• TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    anything it’s a protection for everyone and mainly the separation of state and church, you are allowed to do your religion but not in the government buildings

    You do realize that banning a religion is the state inserting itself into religion, right?

    The separation of church and state goes both ways. The church is not to influence the state and the state is not to influence the church. You are allowed to practice religious expression in a state building, but the state cannot demand that you do so, or regulate which religion you express.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s pedantic, it’s still the government involving itself in policing religious expression.

        You can’t use the excuse of separating church in state if you are utilizing the state to police the church.

        • kameecoding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          except the church is literally not policed, how does it affect the church if your governnent employees can’t wear crosses to work?

          get a fucking grip.

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You do know when the constitution mentions the church, they aren’t being literal… The “church” is the institution of religious beliefs, which is made up of people. You are policing people’s rights to freely express their beliefs.

            Are you harmed by someone wearing a cross when they work?

              • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That sounds like more of a personal problem than an actual depiction of a problem in reality.

                I’m an atheist/agnostic, someone believing in some fake metaphysical being doesn’t affect me at all. What does affect me is when those people try to force their beliefs on me, and you seem to be hellbent on paving the way for them to do so.

                • kameecoding@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  you are right I am personally paving the way, because what I say on this platform dictates policy, lmao

                  • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Lol, if you are now claiming your opinion holds no value or influence…why make a rebuttal in the first place?