from having children. And that future
won't be as stable and happy if we can't keep men and women faithfully
married to each other.None of that requires anyone to stop anyone
else from living as they wish. All it means is that freedom and prosperity will
never happen if our laws don't uphold the traditional family as the
standard of human prosperity. Those that fight it the most are those that
don't want freedom, but power over others.
When I was young I prayed to know of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints is true. I received a clear answer to that prayer. I could no more deny
it than denying I have a heart. I've never seen my heart, but I do feel it
beating inside me. I do feel God working within to change me into a better
person, when I'm willing to follow the instruction.Like
children, we sometimes like to do things our own way even at our own peril. The
Kingmen hated rules, hard work, and anything that didn't give them whatever
they wanted. Their immediate satisfactions and lusts were all that mattered. So
they waited while good men, even good women and children fought. They sent
others to war while staying home to overthrow their government.The
purpose they had was to enslave others to their will. I believe when someone
tells me "bake my cake or else..." they are doing just that. The "or
else" ends with " or else I'll ruin your life by taking your
passion and livelihood to provide for your family away from you". Meanwhile
they could have simply gone to another baker.Freedom comes from not
having to do what is popular or easy, but what you believe in.
Freedom of speech requires us to tolerate speech that may offend us: the
politically incorrect, the sacrilegious, even the hateful. A line is properly
drawn at speech that targets individuals with specific threats of harm, inciting
a riot or encouraging other violation of law, and libel and slander. Freedom of
speech protects potentially offensive speech in public as well as in private.In like manner, freedom of religion requires us to tolerate religious
beliefs and practices that may be offensive, off putting, even categorized as
hateful by some. Freedom of religion protects the public expression of
religious beliefs and practices in addition to protecting private worship.As the supreme court held unanimously in Hosanna-Tabar, churches enjoy
absolute freedom in hiring and firing ministers and in determining which
positions are ministerial vs which are secular.Individual business
owners must be given the widest possible latitude in running their businesses in
accordance with their religious beliefs. Simply denying to employ creative
talent for another does not harm the other and must be protected.
Millennials are confused because the meaning of religious freedom as advanced by
the religious right is very confusing, and not just to millennials.Does religious freedom mean views based on religion can be freely advanced in
the public square (most don't argue with this), or does it mean religion
must be obeyed in the public square?