Sweetums wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If my choices were to go to jail or go to a Mosque, I would go to the Mosque like any sane person would do. Just because you have this undying bias against religion, doesn't mean others do as well.
Doesn't really matter if anyone's biased against religion or not when it's unconstitutional.
Edited, Sep 26th 2011 11:39am by Sweetums I wasn't arguing if it were constitutional or not, simply the belief that criminals should have a choice of religion to choose as "punishment".
Why not? They're all equally ridiculous.
They are two different arguments. Besides, I don't have to agree with the constitution.
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If my choices were to go to jail or go to a Mosque, I would go to the Mosque like any sane person would do. Just because you have this undying bias against religion, doesn't mean others do as well.
Doesn't really matter if anyone's biased against religion or not when it's unconstitutional.
Edited, Sep 26th 2011 11:39am by Sweetums I wasn't arguing if it were constitutional or not, simply the belief that criminals should have a choice of religion to choose as "punishment".
So atheists and agnostics only get to choose jail? Pious Pete more choices than No Thanks Norman? You think that's right? You think that's fair?
I'm pretty sure agnostics and atheists can go to church as well. If you choose not to go to church because of your own personal beliefs, then that's a personal decision. If that bothers you so much, how about not committing the crime? Not tracking on how this is so difficult to comprehend.