Regardless of the witnesses, they themselves admit to being the performers. So as ludicrous as the identification of calf muscles is, it’s cumulative: there’s no need for any other witnesses to identify them; they admit their presence.
So?
Well, frankly, I’m not even sure I agree that “inciting religious hatred” should be a crime. As far as I’m concerned, they are free to stand on the corner and advise all persons that pass that, in their opinion, the Patriarch Kirill and President Putin are both degenerate idiots who would best serve society by digging septic tank ditches, and the Orthodox Church is spitting in the eye of Jesus by endorsing Putin.
So what I’m pointing out here is that while I applaud their interest in free speech, stealing someone else’s pulpit to make your speech effective is not something we, the bastion of the free speech world, generally permit.
As Ravenman notes, it’s academic. In all probability they’d have been locked up for doing it outside, too. You also kind of glossed over the idea that the church would have to press charges; can you imagine a major American denomination pressing charges for an act of this sort that did not result in, say, property damage?
That’s certainly an argument someone could make. From the description of the incident, though, they did not immediately leave the area after being ordered to do so, so even if their initial entry was defensible as ignorance, their refusal to depart was not.
But I suspect they would readily admit they knew they were not authorized to be where they were. Certainly if I were to discover they, in good faith, believed they had a legal right to be where they were it would change my mind.
Right – and if they had, it would be absolutely obvious how corrupt and censorious the Russian system is. Now, in contrast, they can hide behind religious respect.
No, I think most churches would practice what they preach with respect to forgiveness, assuming there was nothing more profane that happened – if there had been some attempt to desecrate the Host, for example, Catholics would not be as forgiving.
In all the Eastern Orthodox churches I have been in in the area beyond the altar rail (the rail itself is often a rather substantial barrier) is clearly different from the rest of the church in such a way that even someone with severe Asperger’s syndrome and completely unfamiliar with Christianity would be able to deduce that it is no go zone.
Because they are females of menustrating age depending on where exactly they were at or around the altar, their presence would be considered in the eyes of traditional devote, Eastern Orthodox an act or an attempted act of desecration. Russian Orthodox are about as welcoming as Hasidic Jews when it comes to women in sacred places.
I wouldn’t characterize it that way. There’s some big burly security dude who tried to grab them and take them away right at the beginning of the video clip. They managed to elude the world’s worst bouncer (guess that’s why he’s working in a church and not a bar) and continue the performance.
Still, I think Bricker’s framing of this issue as generally a matter of trespass and criminal law doesn’t present a complete picture. This is clearly a crime of civil disobedience. It isn’t like our country’s own history with the civil rights movement and other political protests were always carried out with the support of the government and never infringing on anyone else’s property or sense of propriety. This isn’t the shot that was heard around the world, but these girls deserve a lot more slack than the serious charges they are faced with.
“Here” being the key word. The law might be different in Russia. Not to mention which church it was – I’m guessing there would be a difference between your average parish church and St. Basil’s.
Yeah; I was just engaging in a bit of hyperbole, and I realistically expect a trespassing bust like this to end up with a fine/community service, barring prior convictions. I don’t know whether Russian courts generally sentence at the harsher end or not; it does look as if the sentence could realistically be twice as harsh. Yeah, they went overboard, but I guess when you have a tradition of getting gigged for even the mildest protest, the matter of degree might not be the point for them.
ETA: I also have no idea whether the group could have been bailed out and that the jail thing is an extension of their protest. I know that they are doing a lot of mugging for cameras and[URL=“Nadezhda Tolokonnikova | ITAR-TASS: MOSCOW, RUSSIA. JULY 30,… | Flickr”] Nadezhda seems to have access to makeup/hair styling/clothes so it doesn’t appear they’re exactly breaking rocks in the hot sun.
They clearly dodge and resist the attempt to remove them. There’s no question in my mind, watching the video, that they were aware they were not supposed to be there.
-That when the power isn’t legitimate, using unlawful venues to protest against it becomes legitimate. Especially when this venue is well known for supporting said illegitimate power.
-That “disrupting a service” doesn’t carry a sentence of three years in a labour camp in democratic countries I’m familiar with.
-That from many reports made, the trial is conducted in ways that aren’t conductive to a proper defense.
I see your point but frankly you could make exactly the same point, using the same words, about a trial taking place in North Korea. Which means IMHO that this point demonstrates nothing.
The difference being that "here* is a true democracy.
I never bought into this civil disobedience/willingness to accept punishment theory. You don’t have to be fair with the unfair. There’s zero evidence that they buy into it, either. They probably believe, like me, that their action was legitimate and that if they could get away with it, it would be for the better.
It might be that in some circumstances, going through the trial and sentence could be more efficient (by raising public awareness), but if it isn’t, or if it is but you don’t have the balls for that, staying free to give it a go the next day is perfectly fine. And being willing to “accept the punishment” is never needed IMO. It just happens that the punishment is an unfortunate side-effect of raising awareness.
To reuse an argument from Der Trihs : would you deliver Anne Frank to the Gestapo? If you wouldn’t, you agree with the general principle and we’re just arguing about the details. Maybe Putin’s regime isn’t bad enough for you to apply it in this case, but it’s definitely bad enough for me.
I think it’s great that people are out in public protesting this travesty, and look forward to seeing changes in Russian society and government in the near future.