Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Religion vs. The Law

First Amendment Religion

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 22 August 2003 - 10:08 PM

This thread is more of a hypothetical situation, then anything else.

We have Freedom of Religion, true. But, just how far does it extend?

For example: Say a group of Satanists want to worship and perform their rituals...Rituals which, for this example is Human sacrifice. Now, all the members of the cult are willing participants...even the person who is to be sacrificed.

Would that still be considered Murder? If so, wouldn't that violate the groups freedom of Religion?

Edited by Certifiably Cait, 02 September 2012 - 03:22 PM.

"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#2 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 22 August 2003 - 10:16 PM

Yes, it's murder. Any crime committed in religion's name is still a crime; one person's freedom of religion, like any other freedom, ends where other people's freedoms (like the freedom to live, in this case) begin. Healthy society can't exist without laws really meaning what they say, with some people held to them and not others. That's why criminal law can't make exceptions. Freedom of religion, like the freedom to drive a car, HAS TO function within the limits of legality.

#3 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 22 August 2003 - 10:17 PM

Of course it would be murder. Your rights end where other people's noses begin.
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#4 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 22 August 2003 - 10:18 PM

Yes it would. At least be at the very least be considered manslaughter.

Basically until a faith pushes itself off to another people it is allowed to do as it willuntil it breaks the laws.

Example the Snake handling faiths are required cooperate with local authorities about any accidents and may even in some cases have a person trained to administrate anti toxin.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#5 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 22 August 2003 - 10:25 PM

Hmmm. Perhaps the Satanic cult wasn't the best example to go with.


Here's another:

A family, whose religious beliefs don't include doctors, or medicine, have an extrememly sick child. Now, the Family believes that prayer alone will save their child, if their GOD so wills it. So, they refuse to allow doctors to examine, or help their child. The child dies...Are the parents guilty of Murder then?
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#6 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 22 August 2003 - 10:26 PM

^

No, just criminal negligence and child endangerment.
St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#7 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 22 August 2003 - 10:27 PM

Do parents have the right to murder their children? I think not. Our laws are designed to protect children, who can't protect themselves. In other words, we speak for the defenseless (children and animals) because they don't have the capacity to speak for themselves.

If you're an adult and you believe in life without doctors, more power to you. Go off in a corner and die. But let your child die? Not in this country. And that's because children can't make those choices.

Or to put it another way, if a bunch of people want to act like lemmings and jump off a cliff together, go for it. But don't take the kiddies with you, because if you survive, you'll be facing legal charges.  :crazy:

Edited by Rhea, 22 August 2003 - 10:28 PM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#8 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 22 August 2003 - 10:27 PM

Well that is the point the courts are working around. It is nearly a even split about both sides of such cases.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#9 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 22 August 2003 - 11:35 PM

Javert Rovinski, on Aug 22 2003, 11:26 PM, said:

^

No, just criminal negligence and child endangerment.
I agree with you, Rov. However, a Parent does have the right to raise their child as they see fit. Also, if their faith says the use of doctors and medicine is prohibited...Who are we to tell them they don't have the right to follow their faith?

Personally, I think any common sense thinking person who say "Frell it, I'm taking him to the hospital." I know I would.

But, not everyone would. Some would hold to their faith no matter what. And whose to say the Child wouldn't get well on his/her own?
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#10 Nikcara

Nikcara

    confused little imp

  • Islander
  • 3,500 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 12:27 AM

^ sometimes common sense can tell you a kid needs a doc.

And yes parents get to raise their kids how they see fit - but we still don't allow you to beat them with a baseball bat if you get really mad at them.  

If you could yell freedom of religion at everything criminal (and I find the example of refusing to give your kid the health care it needs child endangerment at the very least) then all of a sudden you would have a bunch of new religions coming up with things like 'my god says it's ok to steal from you' or whatever else nonsense.

Freedom of religion ends the second you start violating someone else's rights.
We have fourty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse  -- Rudyard Kipling

Develop compassion for your enemies, that is genuine compassion.  Limited compassion cannot produce this altruism.  -- H. H. the Dalai Lama

#11 Eclipse

Eclipse

    Preview Guy

  • Islander
  • 831 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 08:20 AM

I have a question:

If a Muslim terrorist was captured and put on trial in the US,
and the defense lawyer put the terrorist on the stand;
when the judge tells him to put his hand on the Bible, raise
his right hand and "Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth
and nothing but the truth, so help you God", would he:

1. be within his rights to lie
2. be able to escape a charge of purgery if he is caught lying

Would the judge have to obtain a copy of the Quran to take
the place of the bible and ask the terrorist to "Swear to tell
the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help
you Allah"?


