tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post4258576731371521564..comments2024-03-16T05:00:38.826-04:00Comments on Egnorance: Ross Douthat on the “of course we respect religious freedom” facade.mregnorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comBlogger84125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-59028267503436197882012-08-06T17:40:01.704-04:002012-08-06T17:40:01.704-04:00You have two problems with your analysis: first, c...You have two problems with your analysis: first, calling Pahlavi "forward thinking" is silly. In 1975 he established single party rule. He violently suppressed dissent. Was he better or worse than the current rulers? Probably better, but at the time, he was seen as pretty autocratic and heavy handed.<br /><br />Second, the developments that led to the establishment of the current government of Iran can hardly be called "democratic".<br /><br />Third, the Islamic Republic hated the Soviets as much as it hated the U.S. Khomeni considered communism to be incompatible with Islam. The Soviets supplied arms to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War, hardly the actions of a nation dealing with a "puppet".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-20379641668309803352012-08-06T14:11:30.566-04:002012-08-06T14:11:30.566-04:00Yes, "democracy" did screw up in bringin...Yes, "democracy" did screw up in bringing forward a puppet for the Soviets. The Shah was very 'forward' thinking as far as bringing his country into the modern era was concerned. Not so his replacements.<br /><br />Anon, would you ratify a popular democratic vote for some horrendous policy? Pick your horror. Would you say O.K. just because a debased people voted in favor of a horror?Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-39666221319765275092012-08-06T10:08:14.161-04:002012-08-06T10:08:14.161-04:00You seem to think that the Shah was brought to pow...You seem to think that the Shah was brought to power because "democracy" in Iran screwed up somehow. Perhaps if the Shah had been a little more forward thinking and had allowed for democratic expression rather than autocracy, then the Islamic option would not have seemed so attractive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-71841233933304429772012-08-05T22:21:01.916-04:002012-08-05T22:21:01.916-04:00Yes that is correct Anonymous. We both know that....Yes that is correct Anonymous. We both know that. Sorry if you missed that in the back and forth. The Shaw was our choice for ruler of Iran. And a better choice than the people made in 1979. Democracy sometimes yields immoral results when the voters are enamored of immoral policies. The voters of the Confederate States of America, for instance.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-90557970149438434672012-08-05T20:40:56.710-04:002012-08-05T20:40:56.710-04:00You honestly think the people of Iran are better o...<i>You honestly think the people of Iran are better off now than under the Shaw?</i><br /><br />You are slightly behind the curve here. The coup that British intelligence engineered that people are talking about here is the one that brought the Shah to power.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-57547222852813060972012-08-05T20:37:02.005-04:002012-08-05T20:37:02.005-04:00Work for the Amish, accept Amish rules.
Except it...<i>Work for the Amish, accept Amish rules.</i><br /><br />Except it doesn't work that way, and never has. Your employer doesn't have the right to tell you what sort of benefits you can have based upon his religious beliefs. Christian scientist employers that are mandated to provide health insurance to non-Christian Scientist employees must still do so, even though their faith requires them to personally reject modern medicine.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-3728960203563059912012-08-05T17:46:39.169-04:002012-08-05T17:46:39.169-04:00That pretty much sums it up Egnor. Good post. Ca...That pretty much sums it up Egnor. Good post. Can't think of a thing to add to it.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-44245582782539338332012-08-05T17:45:37.076-04:002012-08-05T17:45:37.076-04:00Modus. You honestly think the people of Iran are ...Modus. You honestly think the people of Iran are better off now than under the Shaw? I don't care which way they would vote. I want to know if you think their lives and society are better now.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-2209195813891534562012-08-05T07:17:26.302-04:002012-08-05T07:17:26.302-04:00@mocus:
