4 ms·

This goes against my religious beliefs - Christians are called to visit prisoners. “I was in prison and you came to visit me … I tell you the truth, whatever y

This goes against my religious beliefs - Christians are called to visit prisoners. “I was in prison and you came to visit me … I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.” Matthew 25:36, 40

jughtuyi 10y ago
You can do what you want in your own home, but you can't demand that the state runs justice in a way that follows your choice of religious texts. I can understand that it's important to take religious views of prisoners into account but if you're just some random person not involved with the prisoner then you'll have to lump it I'm afraid. As it should be.
- danharaj 10y ago
  > "you can't demand that the state runs justice in a way" > "As it should be." "You can't say how things ought to be run, but i can."
  - jughtuyi 10y ago
    The former a constitutional fact of law, the latter an opinion. I also believe the former to be a moral absolute, which is a second opinion. Clear?
    - dang 10y ago
      We've asked you before not to make troll accounts on HN. It's time you stopped.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- apsec112 10y ago
  Actually, in the United States, you can. Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_...), no law can interfere with someone's practice of their religion, unless the law a) does something really important (a "compelling government interest"), and b) there is no reasonable alternative. This applies to the federal government, and many but not all states.
  - jughtuyi 10y ago
    But no law has been created to prevent visits, it's just not something the prisons do anymore. Unless you think religious people should have the power to force you to offer services you don't want to this doesn't apply. 'My religion says that you must offer the public tours around your house.'
    - apsec112 10y ago
      This applies to prisons because they are part of the government, and are therefore state actors. It doesn't apply to private citizens.
    - ifdefdebug 10y ago
      Really? Following your bogus argument, the next thing would be to feed the prisoners with bread and water - no law has been created to prevent hot meals, it's "just not something the prisons do anymore". Prisons are entities which have the power to force human beings into their services - so society has to force the rules over them. This has nothing to do with religion.
      - icebraining 10y ago
        But the whole context of this subthread started by benjohnson is about how this goes against the Christian beliefs, and that's what jughtuyi is replying to.
      - tyingq 10y ago
        >>the next thing would be to feed the prisoners with bread and water Sadly, things somewhat close to this already exist. A common "tough on crime" statement goes something like "well, they're getting 3 hot meals a day". In Texas, right now, many of the prisons give prisoners 2 meals a day on weekends instead of 3...supposedly because staffing it too low to serve 3.
  - MichaelGG 10y ago
    That's unbelievably silly. Having laws arbitrarily apply based on the internal beliefs someone has is incredibly inelegant. Freedom of religion should be an emergent property of freedom of speech/thought/association/etc. For instance, it should be illegal to cruelly slaughter animals, regardless of your personal feeling on the subject. Yet certain groups get exemptions and continue otherwise illegal animal treatment because they, essentially, want to.
- yequalsx 10y ago
  In the form of political participation and activism one can make such demands. There have been a number of famous instances where such have led to improvements and changes.
- biomcgary 10y ago
  Perhaps the commenter is indirectly pointing out that a relatively large block of US voters (many of whom are typically associated with the law and order crowd) have reason to push for changes to the current system.
- bdcravens 10y ago
  Jails and prisons accommodate inmate religious beliefs in food, etc, so I'm pretty sure that's an example of running justice according to choice of religious texts.
  - tyingq 10y ago
    >>Jails and prisons accommodate inmate religious beliefs in food, etc Not universally. And, in some cases, there's an extortion racket for that as well: https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2015/jun/3/fifth-circuit-holds-texas-prisoner-has-right-free-kosher-meals/ https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2015/jun/3/fifth-circui...
driverdan 10y ago
That doesn't say you have to visit people in prison, just that it's a good thing to do. It also doesn't say anything against video conferences.
- emodendroket 10y ago
  Well no kidding; Skype did not exist over 2 millennia ago. It's still an obvious application of the message to today's world.
baltcode 10y ago
I will donate to any effort that brings this to court or a political campaign that runs this line.

jughtuyi 10y ago

You can do what you want in your own home, but you can't demand that the state runs justice in a way that follows your choice of religious texts. I can understand that it's important to take religious views of prisoners into account but if you're just some random person not involved with the prisoner then you'll have to lump it I'm afraid. As it should be.

danharaj 10y ago
> "you can't demand that the state runs justice in a way" > "As it should be." "You can't say how things ought to be run, but i can."
- jughtuyi 10y ago
  The former a constitutional fact of law, the latter an opinion. I also believe the former to be a moral absolute, which is a second opinion. Clear?
  - dang 10y ago
    We've asked you before not to make troll accounts on HN. It's time you stopped.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
apsec112 10y ago
Actually, in the United States, you can. Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_...), no law can interfere with someone's practice of their religion, unless the law a) does something really important (a "compelling government interest"), and b) there is no reasonable alternative. This applies to the federal government, and many but not all states.
- jughtuyi 10y ago
  But no law has been created to prevent visits, it's just not something the prisons do anymore. Unless you think religious people should have the power to force you to offer services you don't want to this doesn't apply. 'My religion says that you must offer the public tours around your house.'
  - apsec112 10y ago
    This applies to prisons because they are part of the government, and are therefore state actors. It doesn't apply to private citizens.
  - ifdefdebug 10y ago
    Really? Following your bogus argument, the next thing would be to feed the prisoners with bread and water - no law has been created to prevent hot meals, it's "just not something the prisons do anymore". Prisons are entities which have the power to force human beings into their services - so society has to force the rules over them. This has nothing to do with religion.
    - icebraining 10y ago
      But the whole context of this subthread started by benjohnson is about how this goes against the Christian beliefs, and that's what jughtuyi is replying to.
    - tyingq 10y ago
      >>the next thing would be to feed the prisoners with bread and water Sadly, things somewhat close to this already exist. A common "tough on crime" statement goes something like "well, they're getting 3 hot meals a day". In Texas, right now, many of the prisons give prisoners 2 meals a day on weekends instead of 3...supposedly because staffing it too low to serve 3.
- MichaelGG 10y ago
  That's unbelievably silly. Having laws arbitrarily apply based on the internal beliefs someone has is incredibly inelegant. Freedom of religion should be an emergent property of freedom of speech/thought/association/etc. For instance, it should be illegal to cruelly slaughter animals, regardless of your personal feeling on the subject. Yet certain groups get exemptions and continue otherwise illegal animal treatment because they, essentially, want to.
yequalsx 10y ago
In the form of political participation and activism one can make such demands. There have been a number of famous instances where such have led to improvements and changes.
biomcgary 10y ago
Perhaps the commenter is indirectly pointing out that a relatively large block of US voters (many of whom are typically associated with the law and order crowd) have reason to push for changes to the current system.
bdcravens 10y ago
Jails and prisons accommodate inmate religious beliefs in food, etc, so I'm pretty sure that's an example of running justice according to choice of religious texts.
- tyingq 10y ago
  >>Jails and prisons accommodate inmate religious beliefs in food, etc Not universally. And, in some cases, there's an extortion racket for that as well: https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2015/jun/3/fifth-circuit-holds-texas-prisoner-has-right-free-kosher-meals/ https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2015/jun/3/fifth-circui...

driverdan 10y ago

That doesn't say you have to visit people in prison, just that it's a good thing to do. It also doesn't say anything against video conferences.

emodendroket 10y ago
Well no kidding; Skype did not exist over 2 millennia ago. It's still an obvious application of the message to today's world.

baltcode 10y ago

I will donate to any effort that brings this to court or a political campaign that runs this line.