[ExI] pussy riot case

[The Avantguardian]

>________________________________
>From: Charlie Stross <charlie.stross at gmail.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> 
>Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 2:22 AM
>Subject: Re: [ExI] pussy riot case
>
>
>On 20 Aug 2012, at 10:17, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
>
>> Il 19/08/2012 22:14, spike ha scritto:
>> 
>> Spike, what about the religious freedom angle?
>> 
>> The Pussy Riot group infringed on the freedom of the people peacefully assembled there to practice their religion.
>> More they infringed it in a place technically devoted to it specifically.
>
>This is a red herring, because the *actual* prosecution in Russia was on charges of Hooliganism -- an old Soviet catch-all offense frequently used against political dissidents, which is so broadly drawn it can be used to prosecute just about any behaviour that the agents of the state disapprove of (walking too fast on the sidewalk, wearing a loud shirt in a built-up area, and so on).
>
>(You would also run into the interesting question -- in any similar case in the EU, or USA -- of political free speech rights.)

FWIW, I seem to remember that free speech rights didn't protect Keith Henson from prosecution for "interfering with a religion" and he just wrote some stuff on a Usenet group rather than crashing in on some Scientological ritual on Co$ property. I suppose how the Pussy Riot might have gone over in the U.S. would have depended on what church they were protesting.
 
 
Stuart LaForge

"Prisons are built with stones of Law. Brothels with the bricks of religion." - William Blake