Religious Freedom

I find it quite convoluted that Progressive and Liberal politicians and reporters are fighting against a law that restricts the government from infringing on personal civil rights. Seems upside down to their stated beliefs.

"We Who Believe in Freedom Cannot Rest"

“We Who Believe in Freedom Cannot Rest” by Tony Fischer, on Flickr

If you have been listening to the news, you would think that Indiana’s law is a frontal attack on LGBT. Ridiculous. But, the uninformed seem to be so gullible the media and politicians get away with any perversion of facts. 

If you want to make your own decisions based on facts, get the side not presented by the media and propaganda sites. See: Your Questions On Indiana’s Religious Freedom Bill, Answered.

Did you know President Obama, when a Senator, helped Illinois get its very similar Religious Freedom law? Whether you find that a negative or positive, did your site opposing Religious Freedom give you this bit of information?

4 thoughts on “Religious Freedom

  1. What completely confuses me about this drama (and several others recently) is the illusion that corporations can have religious beliefs. We extend certain limited legal characteristics of personhood to businesses, it seems to me faith, or for that matter intellect, goes beyond that line. People have faith, People have intellect, People are creative, a corporation is merely a means of organizing and capitalizing on the people within the corporation.

    • What is it you think a corporation is? America and most countries laws see a corporation is a way for a collection of people to do business. Corporations are people owned and operated. Thus corporations are treated as a person.

      How does one decided what a company will do? The idea of an organization can’t make decisions… So, restricting business is restricting what people can do. Removing rights from businesses is removing rights from people.

  2. “Corporations are people owned and operated” – exactly, but those owners and operators are usually vastly outnumbered by the employees who are the ones who are actually expected to act on the “corporate faith” decided at the top of the company regardless of their personal faith (which I am arguing is the only kind).

    • I think with ’employees who are the ones who are actually expected to act on the “corporate faith”‘ you presupposing a an idea not in evidence. What corporation imposes their philosophy on employees? GM doesn’t require workers be Christian, and so on.

      Many do require employees to abide by the laws of the country and state to remain employed… but, that isn’t what we are talking. Many require customers be treated respectfully, those that represent the company are often required to fit an image. But those are things handled by agreement between the company and employee.

      So, why is it OK to takes right and impose restrictions on people that are industrious enough to be at management and ownership levels?

      Since corporations are property, why is it OK to tell the owner of that property what they can do with it? Remember. Laws restricting business are about how it can treat or affect other entities; employees and customers, businesses, etc. Liberals and Progressives seem to be more and more fascist, telling businesses and people what they must do. Step by step they are taking away people’s freedom.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.