Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Alter2Ego, Nov 23, 2019.
Of course it does, other nations laws dont apply here
The freedom of belief and religion includes the freedom not to have a religion or belief system. Thus making such a requirement as MD did was a violation of the mentioned amendments.
Which only further support my assertion that for the purposes of law, atheism is to be treated as a religion, even though it is not a religion.
The supreme also ruled that slavery was legal and blacks were less than human.
Are you suggesting that this court is never in error?
"It has occasionally been argued that in Torcaso v. Watkins the Supreme Court "found" secular humanism to be a religion. This assertion is based on a reference, by Justice Black in footnote number 11 of the Court's finding, to court cases where organized groups of self-identified humanists, or ethicists, meeting on a regular basis to share and celebrate their beliefs, have been granted religious-based tax exemptions." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torcaso_v._Watkins
A specific philosophy is not the same as a lack of belief in an unproven idea.
Where--within this thread--did I say the U.S. Supreme Court is infallible? But does not mean they don't get it right from time? Hardly. A case in point is the Brown v. Board of Education lawsuit in which a later generation of Supreme Court Justices, in 1954, ruled against America's legal apartheid in public schools. https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/brown-v-board-of-education-of-topeka
For Your Information: The two atheist lawsuits that I cited in my opening post concern individuals who happened to be atheist and who used the religious rights argument. The U.S. Supreme Court simply affirmed that, based upon the arguments presented by the lawyers for these particular atheists, and based upon the definition of religion, as well as the behavior of the average religious person, Atheism is therefore RELIGION.
Let me know when you are ready, and I will quote a few of the arguments and direct you to some of the behaviors demonstrated by the individuals in the two lawsuits, as cited in my OP.
You are missing the point. Torcaso, the atheist, argued that his "freedom of belief and religion guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment" was being infringed upon. A person does not argue for "freedom of religion" unless he or she is in a religion. That's the point you seem to be missing.
And the Canadian supreme just rled that it is not a religion. So believe what you want, the actual truth is out there, you jmu
They do when their rights are being infringed upon by a stacked deck.
Of course atheism is a religious belief in the same way that theism is a religious belief. what is remarkable is that a court recognized an obvious.
And you are espousing a belief that a court could never be wrong. Justification of an error, pure and simple.
So the wording "freedom of religion" rather than freedom from religion proves atheism is a religion? That's it?
What is your definition of a religion?
Theism isn't a religion. It is what various religions are based upon; the belief in one or more deities.
Which excludes atheists from that group,
Atheism is no less a theistic belief.
Not arguing that point. However, the freedom of anything include the freedom to not engage in that. Freedom of religion includes the right to choose no religion. Thus, for the purposes of law, and protecting the right to be an atheist, atheism needs to be treated legally as a religion. That does not make it an actual religion, just how it needs to be handled for protection of rights.
Where did one come up with the nonsense the Supreme court ruled slavery was legal?
Okay, so what IS your belief, then?
... and that belief in one or more deities IS a religious belief. Theism IS a religion.
A religion is best defined as "an initial circular argument with other arguments stemming from it".
'Belief in the existence of one of more deities' is a prime example of such an "initial circular argument". 'Belief in the non-existence of one or more deities' is another such example.
Like not playing baseball is a sport...
... that you're willing to express, anyway...
I'm willing to express any belief, but I have none. There is no god, no intelligent designer, no supernatural beings, no father christmas. Just people who should do good in the world.
atheism of course is not a religion, by definition. Atheism means the lack of belief in a god or gods. Atheism is not a religion, the same way not playing baseball isn't a sport.
it is by definition not a theistic belief. It is specifically the lack of belief in a god or gods.
Separate names with a comma.