SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Government restrictions on religion and social hostilities involving religion increased in 2015 for the first time in three years, according to Pew Research Center's latest annual study on global restrictions on religion.
The share of countries with "high" or "very high" levels of government restrictions – i.e., laws, policies and actions that restrict religious beliefs and practices – ticked up from 24% in 2014 to 25% in 2015. Meanwhile, the percentage of countries with high or very high levels of social hostilities – i.e., acts of religious hostility by private individuals, organizations or groups in society – increased in 2015, from 23% to 27%. Both of these increases follow two years of declines in the percentage of countries with high levels of restrictions on religion by these measures.
Among the world's 25 most populous countries, Russia, Egypt, India, Pakistan and Nigeria had the highest overall levels of government restrictions and social hostilities involving religion. Egypt had the highest levels of government restrictions in 2015, while Nigeria had the highest levels of social hostilities.
Global Restrictions on Religion Rise Modestly
Does this reflect your personal experience ?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @02:53PM (6 children)
More restrictions means more control. Then more people will get curious as to what it is that some 'government' (infiltrated by lowlife scum) is trying to stop. So there will be war, and blood will be spilled.
Anyway, who is this person (or group) who will add more restrictions on 'some' religion(s) and not others? Who will make sure this upholder of justice and friend of the people is not the very gutter rat who is the enemy of all people?
Oh I get it... it is someone _you_ approve of, and someone _you_ control. It is always groups in the shadows that control those who are in full view. They are the puppet masters. They pull the politicians', militaries' strings. The masters of deceit and lies.
Better put your energies into building a better future for humanity, so that the need for religion and the identity it gives you is reduced.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @03:19PM (2 children)
It is already illegal to cut flesh from a completely healthy child's penis; any logical reading of modern law leads one to conclude that such an action is child abuse, sexual assault, battery, etc.
So, it doesn't require more control; it just requires the enforcement of existing law. However, religion warps a person's mind, and makes it impossible for him or her to think logically.
That being said, it's not even necessary to rely on existing law; it would be enough to induce a cultural revolution, whereby mothers make faces at other mothers for cutting up their children's intimate sexual organs for no justifiable reason.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Wootery on Thursday April 20 2017, @03:35PM (1 child)
It is already illegal to cut flesh from a completely healthy child
No it isn't, not in the meaningful sense. Let's not be obtuse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @03:41PM
You cannot help but come to the conclusion that it is already illegal. It just so happens that the law is only as good as its enforcers, and the enforcers are all circumcised or afraid of being called "anti-Semitic".
Of course, it is possible for the law to be contradictory; for instance, a German judge concluded that the circumcision of a minor is illegal in Germany according to national and international law, but the German legislation process quickly made it legal.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Thursday April 20 2017, @03:30PM (2 children)
More restrictions means more control. Then more people will get curious as to what it is that some 'government' (infiltrated by lowlife scum) is trying to stop. So there will be war, and blood will be spilled.
Is it legal for a parent to remove an arm from their child? Or an eye? If it is, why? Isn't that an affront to freedom?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @07:11PM (1 child)
It's not illegal to kill the infant when it's still being carried inside the mother. Is that not an affront to freedom?
Just saying
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Thursday April 20 2017, @08:11PM
It is illegal once the baby is old enough to survive without the mother.