Is there a case for making Christianity illegal?

[dbohm]

Before the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, Christianity was in a precarious position. As it was not formally recognised as a religion, it was technically illegal to be a Christian in the Roman Empire. Sometimes Christians were tolerated and left alone, sometimes used as scapegoats, and other times actively persecuted. Judaism had a bumpy history too, however since it was considered an ethnic religion it was given legal status from the beginning.

Besides rumours about child sacrifice and orgies, it's chief danger lay in the fact that it recognised a more powerful Lord than Caesar. Many Romans believed their obstinacy in this matter especially deserved punishment and could have proven troublesome to the greater peace of Rome. As Pliny wrote himself in his letter to the Emperor Trajan, "Neque enim dubitabam, qualecumque asset, quod faterentur, pertinaciam certe et inflexible obstinationem debere puniri." 'For I was in no doubt that regardless of what they believed their inflexible obstinacy and pigheadedness definitely should be punished'. If it wasn't for that he regarded it simply as a base and excessive superstition - 'superstitio prava immodica'.

Even today we see Christianity in conflict with secular governments. In China for instance one of the reasons that makes an underground church illegal is teaching the Second Coming as it implies an authority more powerful than the Chinese Government. In most countries in the West, churches are exempt from equal opportunity legislation and also cannot be forced to administer Gay marriages. Also and this has become a particular problem in cases of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, priests are not obliged by law to relate crimes told in Confessional. Some recent psychologists and atheists have also argued that the concept of Hell amounts to child abuse.

Should Christianity be illegal again? Or at any rate should the State be given the power to decide what legally can or cannot be practised or believed in orthodox Christianity?

[Hamsaka]

[Replying to Hamsaka]
Quite clearly I've made a mockery of your claim on your top listed DC&R group. For the record it is ("was", soon, if you decide to cover your tracks) "Accepts correction". Well you don't, so I'll bow out before I get banned.
If it's against the rules to copy in what I posted earlier (no one will bother going back to my Post #34 where I have now proven myself an accurate prognosticator, here it is (or go back there if it gets removed):

[font=Comic Sans MS]For the record, I've already had "Honoring Dianaiad" as my only group for about a year now. Yes, right on here, exactly right! And I'm not Mormon.
I likewise warn all and sundry that bringing up this topic is "touching the 3rd rail" in ever-so-many discussion boards. Please, let's not get dragged into that here once again. That's not the topic.
That said, I do acknowledge that the case for criminalizing Christianity would be a logical extension of what Dianaiad alludes to. Gays sometimes demand that a photographer or caterer handle their wedding ("wedding?"--itself tendentious) or they will sue the businessperson. The case for making Christianity illegal would be some extension of this kind of social (or anti-social, same difference) activity that the majority or powers-that-be declare should be protected by banning anything that lessens tolerance of said activity. "We must ban Christian teaching against the homosexuals that we have declared sacrosanct." This might reach some compromise (we're already near to it) that Christian groups can be allowed that recognize homosexual rights even up to same-sex marriage and homosexual pastors. How far would this go? Would explicit repudiation by such "Christian" groups include denunciation of the OT and Paul in the NT for homophobic teachings?

Well, I said I second Diana's warning against touching this "third rail", but I have opened Pandora's Box. Can we nevertheless close it up and discuss only more broadly the objection of Atheists in general to Christians who teach against "sin" in the forms many Atheists (and Christians, and Jews, and Moslems etc.) engage in, pick your poison maybe and be specific about one example, like extra-marital sex?


[/font]

I decline your suggestion to stay off the 'third rail'. Because it is so . . . 'live', that indicates a seriousness to the issue that debate and discussion can address. If a moderator feels this discussion is inappropriate, I'll accept their direction. We've managed to stay on topic thanks to you, as you've brought in the idea of LGBT rising up and attempting to make Christianity illegal in some future paranoid fantasy.

For the second time: Please tell me what 'correction' you have given me, in plain speech. Be blunt and straightforward about exactly what correction you have supplied. I am not clear yet. You mention that I have been corrected but do not mention WHAT specifically was corrected.

As for post #34, which I did miss initially; none of that is happening. None. At this point you are speculating and fantasizing (and darkly).

Is it reasonable to center a discussion upon things that have not happened?

Are there historical precedents to add weight to your speculations about making Christianity illegal via the machinations of my 'buddies' (missed that post too!) in the LGBT are fomenting? Aside from the history of the Crusades, that is.

[Goat]

[Replying to post 54 by Hamsaka]
I suppose you are correct, for the moment (just until the next queer judge rules against Christians), all they have to do is pay the money or move out of the state or the country. Nothing like forced.

Can you show ONE case where a church was forced to 'pay the money or move out of state'? Can you show one case where a church was forced to perform a wedding it didn't want to (and that includes any case, it being between divorced couples, interracial, blacks in a predominately white church etc etc etc.

[Hamsaka]

[Replying to post 54 by Hamsaka]
I suppose you are correct, for the moment (just until the next queer judge rules against Christians), all they have to do is pay the money or move out of the state or the country. Nothing like forced.

Can you show ONE case where a church was forced to 'pay the money or move out of state'? Can you show one case where a church was forced to perform a wedding it didn't want to (and that includes any case, it being between divorced couples, interracial, blacks in a predominately white church etc etc etc.

Earlier when I was going back and forth with Diana I realized we were 'battling' personal opinions, so I spent some time doing various searches to find out what she and other's of similar persuasion are talking about. Like I said earlier, I found a lot of Christian news sites/magazine/blogs/opinion pieces with provocative titles such as "Christians Brace for Same Sex Marriage Ruling" as if this ruling would automatically result in gays, lesbians and queers banging down the church doors to force hapless pastors to 'marry' them. Or that any Christian with a business was going to be sued if they conscientiously objected to 'participate' in activities against their beliefs.

ETA: A Christian with a public business can (and should) be held responsible for discrimination against any group regardless of the business owner's beliefs. If it is that touchy with the business owners, they can get a private business license and legally discriminate that way.

If I was a Christian, I would be all worked up by that stuff.

I didn't stop there in my searching, and found two incidences in total where Christian individuals, who own businesses, were sued for discrimination. They were both businesses with public license who cannot legally discriminate (that includes the wedding chapel in Idaho). The other was a wedding photography business owned by Christians who declined to photograph a gay wedding.

NO churches have been forced to marry gays or lesbians in the US. I guess there was a church in Denmark that got sued, though. The UK had some foment about this same issue, and was issued by their government a statement that churches would NOT be 'forced' to marry gays and lesbians.

It's a tempest in a pot of tea, and a grand manipulation of the political right, as usual.

That is why we've yet to receive a link to a genuine legal battle to force a religious entity against their beliefs to perform gay weddings. It has not happened. What has happened is Christians have been manipulated and whipped into fear by politicians pretending to share their religious beliefs in exchange for their voting base.

[otseng]

"Accepts Correction" is listed as your first group. Let's see if you honestly mean that.

You're the kind of PC tyrant...

You so completely misunderstand me in your bias (bigotry?) against me that you think I spoke about expecting queer judges to extort money from people to avoid getting deported? If you can't accept correction about that you're both...well I can't go on without getting banned.

Moderator Final Warning

Please do not make any comments of a personal nature.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator final warnings serve as the last strike towards users. Additional violations will result in a probation vote. Further infractions will lead to banishment. Any challenges or replies to moderator warnings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.