Suppose that an openly pagan food service operation includes...

[Boojatta]

sacrifice of animals to idols and/or demons (in contrast with the usual secular or kosher slaughter operation); butchering; and a restaurant.

Suppose that, in addition to conflicting with some parts of the New Testament, some of the meals also disgusted ordinary members of the community. For example, who wants to walk down a main street and see through a restaurant window a diner who is eating a cow's brain?

Wouldn't there be a religious and emotional basis for concerned Christian citizens and their political representatives to launch a movement to "protect traditional meals"?

[paulsby]

1. no

and this is a weird analogy. fwiw, there are lots of restaurants that serve brains.

[Boojatta]

3. Is it an analogy?

If there is a general principle that is the basis for some political policy, then the same principle can be invoked to support other policies. If there is no general principle involved, then is there any principled basis for the policy?

[paulsby]

5. i think it's an analogy

(i guess) in that you are comparing the concept of "traditional marriage" which is the same (man/woman or man/multiple women) in nearly every culture on earth and throughout thousands of years of history with the concept of "traditional meal" which in the US is largely ludicrous, since the US has quite a melting pot of common foods from countries all over the world. heck, in my little town i can eat vietnames, thai, mexican, italian, etc. and even "classic american food" is influenced from countries as diverse as germany, england, italy, china, etc.

i am 100% for marriage equality. i don't think specious analogies help the cause.

same sex marriage is a radical change to the traditional concept of marriage. however, it is one i wholeheartedly support.

pretending that it's just a new entree on the plate is disingenuous imo

[Manifestor_of_Light]

2. This has been litigated. Supreme court case.

CHURCH OF LUKUMI BABALU AYE v. CITY OF HIALEAH, 508 U.S.520 (1993).

City of Hialeah, FL, passed ordinances banning animal sacrifice, but exempted kosher butchers and killing animals for sport. This ordinance was thought to target Santeria specifically. There was no compelling state interest in regulating the free exercise of religion, according to the Supremes.

Trial court held for the City.
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held for the City.
Supremes held for the church, reversed. I don't know if it was remanded for trial or not.

Anything else ya wanna know???

[paulsby]

6. wow!

look at the big brain on YOU!

either that, or mad lexis-nexis skillz

or both!

nice one!

[Manifestor_of_Light]

7. For this I spent five years in law school.

You may bow reverently, kiss my feet, and call me Doctor. :D

[paulsby]

12. i *may*

but i won't.

;p

[cecilfirefox]

9. It was also unanimous. nt

[Cherchez la Femme]

4. Or serve dog, cat, horse, etc.

although horsemeat is available in restaurants in Canada... those King-loving heathens (kidding on the last comment!)

[cecilfirefox]

8. Your analogy makes no sense and incorrectly compares Pagans

to demon worshipers and people who commit animal sacrifice. First and foremost no major Pagan movement commits animal sacrifice. Voodou and Santeria practice animal sacrifice, but those are two religions are NOT Pagan- in fact if you called their practitioners Pagan they'd probably be livid.

Let me also state that there is no devil concept in our(Pagan) faiths and that most people don't even believe in the concept of demons in the Jewish, Christian, or Muslim sense. Many believe in, essentially, nasty deities- but no beings that are predominately predisposed to some role of "evilness".

Totally offensive, totally offensive.

Also, Church of the Lukumi Babaluye vs. City Commission of Haleigh Florida= Supreme Court case that holds animal sacrifice is a right of members in the United States, and can only be banned by the government when the law in question is narrowly and neutrally tailored. Therefore because any law banning the sacrifice of animals is not neutral, as it only targets those practitioners and not people that hunt for and eat their kills or slaughter a chicken ontheir own on their property, can never happen. I'd also mention that the vast majority of animal sacrifices that take place in Santeria, Voodou, and even Kosher slaughter in Judaism for that matter are a THOUSAND times more human than ANTHING you have ever eaten from a grocery store.

That is all. <3

[MineralMan]

10. You have a problem with animal sacrifices.

Read the Old Testament. God insisted on it. You're making even less sense than usual, Boojatta.

[MineralMan]

11. Brains? I've eaten brains many times. They're quite delicious.

These days, I wouldn't eat cow brains, due to the prion risk, but goat brains are wonderful. I recommend them highly.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

13. You are not making sense from a legal standpoint.

"religious and emotional" considerations do not give anyone standing to sue, or to persuade their political representatives to pass a law.

I think you're trying to get into separation of church and state and the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause of the Constitution, but that's not really what it's about.

The ordinance in Hialeah was held to be specifically targeted against a particular religion, namely Santeria.

However, symbolic cannibalism (take of my body, eat....) is still fine in Christianity.