Are you claiming that contraception is a ...@mocus:<br /><br />Are you claiming that contraception is a religious practice? <br /><br />Religious liberty is a broad concept. <br /><br />The aspect of religious liberty at issue here is Free Exercise of Religion, which is the aspect of religious liberty that is protected by law in the US. <br /><br />Free exercise means the right to live in accordance with your religious precepts. That means:<br /><br />1) the right to worship<br />2) the right to speak publicly about your beliefs<br />3) the right to politic and vote according to your beliefs<br />4) the right to act according to your beliefs. <br /><br />Notice that Free Exercise does not mean the right to force others to violate their beliefs in order to provide you with a product or a service. It is, to paraphrase a supreme court justice in a related context, 'the right to be left alone.'<br /><br />More precisely, Free Exercise means the right in religious matters to be left alone by the government. The government cannot force someone to buy me communion wafers or wine. The government cannot force me to buy someone else contraception. 'The right to be left alone' is the right not to be forced by the government to buy things for others, if such things violate our religious precepts. <br /><br />The question arises: to what extent does the government have the right to override religious practice in order to accomplish a larger social goal? Clearly, the government has a right to proscribe human sacrifice, however fervently a pagan may wish to pursue his liturgy. <br /><br />The guiding principle here is obvious: the government has the right to proscribe religious behavior if, and only if, that behavior is otherwise a serious crime. The government may proscribe a specific exercise of religion is it has a compelling state interest. Murder, rape, etc is not condoned, even if it is part of the religious exercise of a deviant sect. <br /><br />The question then is: is the failure to provide contraception for other people a "crime" sufficiently serious for the government to violate the First Amendment in order to protect?<br /><br />The answer is obvious. It is not at all clear that it should be a "crime" to refrain from buying other people their condoms or to refuse to sell contraception in a pharmacy. <br /><br />After all, kosher Jewish delicatessens should not be required to sell pork or cheeseburgers, even if such products were deemed by government to be something which the public ought to have. And Jewish pharmacies close on the sabbath, they are not "denying" contraception to customers who want their pills on Friday after sunset. <br />It does not mean the right to force others to violate their beliefs in order to provide you with a product or a service. <br /><br />I cannot force you to buy me communion wafers or wine. You cannot force me to buy you contraception.mregnorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-74722062055500876522012-08-04T22:28:29.462-04:002012-08-04T22:28:29.462-04:00Religious liberty is more than just your religious...Religious liberty is more than just your religious liberty. It's everybody elses, too, even when you find their beliefs ridiculous.Modusoperandihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04213914791604385761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-22393613361517060732012-08-04T22:26:29.889-04:002012-08-04T22:26:29.889-04:00What? The Shah wasn't Lincoln and the Iranians...What? The Shah wasn't Lincoln and the Iranians weren't freed from a Hitler, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company was freed from having its revenues squeezed.Modusoperandihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04213914791604385761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-9223142346738755492012-08-04T12:26:30.536-04:002012-08-04T12:26:30.536-04:00I went to the link on 'abandoning a gay patien...I went to the link on 'abandoning a gay patient'. Is there any reason I should believe any of it? It is long on accusations and completely devoid of evidence.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-88767287690456078102012-08-04T12:20:15.990-04:002012-08-04T12:20:15.990-04:00OK. I read it again. It's still incoherent. ...OK. I read it again. It's still incoherent. Do you mean to say that everything is relative?<br /><br />How does 'religious liberty' subsist in what I 'find morally objectionable'? I think my liberty means that I am free to avoid doing those things I find morally objectionable. If you compel me to buy you a condom you have infringed upon my freedom. If I refuse to sell condoms I have not infringed on anyone's freedom. Of course, you live in Obamaland, where not acting is acting.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-33739885469594209752012-08-04T12:12:54.005-04:002012-08-04T12:12:54.005-04:00Modus. You are deluded if you think the popular v...Modus. You are deluded if you think the popular vote confers moral authority. Hitler had a lot of votes, didn't he? Thwarting the democratic wishes of the German Volk to install Hitler at the head of their government would have been an act of great kindness towards them.<br /><br />Did we liberate the people of the Confederacy? Or not? What is your opinion of Lincoln acting to thwart the democratically expressed wishes of the citizens of the Confederacy?Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-34826431046936300202012-08-04T10:30:57.924-04:002012-08-04T10:30:57.924-04:00David, overthrowing a democracy and putting in a q...David, overthrowing a democracy and putting in a quasi-puppet monarch was an act of <i>libawhat</i> for the people of Iran?Modusoperandihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04213914791604385761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-9982851033144100062012-08-04T10:26:19.228-04:002012-08-04T10:26:19.228-04:00Dear David;
