TED Conversations

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

What are the best and worst laws and practices of your region/state/country

Answer as many as you'd like.

Topics: law
+4
Share:

Closing Statement from Jimmy Strobl

Many great thoughts in this conversation, I wish that they still had open-ended Conversations...

I had fun, learned much!

Anyway, It's "impossible" to summarize it, sorry about that.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Sep 21 2012: The worst practice in the US of A: Allowing religious charlatans to spew hatred and lies on a daily basis on TV, in print, and during religious ceremonies, and then allowing these practices to continue under the guise of "religious tolerance".

    We have active public figures ON VIDEO (and who knows how many times not on video) lament how people of other beliefs, non-believers (I guess they're different from "other religions"), gays, women, rape victims, etc. etc. should be physically or spiritually "damned, tortured, or cast out". This kind of nonsense needs to stop. If someone made a direct verbal assault against another person and made public threats, they would be arrested and prosecuted under terrorism laws. But if they do this same thing from an imaginary altar or while holding some kind of religious token in their fist, it's called "religious expression" or "religious freedom".

    As Sam Harris once stated - "Religious tolerance" is a misnomer. Religious people, by definition, don't practice it but demand it at every turn from everyone around them. It should be called "intolerance".

    Between THAT, and our politicians wanting to hug these people all the time. Don't know which practice is worse. The complete and utter suspension of common sense every time the word "religion" is invoked, or how our leaders drape themselves in it. Shameful, the whole lot of it.
    • thumb
      Sep 22 2012: I'm so glad that I don't live over there. Luckily I live in a very atheistic country and the church and state officially separated in the year 2000.
      And it looks like the last and only christian party isn't going to get in to parliament next election.

      I agree with everything you say and feel bad for you that you and many others have to suffer through this idiocracy.
      • thumb
        Sep 25 2012: Interesting perspective. I'm a non-believer when it is framed in the context of organized religion; however, I consider myself spiritual. My question to you: is there a sense of spirituality over there along with the atheistic culture? Or is there at least a sense of awe and wonderment regarding our life/universe inherent within your atheistic community/culture? I think it helps one to be less judgmental in one's life to have a spiritual foundation.
    • thumb
      Sep 22 2012: Harro,
      I agree with much of what you write. I am all for acceptance of religions, religious beliefs and practices IF THEY DO NOT ADVERSLY IMPACT OTHER PEOPLE. I believe that we have tolerated practices that are NOT in any way beneficial to the whole of humanity. Abuse, and violation of human rights, which has been practiced under the guise of religions should NOT be tolerated in our global community. So perhaps we need to seperate our understanding of peaceful religious practices from abuse and violation of other's human rights?

      I totally agree with you that "INtolerance" seems to be generated from WITHIN religious groups. When people encourage religious tolerance, I say "show me". Show me that those practicing a religion can be tolerant of others and not abuse and violate the rights of others. Let's all walk the talk! It feels very hypocritical to me, when we hear religious extremists/fundamentalists speaking about how loving they are, as they are chastising and/or abusing those who do not accept their beliefs.
      • Sep 22 2012: "forgive US, for WE don't know what WE are doing"
        • thumb
          Sep 25 2012: Dear Sergio,
          You don't know what you are doing? You are a human being? You make choices?
      • Sep 24 2012: Arguably, when it comes to religious positions, even relatively benign issues will almost invariable end up "IMPACTING" others. Take reproductive rights and how the US has just spent the last 10 years spinning its wheels idly when it came to developing gene therapies. All thanks to the Catholic right which equates stem cell research to murder. The calling of condoms as being a "sin", for example: 5 Million deaths in Africa every year attributed to Aids. How many could have been avoided with a cheap piece of rubber?
        • thumb
          Sep 25 2012: I agree Harro,
          Many seemingly "benign" issues almost always impact many people.
    • thumb
      Sep 23 2012: Freedom of expression give you the right to say what you just posted. I feel that same as you do but I would like to find them guilty of something different. Like, verbal assault, which has been protected at times. I'm sure if they pick the wrong child of a mafia leader they won't do it again. I don't see the government as coddling these people they are paid to protect our constitutional rights. It's their job.
      • Sep 24 2012: Respectfully, but vehemently disagreeable: As a politician, in particular an elected official, you shouldn't have the "luxury" of *protecting* (your word) freedom of speech when it leads to the breaking of laws, the supression of constitutional rights of others, health care crisis, and war mongering. In the last 30 days alone I have seen so-called pastors condemn women for speaking up, calling for holy war against muslims, and proclaiming that the only path to peace is "through the sword". And then our beloved leaders, the same ones we have elected and continue to support (mostly through our own neglect of political issues rather than active support), take on these causes and politicize them in full public view, completely ignorant of basic facts of health care, mental health issues, and the fact that over 90% of the world, which has access to the same media as we do in many places, don't necessarily wholeheartedly agree with "our" take on these issues. It might be well and good if these issues never left our borders, but many times they "help" dictate our foreign policy, not to mention the foreign policy of other countries.
        Weak or nonexistent censorship of religious hatred ends up costing us in many ways, many more than I care to count or have the space to mention in this forum. Witness the $100,000 bounty issued yesterday by a politician of Pakistan for the head of one of our citizens. All this more than a week after the embassy attacks, and still every politician treads around "religious tolerance" and feelings. Leadership is leading, not following. They need to start sending the message, here and abroad, that any hate speech, and any physical violence, are not acceptable. Start here at home, and see where leadership will take us abroad. Until we stop dancing around basic issues of 6,000 year old dinosaurs and gay rights, we will never lead other countries out of their dark ages. It really is that simple.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.