tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1509760839117869165.post4179121258952184547..comments2024-02-24T01:48:48.809-08:00Comments on Pork Brains with Milk Gravy: Your right to be offended Part IIBen Bakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17807488850925842222noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1509760839117869165.post-49012491945458706842011-11-30T05:00:51.742-08:002011-11-30T05:00:51.742-08:00http://porkbrainsandmilkgravy.blogspot.com/2011/03...http://porkbrainsandmilkgravy.blogspot.com/2011/03/you-dont-want-prayer-in-schools.html <br /><br />My thoughts on School Prayer.<br /><br />Would appreciate hearing your thoughts on my other musings.<br /><br />As for hunting, we have deer. Not as many as in N. Georgia. Problem is as the season progresses, the deer go nocturnal.Ben Bakerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17807488850925842222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1509760839117869165.post-43518468040602177032011-11-29T16:43:24.920-08:002011-11-29T16:43:24.920-08:00True, there are generally exceptions to free speec...True, there are generally exceptions to free speech based on incitement to violence and such, and those types of restrictions come from a good place, and, if codified and enforced properly, are a good thing.<br /><br />I'm happy you've let me share your little internet space today, and happy to have some intelligent conversation.<br /><br />Now I just need to learn to hunt... although I actually want to find some deer when I do it. Don't you live in white tail country? I thought they were supposed to be everywhere and dumb as bricks. Black tails out here, from what I hear it's damn near impossible to catch one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1509760839117869165.post-40973507967471083662011-11-29T16:36:42.149-08:002011-11-29T16:36:42.149-08:00Wish I could get more intelligent comments on my w...Wish I could get more intelligent comments on my writings like yours. You make me think and I appreciate that.<br /><br />So. S'public land. As long as it doesn't constitute a hazard or interfere with the defined public use, I probably don't a problem with it. I haven't gone through myriad permutations on this one. So I probably could find some I object to.<br /><br />Permutation example: Content is an issue. If you put up displays calling for the death of Christians simply for being Christian, I have the same problem with that as I do a Christian putting up a display calling for the death of Muslims. Exhortations to violence against others must be carefully considered.<br /><br />I do agree if you allow one group, you should allow all groups. The fact that I am a pentecostal Christian doesn't matter. Muslims have the same rights me as Wiccans as Satanists as Pagans as Atheists etc etc etc.<br /><br />I GLADLY share space with those who will share space with me. Sadly, finding people willing to so share is like me hunting deer. I hunt. I don't find 'em.Ben Bakerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17807488850925842222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1509760839117869165.post-80131873627014075532011-11-29T16:18:23.556-08:002011-11-29T16:18:23.556-08:00Depends... is anybody allowed to put up whatever d...Depends... is anybody allowed to put up whatever display they want on that land? Usually public land has specific uses laid out. If they take down your display because nobody was allowed to leave shit lying around there, then they've acted correctly. Content neutrality would be the key here. <br /><br />Thus, if they allowed your display, but disallowed mine, based on the content of that display, there would be a problem. Open forums are cool, you can say whatever you want there. Government endorsed censorship based on content is not very cool.<br /><br />Put it up on your own land, with your own money, say in the window of your store or on a billboard or whathaveyou, and there's no legal charge to be made. Some people might complain, but they wouldn't be me. I might be less likely to shop there though, depending on the nature of the display. That's fine, they'd make up for the loss of me with the increase in religious folk going there.<br /><br />But what you'll find, in nearly 100% of cases where some display has been disallowed or torn town, it's because the government was granting special privilege to religion, allowing them to use public land in ways which are disallowed to other groups and individuals, in clear violation of the establishment clause.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1509760839117869165.post-75462783146817158712011-11-29T15:43:38.928-08:002011-11-29T15:43:38.928-08:00Oooo. I'm a FUNDY!
Is a religious display put...Oooo. I'm a FUNDY!<br /><br />Is a religious display put up with tax dollars is different from a religious display put up at private expense?<br /><br />If you truly believe that keeping government from supporting OR suppressing any religion does that means I can erect a religious display at my expense on a public place? By your reasoning if government tears it down, they are suppressing my religion.Ben Bakerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17807488850925842222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1509760839117869165.post-49401778656769176232011-11-29T13:49:52.728-08:002011-11-29T13:49:52.728-08:00Atheists may or may not be offended by religious d...Atheists may or may not be offended by religious displays on public property, but that's not the real problem that most of us have with them, and it's certainly not why our legal actions hold water.<br /><br />It's because religious displays on public property are governmental establishment of religion, and they are spending my money to support your beliefs and all the crap that comes with them. It's against the constitution. If you or your fundy friends have trouble understanding this idea, think about how you would feel if the government put up some sort of Muslim holiday display with your money, or allowed Muslim teachers to lead the class in a Muslim prayer. <br /><br />Offended is one word, but it's more and deeper than that. It's being forced into someone else's faith by your government.<br /><br />Also, it's funny that you and your friends think that we're the ones trying to claim a right not to be offended. We're simply trying to claim a right not to have our government turned into a theocracy. I tend to hear much more about religious people being offended at, well, the very existence of atheists, offended that anyone could question the existence of god, offended that we might put up a billboard saying you can be good without god. And making a big stink about it. <br /><br />Keeping prayer out of schools isn't about personal offensiveness. It's about religious freedom. Something which was put into the constitution very explicitly because the founding fathers recognized that allowing religion into the sphere of government destroys both. That allowing religion and government to mix is a bad idea, because while your religion might be on top and able to oppress everyone else today, tomorrow the tides might shift and you could be the one getting oppressed.<br /><br />If we instead keep government and religion entirely separate, keep government actions from supporting or suppressing any religion, then we will all be free to follow the religion of our own choosing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com