 Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher  Quote:
Originally Posted by OKgrannie (government collecting fees for Focus on the Family) Making religion one of those things on which a majority view is irrelevant allows the individual to assign to religion whatever level of importance he/she chooses. Apparently the individual is prevented from assigning their personal level of importance to other issues, such as gun availability or homosexual marriage. Especially in Massachussetts. | An individual can assign his/her personal level of importance to other issues, but that level of importance is not necessarily the same as the whole of society. The whole of society doesn't mess with the level of importance of religion, it is neither supported nor suppressed by society. Quote: Many countries have state religions but still permit complete freedom of religion.
Even Iraq has always allowed Christians to worship freely. Saddam's Foreign Minister, Tariq Aziz was a coptic Christian.
HM Queen Elizabeth is Head of state and Head of the Church of England yet complete freedom of religion has existed in Britain for centuries.
Infact there are several muslims in both Houses of Parlaiment.
How many muslims are there in the US Senate? | A state religion is supported by the state, meaning citizens pay taxes to support that religion. There is no freedom of conscience when you must pay to support a religion in which you may or may not believe. The so-called "complete freedom of religion" could disappear in an instant if the state is officially a "religion." Our constitution states that "no religious test for office" shall disqualify anyone from serving, so why would we even make note of what religion an elected official supports? The greatest danger to liberty lurks in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.
--Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis |