Sentences with phrase «n't about religious freedom»

This isn't about religious freedom, as the developer also admitted that there are already TWO mosques in that location that serve the community.

The mosque center isn't about religious freedom, as the developer of the mosque said there are already TWO MOSQUES IN THAT LOCATION, so there isn't a need for one.

This is not about religious freedom of judgement (catholics) but about a diverse university that is protecting all students regardless.

This is not about religious freedom.

Not exact matches

«Even if the bills are not implemented, it creates a public discussion about discrimination, and that creates the idea that discrimination is important to religious freedom,» says Marieka Klawitter, a professor of public policy and governance at the University of Washington.

It's about religious freedoms and not really contraception.

They post about the lack of «religious freedom» in these other countries, but what they are really referring to is THEIR churches not being allowed into do THEIR «witnessing».

He explained: «We must not fail to recognise that there is sincere, heartfelt anxiety about the bill's impact on religious freedom.

CNN: Catholic Bishops not satisfied with Obama's contraception compromise The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops does not support the Obama administration's revised proposal for providing insurance coverage for contraception, saying it falls short of addressing concerns about religious freedom.

Because the birth control cases all focus on a 1993 federal law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, not the Constitution, the Justices will face questions about whether the mandate to provide free access to 20 forms of birth control drugs or devices, sterilization, screenings, and counseling imposes a «substantial burden» on religious freedom of nonprofit employers with religious objections to some or all contraceptives, whether the mandate in fact serves a «compelling interest» of the government, and whether an attempt to provide an exemption from the mandate satisfies the requirement that such an accommodation is «the least restrictive means» of achieving the government's policy Religious Freedom Restoration Act, not the Constitution, the Justices will face questions about whether the mandate to provide free access to 20 forms of birth control drugs or devices, sterilization, screenings, and counseling imposes a «substantial burden» on religious freedom of nonprofit employers with religious objections to some or all contraceptives, whether the mandate in fact serves a «compelling interest» of the government, and whether an attempt to provide an exemption from the mandate satisfies the requirement that such an accommodation is «the least restrictive means» of achieving the government's policy inFreedom Restoration Act, not the Constitution, the Justices will face questions about whether the mandate to provide free access to 20 forms of birth control drugs or devices, sterilization, screenings, and counseling imposes a «substantial burden» on religious freedom of nonprofit employers with religious objections to some or all contraceptives, whether the mandate in fact serves a «compelling interest» of the government, and whether an attempt to provide an exemption from the mandate satisfies the requirement that such an accommodation is «the least restrictive means» of achieving the government's policy religious freedom of nonprofit employers with religious objections to some or all contraceptives, whether the mandate in fact serves a «compelling interest» of the government, and whether an attempt to provide an exemption from the mandate satisfies the requirement that such an accommodation is «the least restrictive means» of achieving the government's policy infreedom of nonprofit employers with religious objections to some or all contraceptives, whether the mandate in fact serves a «compelling interest» of the government, and whether an attempt to provide an exemption from the mandate satisfies the requirement that such an accommodation is «the least restrictive means» of achieving the government's policy religious objections to some or all contraceptives, whether the mandate in fact serves a «compelling interest» of the government, and whether an attempt to provide an exemption from the mandate satisfies the requirement that such an accommodation is «the least restrictive means» of achieving the government's policy interest.

Atheists talk about a secular state which is where the government doesn't interfere in anyones religious freedom, and it doesn't endorse any particular religion (or none).

DO N'T think you understand democracy if you think it's only about elections: it's about injecting as much of your religious culture and mindset which excludes freedom of thought, freedom of expression, political and religious pluralism, and human rights.

Here's the basic point about religious freedom that people just don't understand.

Unveiling a new work on the Second Vatican Council in Rome, Cardinal Walter Brandmuller, the retired president of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, announced that Vatican II's decrees on non-Christian religions (Nostra Aetate) and Religious Freedom (Dignitatas Humanae) «do not have a binding doctrinal content, so one can dialogue about them.»

Oh, that's right, we can't, because the GOP is all about telling people that Christians are the only people in this country who matter, and that the First Amendment isn't really concerning religious freedom, but the freedom to pick what ever flavor of Christianity you choose.

While Enlightenment ideas about freedom led rationalists to question the traditional religious strictures against euthanasia and suicide, the Christian opposition to these practices did not weaken.

Washington (CNN)-- The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops does not support the Obama administration's revised proposal for providing insurance coverage for contraception, saying it falls short of addressing concerns about religious freedom.

Many among the Founders had fled the oppressive monarchies of Europe precisely because they were not given the religious freedom to worship as they pleased, and more importantly, to bring about social change in accordance with God's law.

DO N'T think you understand democracy if you think it's only about elections: it's about a culture and mindset which includes freedom of thought, freedom of expression, political and religious pluralism, and human rights.

