@gasman
Perfectly logical Q. The answer, of course, is NO.
The rules of grammar are what they have always been, so they don’t change simply because of one’s religious belief (or lack thereof)
Both BoBo and Dominic, as well as others, have pointed this out.
Does anyone have the right to not respect ANY particular rule of grammar with which they disagree for ANY reason?
Of course they have that right. As long as they’re willing to accept the consequences of that decision.
If they are answerable to a teacher or a boss, that person has the right to dock them for it as well. But, speaking practically, most people are not in that situation.
People regularly flout grammar and spelling rules all over the place constantly so this isn’t much different. Most people reading your writing will most likely assume that you don’t know any better or too lazy to check it out.
The “protest” aspect of it likely sails clear over the heads of most people reading :) Sorry to burst your bubble here.
@Doctor D
What’s unfortunate for this Q is that the original teacher spoken about taught the correct grammatical rule but added a personal reason for it.
She should have just told you that the reason for capitalizing the word God is that doing so follows standard grammar rules and left it at that.
But she chose to editorialize with her personal opinion and ended up muddying the waters.
Whether or not to follow correct and accepted usage of language and spelling is certainly every person’s individual choice. The context in which that choice is made determines the consequences which can range from:
1) Nothing at all.
2) A negative opinion of your intelligence or thoroughness or attention to detail.
3). A lower grade on an educational paper
4). Being fired from a job requiring writing ability. Unlikely but repeatedly done could happen.
Everybody has the right to choose accordingly. One singer took this to its logical (or illogical) extreme. For years Prince insisted upon using an unpronouncable symbol in place of his name. His reason for doing so was a protest of a record company’s wrong treatment of him.
Did most people understand that protest? Not really. Most just regarded him as eccentric in the extreme and regarded him with reactions ranging from amusement to annoyance or to outright scorn or ridicule.
Was his protest recognized? Judge for yourself. Did he have the right to do it? Unquestionably yes. Was it effective? Meh.
:D