• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Let's finally hash it out -- what religious liberties are Americans lacking?

anotherneil

Well-Known Member
Do Priests, Monks, or Nuns get married?
Generally, no, but I don't think there's any reason widows and widowers wouldn't be allowed to become priests, monks, or nuns in the RC church.

My understanding is that an RC church priest can get married, but they'd have to leave the clergy, and are still considered to be priests. I guess RC church monks and nuns can do the same - leave the clergy to get married.

Originally, priests in the RC church were allowed to get married; the church rule banning clergy from marrying was something that came along several centuries later.

I'm not a practicing Roman Catholic; I'm a non-religious individual, so I don't know how to resolve this apparent conflict that you bring up, and I have no interest in trying to explain or defend or resolve it. I'm only interested in things from the perspective of US Constitutional rights and laws pertaining to religion. I'm only interested in the these sort of basic tests for laws:

1. Does it infringe on the first clause of the 1st Amendment (i.e. separation of church and state)?
2. Does it infringe on the second clause of the 1st Amendment (free exercise of religion)?
3. Does it infringe on any other Constitutional right?

If the answer is yes to any of these questions, then the law is unconstitutional, which means the government must stop imposing or "enforcing" it on society.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Plus plenty of social media platforms, for example, add layers of regulation themselves, which I think is fine.
People live stream murder on Facebook, the mods are prone to developing PTSD from seeing tue brutality amd heinous violence people post, they allow the misinformation that led to bomb threats in Springfield, they aren't regulated.
think what you want. I think that if you suppress speech, then people just get worse in private.
As far as we can see this garbage being spreading unhindered is far worse, especially with social media.
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
People live stream murder on Facebook, the mods are prone to developing PTSD from seeing tue brutality amd heinous violence people post, they allow the misinformation that led to bomb threats in Springfield, they aren't regulated.

As far as we can see this garbage being spreading unhindered is far worse, especially with social media.
That's really unfortunate if that happens

But as far as free speech goes, and to try to tie it back to the thread topic, various religious liberties, some of which probably inevitably influence the greater culture.. I just think it does come back to the individual's will to be polite. Without anyone exactly compelling them to be , they should just do it. They shouldn't use ad hominems or start saying things they shouldn't, they should be taught not to , they shouldn't have to be told not to. This is a controversial take, but I think that if you have tell someone not to do something, that's failure of one of the social sciences
 
Top