Obama Moves away from 'Freedom of Religion'

[idea]

Obama Moves away from 'Freedom of Religion' toward 'Freedom of Worship

Obama Moves away from 'Freedom of Religion' toward 'Freedom of Worship'? - U.s. - Catholic Online

so, now everyone is saying "freedom of worship" instead of "freedom of religion"

hmmmm...

the idea being:
freedom of religion = wear/say/do what you want anywhere you want.

freedom of worship = you can do what you want inside your church, but not anywhere else.



what say ye?

another article:
http://www.mercatornet.com/sheila_liaugminas/view/7528/

Think of it this way: If you have “freedom of religion,” you can bring up your children in your faith, hold public processions, and print books. If you have only “freedom of worship” you can pray quietly in your home, as long as it remains out of public sight.
“Freedom of religion” means you can stand on a street corner and proselytize everything from Catholicism to Mormonism to the cult of the sun god Ra. “Freedom of worship” means you can be executed for public conversion away from Islam. Worship is part of religion, but it is one of the least public parts—and thus one of the least involved in actual freedom.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I think religion should be kept minimal in public, just because America is so diverse.

 

[Levite]

I think religion should be kept minimal in public, just because America is so diverse.

Very much agreed.

 

[T-Dawg]

Holy moley, is Obama actually doing something right? No, it can't be!

Although, judging by the name of the source, the information may unfortunately be overly hyped-up...

 

[Revoltingest]

I think religion should be kept minimal in public, just because America is so diverse.

If religion were to be "kept minimal in public", then we might no longer be so diverse.
I urge all you fundies to wear your colors in public, civilly, of course.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Revoltingist so you don't think Westboro Baptist Church is a good example of why religion needs to be kept personal in public?

 

[Badran]

If religion were to be "kept minimal in public", then we might no longer be so diverse.
I urge all you fundies to wear your colors in public, civilly, of course.

I completely agree. I can't see why the interest in limiting people's freedom to express themselves.

 

[Revoltingest]

Revoltingist so you don't think Westboro Baptist Church is a good example of why religion needs to be kept personal in public?

Their problem isn't their faith, but rather their cruelty & rancor.
Remember, I urged civility.

 

[Badran]

Revoltingist so you don't think Westboro Baptist Church is a good example of why religion needs to be kept personal in public?

I'm not sure what is the problem of those you're referring to, but the solution for whatever that is, is not to limit all people's right to freely express themselves.

 

[Sunstone]

This probably says more about Catholic Online than it does about Obama.

 

[Jollybear]

I think that is foolishness for someone to take away freedom of religion, IN PUBLIC TOO. We need to PRACTICE what we BELIEVE, for if we don't practice what we believe, then we do not TRULY BELIEVE it. Also practicing our religion in secret as well as in public is not FORCING our religion UPON others, BIG DIFFERENCE.

So it goes like this, I don't care what Obama says, I will STILL practice my religion and DO and STAND up for what I believe in whether he likes it or anybody else likes it or not.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Just another step to make us subjects of the government.

 

[Reverend Rick]

[youtube]zHd6m_cirrU[/youtube]
YouTube - Easy Rider on Freedom

 

[Mister Emu]

I don't like it... that is not to say I'm going to leap to the conclusion that Obama wants to limit religious freedom... but we do need to be watchful of encroachment on our Constitutionally protected right to freedom of religion, and shifting the terminology could lead to such.

 

[Jollybear]

If ever our freedom was taken away from us, who would still make a stand or a witness for what they believe in in public at the expanse of getting in trouble with the law? Who would STOP practicing there religion in public?

I think if this ever did happen, it would be a TEST of our courage and I don't think it would be right of us to fail that test.

 

[Sunstone]

I doubt anyone has anything to worry about. This change is probably meaningless or insignificant. Style more than substance.

 

[Twig pentagram]

Limiting freedom is never a good idea.

 

[Skwim]

Obama Moves away from 'Freedom of Religion' toward 'Freedom of Worship

Nice how you turned an interrogatory sentence into a declarative one. Next you'll be writing that everyone is saying "freedom of worship" instead of "freedom of religion" OOPS!! Guess you just did. So, just how did you come up with such a broad, all-inclusive conclusion?

the idea being:
freedom of religion = wear/say/do what you want anywhere you want.

freedom of worship = you can do what you want inside your church, but not anywhere else.

Really!! Care to explain how you arrived at these rather odd notions, because I saw nothing in the article that even hinted at them?

 

[Smoke]

freedom of religion = wear/say/do what you want anywhere you want.

Like getting married even if the Mormon Church doesn't approve?

 

[Smoke]

This probably says more about Catholic Online than it does about Obama.

Yes, it does.

Just another step to make us subjects of the government.

Definitely a totalitarian plot! What's worse, President Roosevelt and Norman Rockwell are in on it!