• HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 天前

    This whole thing is really disingenuous. Here’s the article. HOWEVER. Look who represented the pastor: First Liberty. They’re a law group that only takes ideological cases, cases that would allow Christians to violate laws with impunity. This initial case was covered by The Friendly Atheist (Hemant Mehta) a few months back; it’s not a simple case of a kind-hearted pastor trying to help homeless people, and accidentally violating some zoning codes along the way.

    • Miaou@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 天前

      Your link doesn’t paint a different picture than the OP.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 天前

        IIRC the conditions were exceptionally bad, and the action appeared to be tailored to make a legal argument that a (Christian) church wasn’t bound by things like health and safety codes, occupancy limits, or zoning.

        It’s strategically created to make the Christian church in question seem sympathetic, although he could have moved to a different location, and/or complied with health and safety codes.

        Again - look for what Hemant Mehta has written about this. I can’t find the podcast ATM, and I’m too sick (flu) to spend all day trying to find anything he would have written about it.

    • Flax@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 天前

      At least you’re consistent with not wanting Christians to get special treatment

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 天前

        I would love it if Christians would actually help homeless people rather than using them in a legal ploy to expand religious exceptionalism.