Do religious freedom rights supersede other rights?

[IWantGod]

Hey everyone. I have a question. I was debating about the Equality Act on Facebook and I said that I object to it because it would impinge on religious freedom. Then, someone asked if my religious freedom rights supersede other people’s rights, supposedly the right to not be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. Anyway, I’m not sure how to respond to this. My gut instinct is that religious freedom rights are the most important rights we have and so they do supersede other rights but I’m not sure. If that is true, how can I say this without coming across as overly offensive?

Moral rights are the most important rights.

The legal system however has to deal with a plurality of different beliefs, and so unless we talking about a theocracy, what will likely happen is that laws will be made that are inclusive of all cultures rather than exclusive. Thus the system will tend to be more concerned with the enforcement of what is practically useful rather than enforcing what people believe to be morally true.

The real question is should catholic moral truth be the law of the land. At first glance it would seem correct to say yes, but on the other hand it is not morally correct to force people to observe religious truth beyond a pragmatic agreement.

For that reason i personally wouldn’t agree with the criminalization of homosexuality or different points of view on what human sexuality is, and not criminalizing these things will inevitably lead to things like gay marriage because the system has no legal justification for placing a religion over the beliefs of a minority. I think abortion is evil, but i don’t believe the legal system is in a position to enforce against it as it could potentially undermine other legitimate human rights.

In most cases the same rights that protects opposing views are the same rights that protect us.

The point is i honestly believe that there are some problems in society that either cannot be effectively dealt with by the rule of law or shouldn’t be regardless of their moral status.

Therefore i tend to consider evengilisation as the way forward, rather than the christianization of legal institutions.

 

[Kaninchen]

The real question is should catholic moral truth be the law of the land.

Evidence of the Papal States theocracy would suggest that there were distinct problems.

 

[francisca.chapter3]

I’m not sure whether you even understand what pseudoscience means.

We can manipulate animals behavior using various methods. Even the most simple methods work like wonder with those animals. We even able to teach mongkeys to mimic our behavior.

It takes more argument to prove whether a certain behavior is normal or not.

 

[niceatheist]

Really? So your definition of “natural” is what exactly?

 

[francisca.chapter3]

All we can say for now is that it seems that for a lot of trans people the treatment does alleviate the symptoms.

Most trans people dissapointed after gender reassignment surgery. Their “new organ” does not function as it should.

There are many testimonies in Youtube. One of them, his name is Diamond Dee. Please look it up and listen to her testimony.

It is immoral (a medical malpractice) to destroy a perfectly healthy & functional organ, and reshape it into one that no longer function normally.

 

[francisca.chapter3]

A normal sexual behavior is one of biology and psychologically harmonious in an individu

 

[Londoner]

Most trans people dissapointed after gender reassignment surgery.

This is not true. Most trans people are happy with their gender reassignment/affirmation.

Their “new organ” does not function as it should.

For male-to-females, this is not usually true. You would be correct in thinking that the outcome for female-to-male surgery can be less satisfactory.

Diamond Dee.

Hardly a typical example:

Dee became determined to get a sex change, in order to experience sex as a female lesbian (!)

He proceeded to lie successfully to the doctors about having Gender Dysphoria and he received complete gender reassignment surgeryand is now a transgender female. He is obviously not the typical transgender female, because he never really thought that he was “truly female inside” and the surgery was just a ruse to fuel his powerful sex addiction.

 

[LoveMercyGrace]

The First and Second Amendments are inclusive of our rights and since it was designed by the Founding Fathers of our country, I just kind of refer to this.
as for the other topic in this thread, there are many people who want us to think their choices are so important for everyone to focus on.
to put it n perspective, when “they” have lorded over everything it seems and now bring the issue, the teaching, into the classrooms of kindergartens …5 yrs old…to teach them tolerance ,and they have a “choice”…I have to say this is no longer about rights. it is about indoctrination.

 

[francisca.chapter3]

Diamod Dee’s surgery was from male-to-female reassignment. He said “it” didn’t work as it should. His perfectly working organ was replaced with an organ that does not function.

 

[francisca.chapter3]

I competely agree.

To teach gender theories to children at schools takes away their right to grow to become healthy persons with healthy mind body/ sexuality.

 

[AdamP88]

I’m late to this conversation but I don’t believe there is a right to be identified as whatever gender you choose. It’s nonsense.

 

[grotto]

Agree! And that applies to the conceived infant through birth continued!

 

[francisca.chapter3]

In most cases the same rights that protects opposing views are the same rights that protect us.

Exept in the case when it is about teaching medical & scientific truth.

Religious freedom is nothing but

1. a duty to respect others religious ideology/ personal believe, while at the same time
2. Insist on the right to preserve and practice own religious ideology/ personal believe

Supposedly I believe the world is flat. This is my personal believe that I acquire from day to day observation: how I experience it. When I walk my dog daily, I can only see that the world is nothing but one big flat place. Regardless science or what other people tell me, I can only see my own view of the world. This is my personal believe.

Am I allowed to teach this personal believe as scientific truth at schools? No

An THAT is the boundary religious freedom cannot/ shall not cross.

 

[francisca.chapter3]

what will likely happen is that laws will be made that are inclusive of all cultures rather than exclusive. Thus the system will tend to be more concerned with the enforcement of what is practically useful rather than enforcing what people believe to be morally true.

I agree. And the useful law is to protect health and science from non-scientific-personal-believe-system that go against it.

And on the above note, many catholics believe pope Benedict XVI wanted to comeback to the biblical teaching of human sexuality.

But now, even with the present pope, pope Francis who is about “nature”, we will walk through “nature” with him. And, lo and behold, we find the same God !