I was referring to specific groups like the puritans or early mormons. Those groups practiced a brand of religious intolerance that tried to get it enshrined in the law. That strain of religiosity is far too prevalent here. The recent firebombing of a mosque under construction in Tennessee is a good example. The strain of deism and tolerance that Jefferson and many of the other founders followed has mostly died out in the US.
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Judah McAuley <ju...@wiredotter.com> wrote: > > The Universalists and Deists (Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Rush, etc) > sought religious freedom for all. Religion (and a-religion) in United > States at the time of the founding was a complex patch work. Can't > paint it so easily with a single broad brush. > > Judah > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Larry C. Lyons <larrycly...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I thought that they sought religious freedom for themselves, so they >> could joyfully suppress others. E.g., the puritans in new england or >> the catholics in Maryland really had a lot of fun suppressing any >> other christian or indian religion within their territorial bounds. >> >> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:56 PM, GMoney <gm0n3...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Eric Roberts < >>> ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> 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? >>>> >>> >>> Perhaps because this country was founded by people who risked their lives >>> seeking a nation that would provide them religious freedom....? Sure their >>> idea of religious freedom was a bit different, but the spirit has broadened >>> and endured and become a bedrock of Americanism. >>> >>> This means we do what we can, within the confines of what is reasonable, to >>> accommodate people's religious beliefs...no matter how ridiculous they seem. >>> >>> So really, there is no debate as to whether we should allow some religious >>> exemptions....we should....the question is, what constitutes "reasonable", >>> and when does it become truly criminal? >>> >>> For instance, passively murdering your child seems....criminal to me. >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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:345309 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
