Religion clashes with Laws

[savandicus]

Surely if she believes that a man being allowed to beat his wife is fine by islam and she thinks its not (Its freaking sick to beat your wife) then she disagrees with her religion and therefore it isnt her religion so she isnt a muslim

although i agree wife beaters are vile, i think that just because she doesnt agree with wife beating doesnt make her a non-muslim. especially in the muslim religion, where their holy book, whose name escapes me, is up for so much different interpretation. and you dont have to literally follow every part of a faith to be a member. i mean most christians dont believe in evolution these days, but they are still christian

My fault for not being clear there but when i said so she isnt a muslim i meant that wife beating isnt part of her religious believes and therefore you cant claim that she should just deal with it like the lawer in the OPs post.

 

[DisturbiaWolf13]

It horrifying to me how religion, all religion, not just Islam, seems to get a free ride away from critism, because it's faith based.

The shit that has children being forced to marry adult men? That's wrong, I don't care what your religion says.

Those horrifying exorcism camps that Christian groups here in Australia run? So, so wrong, I can't even begin to talk about it?

Entrenched violence against women and children? Wrong.

The exclusion, exorcism or even killing of homosexuals? I'll let you guess how I feel about that.

And of course, female genital mutilation, which is one of the most despicable acts of violence against women, all in the name of culture, tradition and religion.

People should be free to practise any religion they choose. As soon as it starts physically harming people, that's when the law should step in.

This is how I feel about this, paticularly the last point. I've never heard about the exorcism camps in Australia though.

I believe in the separation of church and state mainly because religious law are seen as the word of God(s), therefore being less subject too change. Considering many of these laws were upheld as long ago as 1000 years ago, they just won't fit in to to societies of today. It also doesn't help that Abrhamic religions don't have history of getting along with people with ideas that differ from theirs.

err i think youl find that all religions have histories of intolerance to the ideas and beliefs of others.

 

[ix_tab]

All genital mutilation is wrong, regardless of the gender of the person it's done on.

With that said, it's not the RELIGIONS that are necessarily the worst part. It's the people who take these faith based beliefs (You know, beliefs without a shred of evidence or verifiable fact behind them) and try to force them on the community at large. EVERYONE should answer to the same courts, or it's not justice.

Whilst I totally agree that circumsion is unnessecary, and wrong, the penis is still able to operate without pain to it's owner, though there may be a little loss of sensation.

I am actually unable to write down what happens to women because I will start crying if I do. There's plenty of info about it though, on the net.

 

[Arrers]

This is how I feel about this, paticularly the last point. I've never heard about the exorcism camps in Australia though.

I believe in the separation of church and state mainly because religious law are seen as the word of God(s), therefore being less subject too change. Considering many of these laws were upheld as long ago as 1000 years ago, they just won't fit in to to societies of today. It also doesn't help that Abrhamic religions don't have history of getting along with people with ideas that differ from theirs.

Christ. that's worst thing I've heard all week.

They are run by the Hillsong churches, the Mercy Ministeries. They take young women with histories of mental illness and self harm, seperate them from their families, take their funding away, and tell them that it's demons making them feel that way. And then they exorcise them. And if they don't improve, they get told that they are the ones at fault, and that if they don't open up to the repeated exorcisms and so forth, that they won't be allowed back into the community at large.

 

[Undead Dragon King]

She should be lucky to still be alive. Sharia Law also says that it's all right for a husband to behead his wife for trying to divorce him. It's called "honor killing". It happened here in the U.S. a few months ago.

Every religion has its faults, but Islam is just crazy sometimes!

 

[Arrers]

It horrifying to me how religion, all religion, not just Islam, seems to get a free ride away from critism, because it's faith based.

The shit that has children being forced to marry adult men? That's wrong, I don't care what your religion says.

Those horrifying exorcism camps that Christian groups here in Australia run? So, so wrong, I can't even begin to talk about it?

