Freedom to Oppress: Religious Persecution Versus Religious Privilege
This student suggested that many people confuse “freedom” with “freedom to oppress,” and went on to explain the difference.
I hadn’t seen it phrased quite that way before, but I think he’s on to something.
end quote (my bold)
The above piece was published by Sheila Kennedy who is a Professor of Law and Public Policy at Indiana University Purdue University in Indianapolis
I think i would be likely to agree with her conclusion
Seem to me that a number of domineering type religious groups, such as the exclusive brethren group (for just one instance), have been issued with a form of privilege to then be able to have the right to decide how they might want to dominate and/or oppress certain people
The full-spectrum of this oppressive harm being caused (“the slippery slope”) unto certain people, by religious privilege. May range somewhere between (on a scale of harm caused) whether the Catholic women should now be allowed the right to become priests (a situation traditionally decided/ruled by menfolk), through to perhaps whether members of Exclusive Brethren should be allowed the right to keep company with any ex members of the Exclusive Brethren group
So there is a full spectrum of oppression that still runs throughout Christianity.People may not consider it harmful,until such time it so happen to cause themselves some sort of harm personally
And at present, Catholic women are still being denied the right to decide to become priests .While meanwhile (likewise) the exclusive brethren members are also still being denied the right to freely associate with ex members of the exclusive brethren
Same old form of oppression. But just on a different scale
So therefore if you happen to be born within Catholicism, then your degree of oppression might be experienced to a lessor-degree .If when being compared to degree of oppression being experienced by the other people whom happen to be born unto exclusive brethren parent
And so this will help to explain how our “freedom” (religious freedom) ,at the present time, will still only honestly ever amount to a kind of “negative form” of religious liberty
This sort of situation (oppression) was a situation pretty much guaranteed to be likely to happen. The odd’s were positively geared toward the likelihood, that there were indeed going to be certain groups of people whom would be forced to need to experience oppression
The odds were positively geared in the same way that physical harm could have been positively geared to be likely to cause certain people extreme harm as well too, had our road code been run in the same manner. Had we allowed everyone to have their own privileged to be able to decide (for themselves) what road-speed they (personally) feel is safe to drive their car at.
Both above situations, should be seen as being recipes that would/could both help to encourage instances disaster. Both these two scenario would help to invite possibility for disaster
Quote abishag Wed May 17, 2017 12:29 am
The bottom line of all this is that they should not be calling themselves Christians.
With all due respect to abishag .
Perhaps? its best to stop with this continually crying over spilled milk that was bound to end up spilled
When the odds were geared toward the likelihood that it would/might occur
It’s not like ex exclusive brethren group of people are the only group of people on this earth whom are oppressed and are thus way being forced to need to experience harm and suffering
Far from it. There are quite a number of groups of people all whom are caught-up within this aspect of harm (all experiencing this same situation (degree of religious oppression), even if it be to differing “degree’s” of harm)
The bottom line of all this is that they should not be calling themselves Christians
No no no , please wake up abishag. The real “honest” bottom line is this. that this same problem might also need to apply to quite a number of other groups too (all of them claiming to be Christian)that are all able to be existing under the very same Christian
banner disguise (“slippery slope”)
No good should be expected to come from continually crying over spilled milk. Especially if people had also decided to just continually rely on the using the same old faulty milk jug time and time again (even though its already proved itself to be faulty)
So .Likewise perhaps? one shouldn’t bother to cry over being oppressed. While the ability for religious oppression has also been continually sanction by so many “faithful believers” (and by too many due to their own ignorance)
The situation is faulty . Religious liberty only exist in the negative sense. And so as such the happiness of your own life (abishag) as well as so many other people all around the globe too (including myself), has pretty much been left-up to the random outcome from our fate of birth.
Carelessness of the most highest degree (Human earthly life wagered away on an eternity that quite likely doesn’t even exist)
Your life, was left-up to outcome of luck of the draw . Your life was whittled away by people whom have continually remained fully content to decide to freely allow the right of someone-else to have the freedom to be able to become powerful enough so as to then also be able to demand to be able to gamble with it
This is reality of the situation abishag
These are the people you might be best to ask to change their mind (it might? tend to make far more sense than the way you can be seen to be continually “bitching and bleating” at brain dead cult members )After all , brain dead cult members “generally” are not so well-known for an ability of changing their mind. Are they?
And by the way . Perhaps? we should also expect that we might happen to be (born among some of those people) forced to reap of that whats been allowed to be sown abishag .You and i ,”we” are not anyone who’s extra-special. And so as such somebody was bound to be unlucky enough right?. Had to be somebody (so might just as well be “you or me” then? . Forced to experience the outcome of stupid laws)
And yet perhaps? if we were not born among those whom would be forced to experience this kind of suffering . Then we might? instead then be counted among those “other folk” Folk (lucky enough not to be born into cults and/or highly abusive/oppressive religious groups) whom don’t suffer, and thus also don’t seem to even bat a eyelid or care (millions of “so called” Christian folk worldwide)
Many people don’t even care about this situation (many wouldn’t even give it any thought or consideration,As it just doesn’t happen to effect their own lives.Many people including so many so called “good-Christian” folk as well too) unless they are unlucky enough to be forced to experience it personally
This is how totally unchristian? this whole ugly sad horrid situation is
There is a full spectrum of christian folk. While some christian are cult like, a number of other Christian groups are far less so
And the ones that are less cult like, might then also be likely to be those people whom will also remain less concerned about this cult situation too
The people whom can find a way to live with indifference , are also the people whom actively help to harbor these abuses too
What? would Jesus do abishag .
Was? Jesus able to show a lack of concern (indifference) toward the suffering experience by the man troubled by robbers (Good Samaritan story)
Would Jesus stand by and do nothing while other people were being forced to need to exist with cult abuse (like so many whom claim to be christian are happily choosing to do)
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. Edmund Burke