Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
I don't think you understand what an opinion is. There is a stark difference between something unprovable and an opinion. For instance, the big bang theory is unprovable to a degree due to fact that its impossible to observe anything before mass expansion. Uncertainity Principle is a scientific principle that states that it is impossible to know both a particles position and velocity simultatneously, because the act of observing influences it. A proven scientific fact of unknownable information, is that information an opinion? No. In the most simplistic view point belief or faith in religion can boil down to opinion, but even then your argument fails because speech and or opinion is a result of opinion or what a person believes. What your arguing for is the expression of Religion to be illegal, why? Because you're intollerant of it. Why are anti-religious belief systems fine, but not religious belief systems? How that any different from homophobia, or racism, or sexism, etc... Why hate something just because you don't believe in it? |
I fear you have missunderstood my post. Just because there would be no law specifically protecting freedom of religion doesn't mean there would be no freedom of religion. Anyone would be just as free to practice their religion as they see fit as they do now, as long as it doesn't violate any law. Just like two men can walk down hand in hand across the street, or dress up as a woman, or people who want to play ''violent'' videogames can do that because they choose to do so.
However what would dissappear are the privelliges of religious institutions and the some times larger amount of rights people can claim based on their beliefs. In the UK there where men who suit the government because they had multiple wifes and based on Sharia law all those wifes should get social benefits regardless if they share one household. Because of freedom of religion, they won. Anyone who doesn't share those beliefs, can't claim that right. Here the government tried to ban religious slaughter of animals because it was against the law, for many years this motion was dismissed because it might limit freedom of religion.
That's what i meant with religion losing it's special status in society. It would would be equal to everything else and people are free to practise those beliefs, but they wouldn't be able to claim any additional right based on those beliefs.