Entrenched violence against women and children? Wrong.

The exclusion, exorcism or even killing of homosexuals? I'll let you guess how I feel about that.

And of course, female genital mutilation, which is one of the most despicable acts of violence against women, all in the name of culture, tradition and religion.

People should be free to practise any religion they choose. As soon as it starts physically harming people, that's when the law should step in.

This is how I feel about this, paticularly the last point. I've never heard about the exorcism camps in Australia though.

I believe in the separation of church and state mainly because religious law are seen as the word of God(s), therefore being less subject too change. Considering many of these laws were upheld as long ago as 1000 years ago, they just won't fit in to to societies of today. It also doesn't help that Abrhamic religions don't have history of getting along with people with ideas that differ from theirs.

err i think youl find that all religions have histories of intolerance to the ideas and beliefs of others.

True, but I've heard about a lot more from those three than all other religions. And it's closer to the topic.

 

[DisturbiaWolf13]

Oh that's well informed.
Nevermind that it could, just perhaps, be PEOPLE who are the cause of all the evil in the world, right? Naah, it's totally religion.

He may have gone a little too far, but religion is provably the number one source of delusion in our species. Since few people know the definition anymore... Delusion (noun) Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact.

And a planet full of delusional people isn't healthy.

couldnt agree more.

 

[Chibz]

Whilst I totally agree that circumsion is unnessecary, and wrong, the penis is still able to operate without pain to it's owner, though there may be a little loss of sensation.

I am actually unable to write down what happens to women because I will start crying if I do. There's plenty of info about it though, on the net.

I know what you mean, but I refuse to differentiate between the monstrous, and the slightly less monstrous. Doing so in cases like this, makes us tolerate one when we should tolerate neither.

 

[CosmicGrenade]

Exactly. normally lawyers JUMP aty the chance to screw religion over. Strange lawyer her client went to in the first place.

Personally I'd quite like to ban religion from the judicial system all together, keep it as cold hard logic.

well that would be a problem in england and the us (and maybe other places) what do people swear on in a court?

 

[ix_tab]

Whilst I totally agree that circumsion is unnessecary, and wrong, the penis is still able to operate without pain to it's owner, though there may be a little loss of sensation.

I am actually unable to write down what happens to women because I will start crying if I do. There's plenty of info about it though, on the net.

I know what you mean, but I refuse to differentiate between the monstrous, and the slightly less monstrous. Doing so in cases like this, makes us tolerate one when we should tolerate neither.

No, that's a really good point, and you are totally right.

Just because one has less side effects doesn't make it any more acceptable.

 

[Undeed]

well religion shouldn't come into it since there's a seperation between church and state. The case should just go by law and nothing else

Actually, the separation is inferred from a passage in the constitution that states the government will pass no law creating or supporting any religion (This is very paraphrased and based off memory, I suggest you look it up and make sure). People have taken it way out of proportion recently, going so far as to contest the "In God we trust" on our currency.

That being said, the law should trump relligious obligations. To wit: Suicide cults, polygamy, slavery, any number of other things are supported or even encouraged by some religious document or other. This doesn't mean they are right, which should be fairly obvious even to a casual observer.

 

[Chibz]

The fact is, in the US people don't even know what the bit of the constitution in regards to religion even says. Here, let me quote it for you.

[C]ongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Seems rather cut and dry to me. He broke the law by abusing his spouse. There's no question about it.

 

[Knonsense]

First off, unless the Koran **requires** husbands to beat their wives, there's absolutely nothing here. Most Christians are allowed to drink, but the prohibition happened, and nobody said it was a religious issue (EDIT: ok, in retrospect, probably a bad example because something probably did go down with catholics and some of their rituals). Just because Muslims are allowed to do something in their faith, though not specifically encouraged or required to, does not mean that we have to sanction it.

Also, ignorance of the law is nothing in the law. You need to know the law, or else ignorance of the law could become a benefit.

