Yes.
If people can be allowed to start a Church that has them dancing with rattle snakes, being bitten by rattle snakes as a form of prayer and declaration of belief, for example, then a church where drinking urine is touted as being beneficial or a cure when accompanied by intense prayer would be no better or no worse.
In fact, "
urine therapy" is practiced all over the world by some people. And yes, t
here are people who claim it cures cancer..
And in some parts of the world, you will even be exempt from paying tax and you might even get Government funding.
Well I'm specifically focussing on the secular democracies of North America, Europe, Australia and Japan. To my knowledge, you can't just start a church and preach anything you like whatsoever (see Waco standoff), but if I'm right about this, it would indeed constitute a major double standard.
Why shouldn't they?
Do you think the State should involve itself in the religious beliefs of its citizens?
Absolutely! If governments think it's their job to control the amount of porn a kid gets to watch, then they should also take in interest in all the other things kids might watch. Religious brainwashing involving threats of violence, whether in this life or the next one, constitutes a clear form of child abuse with demonstrably devastating consequences to their critical thinking abilities and quality of life.
*Raises eyebrows*
At least hell isn't teaching them that something is going to anally rape them if they do not clean their room...
True enough. In hell, furnace fires cauterize the rape wounds so they can be inflicted infinitely many more times, a much cleaner procedure. And who said anything about just cleaning their room? If I'm going to brainwash my kids into total obedience, might as well also get them to wash the car, mow the lawn, shovel the snow, sweep the chimney, cook my food, clean my dishes, and maybe whore themselves out on the weekends to make me some extra cash.
There is mocking and then there is coming across like a bigoted, anti-Semitic or racist dickhead. Charlie Hebdo often skirted and crossed the dickhead line.
Well I'm only here to defend the right to mock.
And yet, this is the same "modern human civilisation" which shut down its predecessor for mocking the Government's and the media's reaction to a politician's death..
Well, to be blunt, France has long been known as a nation that believes in social engineering, and after 100 years of it, doesn't look like it's achieving the desired results or reminding anyone that it used to be an important country. Radical Islam is only one issue out of many to be dealt with, but it's become an elephant in the room and needs to catalyze major changes in society's approach to integration and tolerance. If out of fairness we have to alter our standards towards other institutions in the process, then let it be so.
Are you also protest against Netanyahu telling French Jews that they should all come to Israel for protection, thereby encouraging them to remain in their religion and brainwashing their children further in their religious State? That in a time where the French Government is calling for solidarity and unity within the country, another head of State is trying to poach French citizens away by stoking religious fear in them?
I'm fed up with Netanyahu's antics, and if he wants to justify his actions by comparing himself to Bashar Assad next door, then he should be held to the same standards and international privileges that Assad gets. That said, France needs to do a lot, LOT more to protect its Jewish population from anti-semitic attacks and incitement alongside combatting Muslim radicals; they're failing miserably at it, and it's deeply undermining France's credibility when trying to play a constructive role in Middle East peacemaking.