Religious Freedom Does Not Require Complete Secularization, Archbishop Tells UN

[Catholic_Press]

Geneva, Switzerland, Mar 24, 2010 / 04:33 am (CNA).- The leader of the Holy See’s delegation to the United Nations in Geneva has advocated a form of religious freedom that does not require “complete secularization” but sees religion as a “bridge” to human rights.

More…

 

[wisdomseeker]

it seems to me that this prelate is almost begging the secular leaders for the right to be religious. how sad that the CC has lost leadership in the world. what has happened to the CC?

Lord have mercy on us.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

He said: “Increasing instances of ridiculing religion, of lack of respect for religious personalities and symbols, of discrimination and killings of followers of minority religions, and a generalized negative consideration of religion in the public arena damage peaceful coexistence and hurt the feelings of considerable segments of the human family,” he explained."

which is not what has been criticized by civil libertarians in the US, but a promotion of religion by civil authorities.

 

[rlg94086]

which is not what has been criticized by civil libertarians in the US, but a promotion of religion by civil authorities.

Okay, Beau…whatever you say.

Meanwhile…you are in favor of a school (civil authority) banning the instrumental version of Ave Maria by a student (not a civil authority)… So much for freedom of religion.

I’m sure you feel better by trying to claim that you are only concerned with promotion of religion by civil authorities as you fight for “freedom from religion.”

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

Meanwhile…you are in favor of a school (civil authority) banning the instrumental version of Ave Maria by a student (not a civil authority)… So much for freedom of religion.

Actually, I never said if I favored it or not but I thought the decision was supportable. Since you are bringing in another thread, you are hijacking this one.

I’m sure you feel better by trying to claim that you are only concerned with promotion of religion by civil authorities as you fight for “freedom from religion.”

Let’s not personalize this, OK?

 

[rlg94086]

Actually, I never said if I favored it or not but I thought the decision was supportable. Since you are bringing in another thread, you are hijacking this one.

My apologizing for hijacking, but it is a fair point that you never directly favored it.
Beau Ouiville:

Let’s not personalize this, OK?

I don’t have a problem with personalizing issues. We are expressing our opinions, and I stand behind mine. I’m not clear why you always fear standing behind yours.

You posted that we should have “freedom from religion” in this country, so I am calling you on it. Freedom from religion is not the same as freedom of religion…in fact, that is the point of the Bishop’s comment.