Mullet said he should be allowed to punish people who break the laws of the church, just as police are allowed to punish people who break the laws of the state.

Amish leader: Beard-cutting a religious matter - US news - Crime & courts - msnbc.com

No, you should not be allowed to do so nor any other religious individual, body or church. Religion does not make a physical attack immune to any and all applicable laws.

-FA

amanga asked:

This may be a really juvenile question, but it's been scratching at my brain!
If a person testifying in court is a known atheist, are they still required to swear on the bible? And if so, I guess the court is relying on that atheist's morals alone to pull through and tell the truth, right?

1) The oath/affirmation is a traditional declaration that expresses the witness’ assurance that the testimony given will be the truth and nothing but the truth.

2) Not all courts use the bible. Some don’t use it at all. Others only require raising the right hand. Laying one’s hand on a bible or a saying “so help me god” are just historical appendages to the main point which is telling the truth. I have no issue with taking an oath as is. They remind me of the following anecdote:

At a lunch party I was placed next to a well-known female rabbi, now ennobled. She asked me, somewhat belligerently, whether I said grace when it was my turn to do so at High Table dinner in my Oxford college. “Yes,” I replied, “Out of simple good manners and respect for the medieval traditions of my college.” She attacked me for hypocrisy, and was not amused when I quoted the great philosopher A J (Freddy) Ayer, who also was quite happy to recite the grace at the same college when he chanced to be Senior Fellow: “I will not utter falsehoods”, said Freddy genially, “But I have no objection to making meaningless statements.”
-Richard Dawkins

3) The court relies on facts. That is why there is such a thing as perjury if a testimony is shown to be false.

Thanks for the question. Hope it helps.
In reason:
-FA

Swiss vote on referendum to ban new minarets Right-wing parties regard mosques’ spires as symbols of militant Islam
(via Switzerland votes on minaret ban - Europe- msnbc.com)
Good idea? Bad idea? Is in-migratory control the solution? When was the last time a church or a free-thought center was allowed to be built in a Islamic country? Should freedom of expression have limits? Reciprocity? If current demographics predict an Islamic Europe, what would that mean for the rest of the world?

Swiss vote on referendum to ban new minarets Right-wing parties regard mosques’ spires as symbols of militant Islam

(via Switzerland votes on minaret ban - Europe- msnbc.com)

Good idea? Bad idea? Is in-migratory control the solution? When was the last time a church or a free-thought center was allowed to be built in a Islamic country? Should freedom of expression have limits? Reciprocity? If current demographics predict an Islamic Europe, what would that mean for the rest of the world?