Religious Tests On The Rise

[Entreum]

So here's a question - how is this any different from the tests Conservatives keep demanding Muslims be subjected to to ensure they don't hold interpretations of the scripture that the conservatives deem "anti-American"? Because I'm not seeing anything about nominees being questioned just for being Christian.

Just because that is bad doesn't mean this is not also bad.

[Salus Maior]

Why? Seperation of church and state. Not that I believe in that, but I have no problem using it.

Separation of Church and State doesn’t mean religious people aren’t allowed government positions.

Indeed, in it's original context it means that the government cannot dictate the teachings of the church.

[Scomagia]

The obvious problem here is the assumption that a religious person can't be impartial, that they wouldn't rule against their religious convictions. That is, frankly, an incredibly bigoted viewpoint. Holding particular opinions on a matter does not inherently make a person unable to be impartial or make rulings that are in line with existing precedent.

Obviously some folks have no problem with this sort of questioning because they are so bigoted against religious people that they don't think the religious are capable of making rulings that go against their religious convictions. It's absolute nonsense.

[Salus Maior]

The obvious problem here is the assumption that a religious person can't be impartial, that they wouldn't rule against their religious convictions. That is, frankly, an incredibly bigoted viewpoint. Holding particular opinions on a matter does not inherently make a person unable to be impartial or make rulings that are in line with existing precedent.

Obviously some folks have no problem with this sort of questioning because they are so bigoted against religious people that they don't think the religious are capable of making rulings that go against their religious convictions. It's absolute nonsense.

Nobody is fully impartial.

[Scomagia]

The obvious problem here is the assumption that a religious person can't be impartial, that they wouldn't rule against their religious convictions. That is, frankly, an incredibly bigoted viewpoint. Holding particular opinions on a matter does not inherently make a person unable to be impartial or make rulings that are in line with existing precedent.

Obviously some folks have no problem with this sort of questioning because they are so bigoted against religious people that they don't think the religious are capable of making rulings that go against their religious convictions. It's absolute nonsense.

Nobody is fully impartial.

I never said anyone was fully impartial. Assuming that someone won't be impartial because of their religious views is still bigotry.

[Vassenor]

So here's a question - how is this any different from the tests Conservatives keep demanding Muslims be subjected to to ensure they don't hold interpretations of the scripture that the conservatives deem "anti-American"? Because I'm not seeing anything about nominees being questioned just for being Christian.

Just because that is bad doesn't mean this is not also bad.

Way to miss my point completely.

[Pagan Trapistan]

The obvious problem here is the assumption that a religious person can't be impartial, that they wouldn't rule against their religious convictions.

Pagans can be impartial, ya'll abrahamics can't even leave incense for the Roman Emperor because the jewish god said not to have any other gods. And he wasnt even talking to you! The Jews even said he wasnt talking to you! Ask one!

[Salus Maior]

The obvious problem here is the assumption that a religious person can't be impartial, that they wouldn't rule against their religious convictions.

Pagans can be impartial, ya'll abrahamics can't even leave incense for the Roman Emperor because the jewish god said not to have any other gods. And he wasnt even talking to you! The Jews even said he wasnt talking to you! Ask one!

Has it occurred to you that Christians might think that the Jews are wrong?

[Salus Maior]

Nobody is fully impartial.

I never said anyone was fully impartial. Assuming that someone won't be impartial because of their religious views is still bigotry.

.....What?

I don't think anyone's saying anyone is impartial because of their religious views. And I don't know how that would be bigoted.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

The obvious problem here is the assumption that a religious person can't be impartial, that they wouldn't rule against their religious convictions.

Pagans can be impartial, ya'll abrahamics can't even leave incense for the Roman Emperor because the jewish god said not to have any other gods. And he wasnt even talking to you! The Jews even said he wasnt talking to you! Ask one!

Hi, someone who follows an Abrahamic religion here.

I have no idea what you're talking about with that Roman Emperor stuff.

[Pagan Trapistan]

Has it occurred to you that Christians might think that the Jews are wrong?

They're experts in this shit. Ya'll barely even know it half the time. Oh and generally Jews are less legalist. You know.... Being shitty about leviticus instead of just being a good person.

[Camelone]

Pagans can be impartial, ya'll abrahamics can't even leave incense for the Roman Emperor because the jewish god said not to have any other gods. And he wasnt even talking to you! The Jews even said he wasnt talking to you! Ask one!

Hi, someone who follows an Abrahamic religion here.

I have no idea what you're talking about with that Roman Emperor stuff.

Early Christians were sometimes tested by Roman authorities on their loyalty to the Roman Emperor by ordering them to offer some sort of sacrifice to the Emperor. That was and is a big no no so it led to a good few martyrdom's and imprisonments.