Try to read what I wrote, for comprehe...Dear David;<br />Try to read what I wrote, for comprehension, and respond to that.Modusoperandihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04213914791604385761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-65423510085794943252012-08-04T09:05:52.057-04:002012-08-04T09:05:52.057-04:00Well, I went to the link Modus. That's quite a...Well, I went to the link Modus. That's quite a strawman you have there. According to the writer we are in danger of being deluged with doctors who will refuse to perform most ordinary medical procedures. As if the entire graduating classes of our medical schools have been JWs and Christian Scientist. The author of that piece is barking mad. And so is anyone who takes him seriously.<br /><br />Apart from abortion, contraception and euthanasia I cannot think of any necessary medical procedure which I as a catholic would find morally objectionable.<br /><br />You are all about force Modus. Because of your self-righteous preening you feel entitled to direct the actions of other people.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-60179617860357250622012-08-04T09:02:55.333-04:002012-08-04T09:02:55.333-04:00Well good for them. That was an act of liberation...Well good for them. That was an act of liberation for the people of Iran. Bringing in the current tyranny was an act of war against the people of Iran.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-53376367534874348052012-08-04T08:57:27.065-04:002012-08-04T08:57:27.065-04:00Work for the Amish, accept Amish rules.
Work for t...Work for the Amish, accept Amish rules.<br />Work for the catholics, accept catholic rules.<br />Work for orthodox Jews, accept orthodox rules.<br />etc.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-4731400281023420282012-08-04T08:54:12.518-04:002012-08-04T08:54:12.518-04:00Personal moral behavior is a collective action? I...Personal moral behavior is a collective action? I don't think so Modus.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-54848573933951354392012-08-03T16:30:09.632-04:002012-08-03T16:30:09.632-04:00I see no reason why we shouldn't go all the wa...<i>I see no reason why we shouldn't go all the way to polygamy.</i><br /><br />And your objection to polygamy would be? It seems to have been just fine for Jacob.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-41727426794169486042012-08-03T16:28:07.988-04:002012-08-03T16:28:07.988-04:00I my opinion the Amish should be exempt.
The Amis...<i>I my opinion the Amish should be exempt.</i><br /><br />The Amish frequently hire non-Amish to work for them. Should they be exempt from paying those on behalf of their non-Amish employees?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-45119350607436528002012-08-03T16:09:43.327-04:002012-08-03T16:09:43.327-04:00David, religious liberty, if it means anything at ...David, religious liberty, if it means anything at all, is not just what <i>you</i> find morally objectionable. It's what everybody <i>else</i> finds objectionable too, even if you find theirs ridiculous or you yourself find their view objectionable. Just as someone elses "ordinary medical procedure" is contrary to your religious beliefs, <i>your</i> "ordinary medical procedure" is contrary to someone elses religious conscience.Modusoperandihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04213914791604385761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-82342993212020813662012-08-03T16:06:11.400-04:002012-08-03T16:06:11.400-04:00David: Answer the question about the Amish first. ...David: Answer the question about the Amish first. Is it okay that they are required to pay for unemployment insurance and social security taxes for their employees even though those things violate their religious principles?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-53127317352527518212012-08-03T13:46:02.537-04:002012-08-03T13:46:02.537-04:00Well, I went to the link Modus. That's quite ...Well, I went to the link Modus. That's quite a strawman you have there. According to the writer we are in danger of being deluged with doctors who will refuse to perform most ordinary medical procedures. As if the entire graduating classes of our medical schools have been JWs and Christian Scientist. The author of that piece is barking mad. And so is anyone who takes him seriously.<br /> <br />Apart from abortion, contraception and euthanasia I cannot think of any necessary medical procedure which I as a catholic would find morally objectionable.<br /><br />You are all about force Modus. Because of your self-righteous preening you feel entitled to direct the actions of other people.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05652227699197953483noreply@blogger.com