Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
So we agree that rights are limited, there's a good start! To me religious rights have to be at the absolute bottom of the hierarchy. Why? Because no other rights should be violated just because "God says it's okay". Other rights are based on logic.
But to deny that rights need to be limited is what is truly assinine. And frankly, quite shocking for someone who aspires or has aspired to public office.I'm gonna support you here. That article read to me like a lot of speculation.
|
It's not a hierarchy. IF there's a conflict where your rights and mine cannot possibly co-exist, then there has to be a compromise that causes the least egregious abrogation of rights. In cases like you've described, where it's "right to life" vs. "my right to kill you based on religion," then that's a pretty easy case. But why should freedom of religion be subordinate to, e.g., your conclusion that we must teach every child that homosexuality is normal and wonderful? Which of *your* rights does it violate for me to teach *my* children this belief? You won't be able to name one...you don't have a right "not to be offended" by someone else's beliefs; you don't have a right to "prevent societal stupidity." But it's pretty obvious which of my rights you're willing to dismiss.
Oddly enough, in the "life" vs. "religion" rights debate, there's one hot-button issue where the very religious people are on the side of life -- the abortion debate. And in this case, pro-choicers are quick to say that a woman's right to govern her own body trumps both the religious "morals" argument AND the unborn person's right to life itself. So, in this conflict it's not only religion that comes out on the bottom, but life itself. In this conflict, the hierarchy you think exists is suddenly re-defined to be most convenient to solve the conflict in the way people want it to be solved.
To be clear, I'm the most non-religious person you could ever meet, and I think that most religious beliefs are silly. I also think abortion should be legal, to a point, but I'd never be able to do that to one of my own. That said, I accept that people have the right to beliefs I disagree with. It's just that their rights end at the tip of my nose. This is the heart of the libertarian philosophy, and it's why I'm voting for WR.
No, I'm not a party member.