[Pagan Trapistan]

I have no idea what you're talking about with that Roman Emperor stuff.

Will you observe Roman festivals upon request and leave incense for the Emperor?

[Salus Maior]

Has it occurred to you that Christians might think that the Jews are wrong?

They're experts in this shit. Ya'll barely even know it half the time. Oh and generally Jews are less legalist. You know.... Being shitty about leviticus instead of just being a good person.

Apparently neither do you.

[Salus Maior]

I have no idea what you're talking about with that Roman Emperor stuff.

Will you observe Roman festivals upon request and leave incense for the Emperor?

"upon request" That's a funny way of saying "on pain of death".

[Pagan Trapistan]

That was and is a big no no.

Only if youre a jew. You all just think youre jews. Unless you are a jew, in which case the Roman Empire gives you special priveleges. Be thankful.

[Pagan Trapistan]

"upon request" That's a funny way of saying "on pain of death".

I wouldnt have it any other way. Hail Caesar!

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Erm, kind of an obvious question about the candidate's biases.

There should be separation of church and state

Only for the irreligious.

and if the judge is going to rule against abortion, it should be for a legitimate reason, not because of religious beliefs.

Relogious beliefs are a legitimate reason.

So essentially OP is practicing for the Oppression Olympics.
Being asked if you can separate your personal religious beliefs from your political votes is not a religious test.

Religiously that is a test, in fact.

How about religious tests for everybody?

It is not the practice that I am aiming to suppress, but rather the belief that religious law trumps secular law.

For the religious it should.

Why? Seperation of church and state. Not that I believe in that, but I have no problem using it.

Being religious doesn't have to imply you cannot leave your religion inside your home.

You shouldn't, tho.

Thank you for supporting my point.

We'd be better off replacing them with people actually loyal to the Roman state.

This is America, not Rome.

Believing in the Catholic teachings toward abortion and marriage are nowhere near genocide and murder, obviously.

So it's okay to use religion as a guiding point for the actions of public officials, unless it's something you don't like.

You're missing the principle of the matter, which is why I used an extreme example.

Well Christianity doesn't advocate for genocide afaik, so you used a bad example.

Hi, someone who follows an Abrahamic religion here.

I have no idea what you're talking about with that Roman Emperor stuff.

Early Christians were sometimes tested by Roman authorities on their loyalty to the Roman Emperor by ordering them to offer some sort of sacrifice to the Emperor. That was and is a big no no so it led to a good few martyrdom's and imprisonments.

Oh ok, thx.

May Allah SWT curse those DHaalimoon if they hadn't repented, aameen.

That was and is a big no no.

Only if youre a jew. You all just think youre jews. Unless you are a jew, in which case the Roman Empire gives you special priveleges. Be thankful.

Didn't Rome massacre Jews? And most Christians in early Christianity were of the Jewish ethnicity, and Rome heavily persecuted the Christians prior to being Christianized.

"upon request" That's a funny way of saying "on pain of death".

I wouldnt have it any other way. Hail Caesar!

You like death threats or are you just joking?

[Pagan Trapistan]

You like death threats or are you just joking?

I'm not a centurion. Now are you going to leave some incense for the Emperor or not?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

You like death threats or are you just joking?

I'm not a centurion.

What does that have to do with my question?

Now are going to leave some incense for the Emperor or not?

Depends. Which Emperor are we talking about?

[Pagan Trapistan]

Depends. Which Emperor are we talking about?

Julius Caesar of course

[Scomagia]

The obvious problem here is the assumption that a religious person can't be impartial, that they wouldn't rule against their religious convictions.

Pagans can be impartial, ya'll abrahamics can't even leave incense for the Roman Emperor because the jewish god said not to have any other gods. And he wasnt even talking to you! The Jews even said he wasnt talking to you! Ask one!

I'm not sure how that's even related to my post.

[Camelone]

That was and is a big no no.

Only if youre a jew. You all just think youre jews. Unless you are a jew, in which case the Roman Empire gives you special priveleges. Be thankful.

... where are you even getting this information that Christians think they are Jews?

[Scomagia]

I never said anyone was fully impartial. Assuming that someone won't be impartial because of their religious views is still bigotry.

.....What?

I don't think anyone's saying anyone is impartial because of their religious views. And I don't know how that would be bigoted.

That's the implicit assumption behind questioning a religious person about the public beliefs of an organization to which they belong and whether or not those beliefs affect impartiality. You wouldn't ask those questions unless you believed that religious belief itself complicated an individual's ability to be impartial. That's an inherently bigoted position to take.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Depends. Which Emperor are we talking about?

Julius Caesar of course

Eh, seems cool on my partial reading of his wiki page, but considering that Judaism is around during his time, I'll stick with the Jews.