What Should the State do about Heresy? (Poll)

What Should the State do about Heresy?

  • Option 1, Avoid Being Guilty of Overreach

    Votes: 4 12.9%
  • Option 2, Enforcement Impossible to Implement

    Votes: 5 16.1%
  • Option 3, Establishmentarian View

    Votes: 22 71.0%

  • Total voters
    31
Status
Not open for further replies.
I actually long for the Theocracy, but only directly under Jesus himself.

You missed my point. It was a reductio ad absurdum. Let's take the most horrible situation imaginable--a society where the magistrate criminalizes Satanists and other blood cults. A society run by Christians. A society worse than Hillary, worse than Islam, worse than anything. Even in that society, what you do in your own home is hard, if not impossible, to criminalize.
 
I've been reading old primary source texts from colonial America which speak to this issue. One interesting one is the following:

The Laws and Liberties of Massachusetts,
1647

Regarding Heresy:
"Although no humane power be Lord over the Faith and Consciences of men, and therefore may not constrain them to believe or profess against their consciences: yet because such as bring in damnable heresies, tending to the subversion of the Christian Faith, and destruction of the souls of men, ought duly to be restrained from such notorious impiety, it is therefore ordered and decreed by this Court;

That if any Christian within this Jurisdiction shall go about to subvert and destroy the Christian Faith and Religion, by broaching or maintaining any damnable heresy; as denying the immortality of the soul, or the resurrection of the body, or any sin to be repented of in the regenerate, or any evil done by the outward man to be accounted in: or denying that Christ gave himself a Ransom for our sins or shall affirm that we are not justified by his Death and Righteousness, but by the perfection of our own works; or shall deny the morality of the fourth commandment, or shall endeavor to seduce others to any heresies aforementioned, every such person continuing obstinate therein after due means of conviction shall be sentenced to banishment."

http://plaza.ufl.edu/edale/Laws and Liberties.htm
 
I had earlier offered a number of hypothetical situations that illustrate the bankruptcy of Roger Williams/political pluralism. But now we can draw upon real life issues. The following incidents will make some uncomfortable, not only because of the disgust factor, but also because it involves "America's Greatest Ally."

We know Jews circumcise. But Orthodox Jews take it to another level. They bring a mohel in do to a Bris. It involves sucking the blood from the....well....that which just got circumcised.

Not surprisingly, a high number of STDs have been reported in Jewish infants in New York.

Now, does the magistrate have the authority to prohibit that religious expression?
https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/.premium-what-is-oral-suction-circumcision-1.5311796
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top