1. As a volunteer for the Red Cross, I'd get arrested and convicted if I did what they did.
    If the Red Cross was a movement then i'd be a nun!
    I am not judging their actions but I do not approve of the method, it very much seems like religion is excuse.

  2. I need to start a religion around my sincere belief that I should be able to walk into any government office, take what strikes my eye (hey, it belongs to "the People" & elected officials are just using it on our behalf) and give a turbo wedgie to officials making decisions contrary to how I believe. It's humanitarian, really. Enough wedgies ought to convince them to do what's right for the People, rather than the Corporations…

  3. It is absolutely appropriate that freedom of religion should allow anyone who has a religious conviction to serve people that they believe lives are in danger protection. My friends with Colin were Catholic Christian. But I’ve studied my face since I was 16 and have been a professional minister. I know my faith calls me to love and serve. For me locally that means working with groups to take food to homeless at one parts here in town and I particularly spend a lot of time with homeless teens at that park hotel segregate themselves and make sure to get resources and contacts and Lyons healthcare. That includes exchanging needles. And I believe that my faith dictates that their lives are more important than any law. That’s what my face tells me and because of my moral conscience that is well formed and well informed based on the canon of Christianity which is the forecast for an actually apostles, and teachings from the ancient church these are the foundational teachings of my faith. Jesus gives us 11 new Commandments in the New Testament the last of which is in John chapter 13 verse 34 and 35. Jesus tells his apostles to love one another as he has loved them and if they love one another as he has love them that is how they would know that they are his disciples. If these people are going out there in the way I am I go on mission trips to help those in dire need the ostracized most disenfranchised, then if their input is their faith, and then there is no law of the land that can exceed the love of God. As long as they are not committing actual crimes were they are hurting anyone or doing permanent damage to our national Park and I don’t think that’s her intention and I think they went in there with absolute intention of leaving no traces that they were everThere. When it comes to faith and moral conscience in my Catholic Christian faith there is no sin greater than violating your moral conscience. Stopping because these federal prosecutors are going to come after you is a violation of my more conscious if I were in the position.

  4. As someone who does not practice religion, but is a witness to these tragedies as a first generation Mexican-American.
    These people should be protected at all costs for doing the right thing. Helping struggling migrants at the border and giving them whatever aid they need.

  5. Religious protections should be abolished, all together.
    Get rid of the ludicrous laws, tax exemptions, and social protections. Then watch all the rats abandon the sinking boat.
    Guess who stays?
    The truly faithful.
    Seems to me, to be the only way to save "the church" from the festering rot, currently killing it from within.

  6. I think there are many points that need to be addressed. These people broke the law, knowingly. However, many people agree that the current laws surrounding immigration are not helping those fleeing poverty, drug cartels, crime, and other issues in their home country, and as such the US should revisit its immigration laws. I don't think these particular crimes should be pardoned under "religious freedoms" – I think they should be pardoned under something akin to a good samaritan laws. These people are trying to help, to mitigate deaths, to assist people who are fleeing a poor life. Whether they do so because of religious convictions or a simple desire to do good in the world should have no bearing on this matter.

  7. hell no, you want to set the legal precedent that freedom of religion trumps the law?

    what of the islamic religious dity to murder your daighter for disgracingvthe family honor?

    what of the religious right of a husband to stone an adulterous wife to death

    ever here "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" gonna be alot of salty wiccans once the burning at the stake starts up again

    you think the WBC won't abise this precedent?


    ehay about when the pedophiles organize their own child sex cult?

    religious freedom needs legal limits or nefore you know it, human sacrifices to the sun gods will be a thing again

  8. I agree with giving humanitarian aid, but I'm worried about the precedent this sets. What's illegal for one person should not be legal for another based solely on religious beliefs. We can't start holding people to different standards based on religion.

  9. Illegal immigration: 7,200 deaths over 20 years,
    addiction to smoking: 480,000+ annually, drunk driving: 11,000 per year
    Compared to smoking, one person dies every day (roughly) from Illegal immigration while 1,315 people die every day from smoking
    Is focusing on the border by having people give supplies necessary, when other health and social issues exist that literally affect more people

  10. religion providing the right for property invasion: no
    should humanitarian efforts be allowed, protected and supported despite what minor laws they infringe upon? yes
    life is an indivisible human right.
    you don't have to be a legal citizen to be human.

  11. I don't know… I agree with what they're doing but I don't think you get to break the law just because your religion compels you to do so. I mean if this is allowed then doctors can refuse to sell contraceptives because of their religious beliefs, people can discriminate against anyone in their business because of their religious beliefs, people can assault or kill others because of their religious beliefs?

    We could draw the line at 'this doesn't apply when the law broken doesn't harm anyone' but then folks would argue that illegal immigration harms society and list a myriad of arguments from 'they're takin' our jerbs!' to 'they're taking advantage of support systems that are meant for citizens'. I don't like it. Religious beliefs or not, you have to obey the laws of the land, you can endeavor to change those laws, but you can't just ignore them and claim religious immunity.

  12. I don't think religion is an excuse for this, I understand things are horrible and desperate south of the border but immigrants need to cross legally; our government needs to also be more lenient with it's immigration policy and to start stabilizing countries south of our border to reduce the need for people to immigrate to the USA

  13. I don't think religion should be above the law. It might be a good idea to make an exception in the law for humanitarian aid, but not religion. To each their own culture though.

  14. I support the humanitarian work being done. The video did not make clear how religious belief factors into the work, though. In the articles I have read, the people doing the work were not described as religious.

  15. First, should these people be charged with aiding in the commission of a crime? Second, if people can get away with crimes because of their religion, how far does that go?

  16. Lots of people in the comments are saying that these people should have followed the law, and just done what the establishment wants them to do: "protest" quietly in the corner.
    I've seen this stance a lot as of late, and it's absolutely bullshit. Advocates of "only peaceful/lawful protests" are absolutely insincere concern trolls. They don't care if the issue in question gets resolved (and often feel it's better how it is), and know that politicians will just ignore protesters who do nothing but hold up signs or post mean comments online. Would you have told the Black protesters during the Civil Rights movement to stop breaking the law, and get to the back of the bus? Because they were very much breaking the law when they entered "whites only" areas, and went against Jim Crow laws.

  17. Personally I find it abhorrent that you need the RFRA in this case at all, as it means that trying to keep your fellow human alive is effectively criminalized.

  18. Finally these laws are used to promote the good side of christianity instead of as a basis for discrimination and shitty behaviour. Somehow i doubt the hardcore prosperity doctrine right wing christians ever saw this coming lol.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.