:wacko:
Ashley Edward Miller said:
"Eclipse ...hmmmm .... for a minute, I thought you were someone important,
but, now I remember .... you're just that preview guy."

#12 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 08:44 AM

Please note

Not every vountry demands you lay a hand on a bible and swear to tellt he truth so help you god.

many countries, just require you to raise a hand and swear to tell the truth.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#13 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,147 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 10:34 AM

Quote

A family, whose religious beliefs don't include doctors, or medicine, have an extrememly sick child. Now, the Family believes that prayer alone will save their child, if their GOD so wills it. So, they refuse to allow doctors to examine, or help their child. The child dies...Are the parents guilty of Murder then?

JUst about the time I nwas born, there was a family here with a very sick daughter. Her father wouldn't allow a Doctor, the girl died, he was not prosecuted. It was still being talked about as I grew up. My family lost a daughter when I was 4 months, she was 24 months.

It affected my brother and sisters, to lose Joni when they were all so young, and to see the other family have a chance to save their daughter, and never try.


I don't recall the other kids in that family ever talking abvout going to a doctor. I do not know how they were treated after the one girl died. They seemed relitivly happy by the time I knew them.
Can't Touch This!!

#14 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 12:37 PM

Eclipse, the use of Bibles in swearing in witnesses is something I haven't seen in California....ever I think.  I believe it's still done in some courts but to me it's a flagrant violation of the establishment clause.

LOTS, the example you raise (the second one) is directly addressed in one of my favorite B5 eps ever, "Believers".

Lil
Posted Image

#15 Marlowe

Marlowe
  • Just Washed Ashore
  • 5 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 02:30 PM

Well, this will be a fun introduction to this board...

Hi - I'm new.

If someone is willing to be sacrificed as part of their religion - I think the law should stay out of it.  It is tantamount to suicide, which of course is also illegal (a bizarre law if there ever was one), but since I believe very strongly that people should be able to end their lives when and how they want to, I have to say that anyone participating in a religious ritual as a sacrifice should have the freedom to control their own death.


I'm not a nut (well, okay, that may be open to debate).  I have a friend who killed herself when she was 21, and she had been hospitalized a couple of times for trying suicide before - but I've never known anyone who had more of a right and a reason to end her life.  I wish she could have done it with the knowledge and support of her family and friends, instead of having to do it alone and afraid.

#16 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 02:40 PM

Welcome to the board Marlowe:)

I think that LOTS' example is a little different because it involves ritual killing as a part of religion.  I think there's a difference between taking ones' own life and taking another...

Lil
Posted Image

#17 HubcapDave

HubcapDave

    Bald is Beautiful!

  • Islander
  • 1,333 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 02:49 PM

Una Salus Lillius, on Aug 23 2003, 10:37 AM, said:

Eclipse, the use of Bibles in swearing in witnesses is something I haven't seen in California....ever I think.  I believe it's still done in some courts but to me it's a flagrant violation of the establishment clause.

LOTS, the example you raise (the second one) is directly addressed in one of my favorite B5 eps ever, "Believers".

Lil
Not that I've been in a California courtroom recently, but I believe they still do that. However, they also have other methods of swearing in people for atheists and other religions.

Since you have the option of choosing how you swear your oath to fit your particular beliefs, I don't think it necessarily violates the First Amendment.

Besides, the act of swearing an oath is to signify to the people in the court that the person testifying has vowed in the highest manner possible to that witness that they will tell the truth. It has nothing to do with government backing  a particular religion. But since most of the people in this country follow a Christian faith, it is the one you see used most often. I'll try and dig up some of the other forms of swearing in that courts use, they are pretty interesting from what I remember.

#18 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 03:03 PM

^

Well, I have been in many court rooms in the past ten years.  I've never seen a bible used.

I think I had one deposition officer say "so help you God" during a swearing in but mostly it's just "do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth"

I'm sure  there are exceptions and I can't really speak for outside of CA (except Connecticut where I've defended a few depos and not seen the bible used nor god mentioned during swearing in).

Lil
Posted Image

#19 HubcapDave

HubcapDave

    Bald is Beautiful!

  • Islander
  • 1,333 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 03:51 PM

Well, that would make sense. Easiest way of dealing with it I suppose.

Then again, we apparently do other things differently in our courts than other states. I know that in Ca, the judge is the one who reads the verdict from the jury, whereas anywhere else, it's usually the jury foreman (at least, that's how they usually show it on TV).

So, Lil, what brings you to be in so many courtrooms? Are you a lawyer? If so, I've got a lawyer joke for you! ;)

#20 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 03:54 PM

Yeah I'm a lawyer.

And do not get me started on how this stuff is portrayed on television.

:crazy:
Posted Image



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: First Amendment, Religion

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users