Open main menu

Comments:Controversial evangelist leader Tony Alamo arrested in child sex investigation

Is the U.S. "right to freedom of religion" appropriate given cases such as this?Edit

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading


Cult of PedophilesEdit

There are some well known examples where freedom of religion is used to exclude certain religous groups from controlled substance laws for ritual purposes, and even in some cases things like zoning laws, but there is no exclusion for crimes involving minors nor should there be. Child sexual abuse does not get magically transformed into anything else because of what the perpetrators claim. None of this has anything to do with any true beliefs. Everything looks like this was a cult setup to give excuses for a group of pedophiles to abuse kids. I hope they all rot in jail. 72.154.55.191 11:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The right to freedom of religion is, for the most part, fine. It just needs limits put on it to help prevent cults, bigotry, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.102.177.108 (talk) 15:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Freedom from religion, tooEdit

The children's rights to not have their parent's religion forced on them and not have their other rights abused is more important. I feel that everyone's unchecked freedom ends where someone else's begins--they can do what they want personally but when it affects someone else against their will, it's no longer their freedom. --Poisonous (talk) 16:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

So does the same right not to have parents religions "forced" on children apply to other religions? Parents of all sorts raise their children in their own religions. If we start making judgments about which religions are allowed to do that and which are not that amounts to massive violations of the First Amendment. We have to keep issues of child abuse generally separate from issues of whether or not we like a religion. JoshuaZ (talk) 16:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes, if a child doesn't want to participate in a religion, I think it's fair to expect that parents respect that, though it's beside the point. The problem is when freedom of religion is used to defend child abuse, like when a girl was abused during excorcism in Texas. --Poisonous (talk) 05:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Umbrella of religion not this bigEdit

Anything that is truly religious falls under the great commandment of love God above all and love your neighbor as yourself. Abusing minors is neither loving or sanctioned by God.

It doesn't say anything aboutloving your neighbor"S" or your neighbor's CHILDREN!

This guy is a scum bag and should be prosecuted to the full extent of he law! PerryO206.24.48.1 01:21, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

If this is religion then a whorehouse could be the cathedral! At least Hugh Hefner never purported to be anything but a libertaian. This guy Alamo is lower than pond scum. PerryO206.24.48.1 22:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)