Ther is already exemptions for conscientious objectors...so they are covered. Not all conscientious objectors do so for religious reasons. I think these faiths need to get out of the middle ages and modernize a bit. We don't allow others to walk around carrying large knives that can almost be considered a short sword, so why should they be special?
Eric On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Larry C. Lyons <larrycly...@gmail.com>wrote: > > what about groups like the Amish or Mennonites? They have very > specific exemptions regarding military service for instance. If the > draft was suddenly reinstated should be through all eligible amish and > mennonite people in jail for following their pacifist religion. Or > another good example, what about the select exemptions for Sikhs (hair > and the kirpan)? Are we to throw thousands of people in jail for > simply following their religious beliefs? > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Eric Roberts > <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > > > I don't think any religion should get an exemption for > > anything...especially when it comes to matter that regard minors. If it > > violates the law, it violates the law. Just because your stone age faith > > says it is OK, doesn't mean that we should allow it. You have a choice > to > > be in that faith, they don't. You commit an honor killing...you go to > jail > > for murder. You kill a doctor that performs an abortion...you go to jail > > for murder. You rape your wife...you go to jail for rape. If your faith > > hasn't caught up with the 21st century...to bad. > > > > Eric > > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 1:26 PM, PT <cft...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> Someone needs to smack that judge individually and not make a blanket > >> rule, especially not an amendment to a constitution. > >> > >> Sorry Muslim dudes, but your religious laws do not trump U.S. criminal > >> law. I don't think I would get a pass for killing someone with the > >> justification being that the Old Testament told me to (and in fact, > >> people haven't). > >> > >> If one lives in the U.S. they need to fulfill their responsibilities as > >> a citizen, which includes abiding by the law of the land. Rape should > >> be no more tolerated than honor killings. > >> > >> This is one of the biggest problems with Islamic fundamentalism and > >> western society. Islam and Islamic law are joined at the hip and > >> Islamic law is incompatible with the laws of most modern societies. It > >> is an outdated system that has outlived its purpose and needs to be > >> revised, or abandoned. Preferably the latter. > >> > >> ----- > >> "Because I can lie beautiful true things into existence ..." > >> Neil Gaiman on Why I write. > >> > >> On 1/11/2012 11:05 PM, Jerry Milo Johnson wrote: > >> > > >> > If you had followed the passing of this law, the bill was drafted in > >> > response to a judge's ruling in New Jersey, evoking Sharia law, > finding a > >> > husband not worthy of a restraining order based on spousal abuse > >> (physical > >> > and sexual) because "it was part of the husband's religion". > >> > > >> > Earlier this year an appeals court in New Jersey overturned a state > court > >> > judge's refusal to issue a restraining order against a Muslim man who > >> > forced his wife to engage in sexual intercourse. The judge found that > the > >> > man did not intend to rape his wife because he believed his religion > >> > permitted him to have sex with her whenever he desired. > >> > > >> > The case "presents a conflict between the criminal law and religious > >> > precepts," the appeals court wrote. "In resolving this conflict, the > >> judge > >> > determined to except (the husband) from the operation of the State's > >> > statutes as the result of his religious beliefs. In doing so, the > judge > >> was > >> > mistaken." > >> > > >> > http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-12-09-shariaban09_ST_N.htm > >> > > >> > > >> > As noted, the judge was overturned by an appeals court, and the OK > bill > >> was > >> > a pretty egregious example of overreaction based on mindless fear. > >> > > >> > But I do understand the desire to keep religion out of our courts > >> > (regardless of WHICH religion) > >> > > >> > And a judge DID use Sharia as the basis for his ruling (which is > pretty > >> > scary, overall, especially for his wife, I am sure) > >> > >> > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:345287 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
