Rights for non-belief

One of the most important rights for humankind in general is the right to choose to believe or not belief something for oneself; free from coercion or discrimination,and with full liberty to criticize any idea one chooses.Yet full liberty of belief is still to exist.In America;in many states; it is illegal for a declared atheist to hold public office.There is still discrimination in the fields of education, housing, employment, in the military, and in other fields for atheists; and that's just in America.Despite the noble goal of defeating islamophobia and intolerance; the type shown by quran burning by a reactionary pastor and other acts clearly done simply to incite sectarian division and hate, many people have supported draconian "anti-blasphemy laws" in Ireland ,the UK, and the UN.This does no one any good.Any human being has the inherent right as sentient beings to criticize,question or dismiss personally and publicly religion, theology, scripture, or religions founders.Atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, rationalists,materialists, and skeptics have every right that members of any religion do.

Vote
96%
4%
Rating
Votes
32
Views
3319
Mark as inappropriate

9 Comments

  • Anonymous

    7 years ago
    There's are no athiest's in a foxhole.......... get real,

    0 0

  • I Absolutely support this. Freedom of religion and freedom of speach are two of the most fundamental rights in democracy. That is, without them, one cannot say that a state is fully democratic. Being from Canada, I had never heard of laws against atheists entering office in the U.S.. This is ridiculous and should be abolished immediately. I do, however, relunctantly assume that government can put anti-blasphemy laws, as long as they really are against certain words that would be hateful and offensive - not, of course, against stating one's own personal beliefs.

    e.g., One MUST have the right to say "I don't believe in God", without discrimination, but the government has the right to put a sentence against saying things such as "I hate f***ing Jewish rats!"

    0 0

  • I feel we need to define dismcrimination in this case, for it is obvious that church and state should be seperate. However, if two people disagree one of them has every right to seek a friendly debate with the holder of the opposing view.

    0 0

  • Anonymous

    7 years ago
    I was religious as a child, and have alwyas been interested in religions, mythology and science.I realised in mid-teenage that faith was based upon nothing but itself, that science explained nature satisfactorily without needing supernatural beings, and that religious beliefs were no different to those of ancient beliefs in gods and goddesses.When I first had doubts about my faith I thought that maybe this was a test of my faith, which was an idea planted in my mind by those teaching us about our faith. So I made the effort to accept it even more so. But the doubts came again, and I wondered what would happen if we took faith out of the equation; the world and nature still made sense, so I saw no reason to get back into it. And my understanding is that there's no theoretical or mathematical need for a god or gods, and there's no valid evidence of it or them; so there's no reason to believe. At the time this was difficult intellectually and emotionally (I was a teenager, after all).That was over 40 years ago, and my escape from faith has freed me to embrace what science has to offer, which I consider far more plausible than belief in the supernatural, and is the nearest we can get to the truth about how nature and the universe work. I've felt a sense of freedom ever since, and am happy and at peace with this.I still have an interest in religions, mythology, folklore and related matters, and am fascinated that people still believe in things that to me are clearly just not true.References :

    0 0

  • Anonymous

    7 years ago
    What about my right to travel? Why should that be governed so tightly? Why does it cost so much to register a car when by right it should just be illegal to hit something with your car? why cant it be that those who can not physically control a car well be allowed?? I have seen some major negligence on the road before and some people should not be allowed to drive simply because they dont care enough...

    0 0

  • I object because you can not allow anyone to "criticize,question or dismiss personally and publicly" and not be subject to such criticism yourself. I propose instead, that we outlaw the public criticism of all belief structures (and the lack thereof). A kind of don't ask don't tell policy if you will.

    0 0

  • Anonymous

    6 years ago
    Good idea, the further we get away from theocracy or theocrazy the better it will be for all ;)

    0 0

  • Religion causes more trouble than it is worth. I only see trouble and violence coming from those uneducated religious fanatics, believing in something that has been drummed into them since birth. People are brain washed into religion. It is tiresome and aged. 'God' from any religion does not and will not take care of me and my children. I protect them and will not be forced to think otherwise.

    0 0

Similar Ideas:

Instantly search any time by typing

Sorry, we couldn't find
"".