"Oh, but I didn't know murder was wrong."
"Ok you're free to go. You just have to put a little check mark next to murder on this list to indicate that you know it's illegal and you won't do it again."

This is ludicrous.

 

[Baby Tea]

Whilst I totally agree that circumsion is unnessecary, and wrong, the penis is still able to operate without pain to it's owner, though there may be a little loss of sensation.

I am actually unable to write down what happens to women because I will start crying if I do. There's plenty of info about it though, on the net.

I'm completely against the genital mutilation of women, but male circumcision isn't even remotely the same thing and I cannot see why it would be labeled as 'wrong'. Recent studies have actually shown the health benefits of a circumcised penis. Unnecessary? Maybe if you aren't Jewish. But I certainly wouldn't call it wrong.
I suppose that could just be a difference of opinion, however.

 

[Agayek]

Actually, the separation is inferred from a passage in the constitution that states the government will pass no law creating or supporting any religion (This is very paraphrased and based off memory, I suggest you look it up and make sure). People have taken it way out of proportion recently, going so far as to contest the "In God we trust" on our currency.

That being said, the law should trump relligious obligations. To wit: Suicide cults, polygamy, slavery, any number of other things are supported or even encouraged by some religious document or other. This doesn't mean they are right, which should be fairly obvious even to a casual observer.

While I agree on the rest of it, why is polygamy such a bad thing? Why do you have the right to say that's bad? It doesn't hurt anyone. If one party isn't willing, it falls under the category of slavery/forced marriage, which should be banned regardless.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

anyone, no matter who, should be under the law of the country, not any religion.
religion sometimes blocks the law, so it should be forced under the law to keep everyone in the same boat.
you don't have 1 set of rules for some people, and other rules for others. (unfortunately britain does.)

 

[Nmil-ek]

Actually, the separation is inferred from a passage in the constitution that states the government will pass no law creating or supporting any religion (This is very paraphrased and based off memory, I suggest you look it up and make sure). People have taken it way out of proportion recently, going so far as to contest the "In God we trust" on our currency.

That being said, the law should trump relligious obligations. To wit: Suicide cults, polygamy, slavery, any number of other things are supported or even encouraged by some religious document or other. This doesn't mean they are right, which should be fairly obvious even to a casual observer.

While I agree on the rest of it, why is polygamy such a bad thing? Why do you have the right to say that's bad? It doesn't hurt anyone. If one party isn't willing, it falls under the category of slavery/forced marriage, which should be banned regardless.

Multiple benefits, a poligamist could have 4 unemployed wives and children milking the government while none of them lifts a finger.

 

[EgoDeusEst]

I live in Denmark. It's illegal to wear masks that cover your face, but noone does anything about Islamic burkas that cover your entire body.

I don't get it.

I doubt the Quran has a passage that states wifebeating is acceptable.

It's like how Satan reads the Bible. Interpret the old books like you feel like and it's bound to give you a few bonuses.

 

[caster272]

Law and religion are both meant to create order. Order is to allow the weak to live without fear of the strong. Unfortunately this doesn't work out that well. Once people interpret things from a certain point of view they start to find ways to feel entitled to things they shouldn't. A possibility is for religion to not simply preach what is right and wrong but encourage people to consider what right and wrong are, at the very least they will start to think hopefully for themselves.

And personally I think religion is meant to be an individual experience. Something you come to understand and come to terms with through mediation and self reflection. This can't be accomplished through a church.

 

[LeonLethality]

I believe law comes first laws keep order (DO NOT SAY THEY DON'T I WILL COME UP WITH MILLIONS OF EXAMPLES PROVING YOU WRONG) and if laws didn't come first, people would still be snackrificed to divine dieties, since now murder is illigal we cant do that, this is why I think the world might be better off without silly religions, but whatever, I cant change it so I ignore them and when religions come into play like this its a little infuriating, society built laws, simple faith shouldn't drag it down.
theres my rant.