Glamrocker Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Of course, absolutely with regard to both points. I've never suggested otherwise. A interesting observation to be digested and remembered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Erikson Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 What do you mean by "freedom of religion"? No-one ever mentions our freedom from religion. It's alright for a religious person to tell a homosexual he/she shouldn't exist, yet if a homosexual were to say religious people shouldn't exist there would be uproar. Yet one of them is genetic and the other just stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aleksandr Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 No-one ever mentions our freedom from religion. It's alright for a religious person to tell a homosexual he/she shouldn't exist, yet if a homosexual were to say religious people shouldn't exist there would be uproar. Yet one of them is genetic and the other just stupidity.Indeed. I feel that I have a right to freedom from religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balpin Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Of course, absolutely with regard to both points. I've never suggested otherwise. In the words of the song, There we have it gentlemen what more evidence do you need. Condemned from his own mouth I would say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Of course. That's how it works. For human rights to be meaningful they have to be applied to everyone. But they are not, so they are meaningless. The "rights" are only applicable in the european area, only apply to actions of the state not individuals and thus do not guarentee any of the rights suggested, they merely form a body of get out clauses for criminals seeking to escape punishment for their actions. A terrorist in the UK can drag out human rights appeals for a decade, a terrorist in afghanistan gets shot in the face. All under the same system. The convention is perfectly nice as an aspirational set of principles, in practice it has been a costly terrorists and criminals charter which needs fundamental reform or abolishment from law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 What do you mean by "freedom of religion"? It's pretty explanatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Indeed. I feel that I have a right to freedom from religion. Indeed you might, but other people might not think that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric_Collins Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Wrong. His injuries were caused by a landmine explosion. . unproven, Abu says land mine. Experts say from making home made explosives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 I don't really see some of the things that you're suggesting as being a "right" per se. Rights for me are food, shelter, freedom of expression and religion etc. All the incidental stuff just makes a mockery of the phrase human rights. I think the 'right to religion' bit is also incidental. It is covered by freedom of expression and shouldn't be singled out for special treatment. Tip toeing around religion is the major flaw with how Human Rights laws are interpreted and implemented. And is part of the reason it is taking so long to get rid of Hamza. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 I think the 'right to religion' bit is also incidental. It is covered by freedom of expression and shouldn't be singled out for special treatment. People have been persecuted because of who they worship, or which church they worship at, or whether they believe wine really does turn into Jesus's blood when it's swalled or not. I'd defend Freedom of Religion, and I'm atheist. People should be free to hold whatever beliefs they wish without others persecuting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.