Bears Armed wrote:Kenmoria wrote:“Suppose there was a person who wanted to join a religion, it doesn’t matter which, but was prohibited from doing so based on some arbitrary category, such as having green eyes. The actual category itself doesn’t matter, only that the person can’t reasonably change it. This religion probably has some teachings about why people need to follow. It is conceivable that the person has some fears about eternal damnation, bad karma or soul annihilation.
To prevent this person from joining the religion of their choice and exercising all the necessary sacramanets is to deny them the opportunity to grow spiritually and feel secure with their place in the universe. The GA’s very purpose it to uphold fundamental human rights, such as freedom of religion, and this proposal is just a way of achieving that.”
Suppose that religion teaches that allowing people with green eyes to participate in its rites is itself a grievous sin: By forcing the religion to admit that person to membership & sacraments you force its members to commit a sin, harming their ability to feel secure within their place in the universe. Son't you recognise the existing members of religions as possessing rights, too?
“Except that religions can, and should, change. A faith can adapt and gain more liberal interpretations of scripture, or find a way to reconcile their somewhat archaic practices with modern society. Societal change can happen at a religious level, and often does in many societies around Kenmoria. However, someone being discriminated against for an innate condition cannot change, and shouldn’t have to be hurt for something over which they have no control.”
Tinfect wrote:OOC:
I recommend that we end this 'green-eyed' euphemism immediately; this is not about something so trivial, if intrinsic. This is about women, and gay people. If you are going to stand there and defend homophobia and misogyny, say the damn words.
(OOC: The main reason I stick to mentioning eye colour is that nobody will be offended by either side of the debate. As far as I know, no country in the world discriminates on the basis of eye colour, so nobody could potentially feel threatened if somebody is defending eye-based discrimination. That could very easily not be true with gender or sexuality.)