They often include provisions about religious practices for the couple and for any children who may arrive; whether or not they plan to have children; what they will do in the case of a pregnancy not wanted by one or the other; what will happen if the couple decides to separate; what the financial arrangements will be in such a case; what provision will be made for the children; how in - laws, relatives, and friends will be included in the relationship; what sexual practices will be followed; under what circumstances the couple will move from one home to another; whose job will take precedence; and what kinds of freedom each partner is to have.

you sit there in your home having nothing to do with anything that happened, then blame someone else who is in that same position for what happened, and he has to condemn it, and apparently he's guilty because of his religion... and about «no other religious freedoms in muslim countries»... you cant name a SINGLE muslim county that denies religious practice... not a single, including saudi arabia... just because they don't premit building religious buildings doesn't mean they don't respectively let you practice whatever you want to practice... unlike in some WESTERN countries they are banning religious practices such as; the headscarf!

This isn't about a moral decision or religious freedom or even about money.

How can she believe that a subpoena issued to five pastors demanding everything they have written about the ordinance, Mayor Parker, homosexuality, or gender will not raise profound issues of religious freedom?

The letter urges followers to frame this as a debate about religious freedom, not contraception, because it's a more effective way to sway public opinion.

The views of a visiting pope, respected by Catholics and many non-Catholics alike as a moral and spiritual leader of great prominence, will not make persons now unconcerned about global warming suddenly begin to grow concerned, nor even make skeptics of religious freedom begin to take its claims more seriously.

The document from the Equality and Human Rights Commission follows the European Court of Human Rights judgment in four cases about religious rights in the workplace, one of which found that an employee suffered a breach of her right to religious freedom for being told not to wear a cross at work.

Story says, «The letter urges followers to frame this as a debate about religious freedom, not contraception, because it's a more effective way to sway public opinion.»

I just want people to show a little more meaning behind their religious intentions besides making up bs about the government infringing on their freedoms... grow up, women use birth control... not a religious issue at all!

Everyone has an opinion about birth control, but the issue isn't really about birth control as much as it is about the government trying to strip away our religious freedom.

Friends of religious freedom — and even those not so friendly to it who wish to learn more about it — will enjoy a public conversation on the subject next week at Georgetown University, where the Religious Freedom Project of the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairsreligious freedom — and even those not so friendly to it who wish to learn more about it — will enjoy a public conversation on the subject next week at Georgetown University, where the Religious Freedom Project of the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs wfreedom — and even those not so friendly to it who wish to learn more about it — will enjoy a public conversation on the subject next week at Georgetown University, where the Religious Freedom Project of the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World AffairsReligious Freedom Project of the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs wFreedom Project of the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs will....

If he is trying to talk about Obama, Obama has not done nothing about taking religious freedom.

They are knowingly attempting to inject their religious world view on everyone and anyone because they believe they know how best to live and don't give a rat's ass about anyone elses freedoms or rights, but if you want to call that «doing their best» then you can take your message back to it's authors, the vile disgusting things, the wh.o.re of Babylon, the putrid decaying evil of Joseph Smith and shove it down his dead and crumbling corpse.

They spread hate and fear every chance they get and lest we forget, these Christian conservatives whining about their «religious freedoms» now, are the SAME people who didn't give a rat's - about the religious rights of Muslims who wanted to build a community center in NY.

This state of affairs not only fails to engage with the core issue at the heart of the culture of death, it also tacitly encourages agnosticism about life after death, human freedom, the ultimate nature of evil and the human need for prayer and religious practice.

It is because our Constitution «endorses associational freedom» and insulates from public supervision our «private» choices about «personal relationships»» and not because of anything distinctive about religious institutions or the church - state nexus» that the government can not tell, for instance, the Catholic Church that it must ordain women.

Religious freedom is not about inflicting your beliefs on others, regardless of whether or not the other is your child.

But really, by basing a decision about a permanent irreversible amputation on the Bible, you are dis - respecting the child's religious freedom, aren't you?

Contradictions aren't anything new to the religious, but in this case it seemed to be a misunderstanding about freedom of speech.

This is not an argument about private property rights or religious freedom, it is an argument about taste and his statement this evening is tasteless.»

We on the left do not mind if a man and women decided they want to live together, freedom is what we believe in, you do have of course in the labour party people like Blair and brown brought up in a religious home these people have problems, for the rest of us just get on and live you life, because boy it's to short to worry about

What is this state about if not religious freedom?

«What are we about,» he recently asked, «if not religious freedom?»

Poloncarz expressed his full support for the local law, saying it's not an issue about religious freedom nor freedom of speech but rather an issue of protecting children.

Frank's dawning realization that he should not limit himself to prescribed religious rules sort of reflects the way Rogen and Goldberg have spoken repeatedly about how they work better with the freedom of an R rating.

The case involving the Religious Freedom Restoration Act presents not only an important church - state issue, but also a significant question about the separation of powers between Congress and the Supreme Court.

According to the court transcripts the decision is not about the LGBT equality rights verses religious freedoms of the Christian - based university.

The dissent in the Court of Appeal, assessing the broader justification, concluded that the accommodations offered by the province sufficiently met concerns about interfering with religious freedom, including that the right claimed related to having the photo taken willingly: since it was required by law, one could argue the Hutterites would not be having their photos taken willingly.