Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?

[BT]

Controversy

Black's Law Dictionary defines "license" as, "The permission by competent authority to do an act which without such permission [...] would be illegal." The authority to license implies the power to prohibit. A license by definition "confers a privilege" to do something. By allowing the state to exercise control over marriage, it is implied that we do not have a right to marry; marriage is a privilege. Those born in the US receive a birth certificate, not a birth license. Most would object to a birth license, as it would imply that people must gain permission to be born. Following that same logic, many refuse to accept a marriage license and exercise their right to marry, without obtaining permission from the state.[1]

Some groups believe that the requirement to obtain a marriage licence is unnecessary or immoral. The Libertarian Party, for instance, believes that all marriages should be civil, not requiring sanction from the state.[2] Some Christian groups also argue that a marriage is a contract between two people and God, so that no authorization from the state is required.[3]

In 1993, parents in Wisconsin became upset, because a test was being administered to their children in the government schools, which was very invasive of the family?s privacy. When parents complained, they were shocked by the school bureaucrats, who informed them that their children were required to take the test by law and that they would have to take the test, because they (the government school) had jurisdiction over their children. When parents asked the bureaucrats what gave them jurisdiction, the bureaucrats answered, "your marriage license and their birth certificates."[4] Judicially and in increasing fashion, practically, a state marriage license has far-reaching implications.

In the United States, until the mid-nineteenth century, common-law marriages were recognised as valid, but thereafter the states began to invalidate common-law marriages. At present eleven states and the District of Columbia recognize common-law marriages. (See Common-law marriage in the United States.) Common-law marriages, if recognised, are valid, notwithstanding the absence of a marriage license.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_license

What is interesting is that Loving vs Virginia (which declared interacial marriages legal) declared marriage a right. Seems like a conflict. Perhaps requiring marriage licenses or issuing them is unconstitutional.

[Cynthia]

Atheist is no more negative a term than monotheist. The word monotheist indicates a belief in a but one god.

If atheists are happy being called atheists, I see no reason for them to invent a new name. It's just a classification, not really a religion, anyway.

Polytheists= believers in several gods. (there are a variety of polytheistic groups of gods)
Monotheists= believers in just one god (sort of) Allah, Elohim, God, the Trinity, etc.
Atheists = belief in no god or gods.


I don't think that atheists are more anti-theists than Christians, Jews Muslims, etc are anti-atheist. Anyone can be intolerant. Buddhists do not believe in a Creator Deity, and some believe in a large number of spirits, others in none at all.

If atheists are happy being called atheists, I see no reason for them to invent a new name. It's just a classification, not really a religion, anyway.


I wonder sometimes why the person who does not believe in any sort of religion would be interested in any sort of  "label" at all.

I have lived my life as a New Ager, as a candidate for spiritual advancement into the rhelm of peace on earth, by attending Shaman rituals in Taos NM. I have dabbled in Buddhism.( I enjoyed the peace of meditation and the beauty of centering oneself to an inner place with the world, I might add).

Heck, I was once married to a Moslem.....prayed each and every morning with my husband. I have dabbled in Sufism (Iraqi) Another beautiful healthy place to visit. Drumming, belly dancing, eating healthy and poetry.....awesome summer of '87.
... I  have attended Messianic Jewish services with good friends who are Jews for Jesus.....I have best friends who are Jewish, have attended services with them in Arizona at Temple.

 I've witnessed others pray to Goddesses in Volcanos in Maui ( New Age experience).

 I have memorized the entire I-Ching during this period of my life. If I wanted to I could caste an I-ching for any one of you. Not quite the Tarot Cards idea, but  a very enlightening advice giving venue, indeed.

 But, all in all, I have taken this journey ----and, in the end come to find out that I have come full circle back to Christ through my journey(which started in 1970-1992 when I joined the Catholic Church.) Yes, I was one of those who fell in love with the Mass of the Catholic Church at age 17.
Heck, I even studied the Mormon in High School for a while as my best friend growing up was Mormon.

I was criticized once for dabbling too much in "other areas of the world of spirit"...but, I must say that the only real beauty in my life and the only REAL, REAL peace in my heart has come through prayer to Jesus Christ. (as a Catholic).

I do not have a negative attitude towards those who do not believe in Christ..nor do I hold disdain for other religions. . . . or non religious folks.
I have just "realized"..not necessarily "found" that Christ is real for me. I wish to explore His Love and Word more in my later years.
My journey in this world has taken on a world of interesting pathways and varied choices.

 My best friends in this life who are Jewish (the wife was once a nun and is now a bi-sexual, he is a Child Psychologist. They live in Ar. He counsels children and now Iraqi war vets).  YEp...they are my "Best Friends". They hold such acceptance for me that it's the essence of what friendship means........and have been like family to me for over 35 years.
The thought that they are so far away from my reality as a religious human being makes me wonder about others in this world....how much we could reach out to be even more complete. What a capacity for love. What we could do if we all held more acceptance. So very vital and necessary. I don't believe we have that in our world today.  

While I agree that all relgions have intolerance, I do not believe it is acceptable to broad stroke or criticize another person's religion "just because" of non acceptance.

I believe the original posters of that sign did just that.

Protesting...not accepting.

If you were to ask them why they did it, you would find that they have little tolerance for Christians in this life.

I was hoping to hear that all they wanted was to share the JOY in their heart for the Winter  Solstice celebration. I know all about such celebrations. Were they trying to show their JOY? I have my doubts.

My doubts were set in motion.......I question  their intentions.

Protest equals resentment sometimes......I see no real value in rebelling against another's time of JOY.