Anti-Church punk group in prison

Actor

The Russian punk group "pussy riot" found themselves in hot water when they entered an Orthodox Church and interrupted proceeding by performing an anti-Church dance on stage.

What they didn't figure on was that they'd have to spend six months in prison while waiting for a trial! They're scouring the internet looking for popular support and have to resort to begging Madonna to say a few words on their behalf at a rock concert.

They're also claiming they're "political prisoners" because they mentioned Putin in their little dance. No mention of the fact that they premeditatively entered a sacred place with the sole intention of causing scandal.

Here is the shocking video:

http://youtu.be/VtYw-d1CSxQ

Frynge

Video.....Yes
Shocking......Not quite
Group.......Not by my standards
Dance....I could dance better

Zombrex

Actor wrote: »

The Russian punk group "pussy riot" found themselves in hot water when they entered an Orthodox Church and interrupted proceeding by performing an anti-Church dance on stage.

What they didn't figure on was that they'd have to spend six months in prison while waiting for a trial! They're scouring the internet looking for popular support and have to resort to begging Madonna to say a few words on their behalf at a rock concert.

They're also claiming they're "political prisoners" because they mentioned Putin in their little dance. No mention of the fact that they premeditatively entered a sacred place with the sole intention of causing scandal.

Here is the shocking video:

http://youtu.be/VtYw-d1CSxQ

They are considered political prisoners because of the harsh treatment after arrest (including having their defense tampered with, leading to accusations that they will face a show trial) and the political nature of the protest (it was primarily to criticise Putin's re-election and the support Putin received from the Russian church).

These types of stunts are not my thing, but there is little question that there is political interference in their treatment and that they are not being treated proportionately. Various groups including Amnesty International have stated that they are political prisoners. Remember it doesn't require that you agree with a person's views or even actions for them to be considered a political prisoner.

mathepac

Actor wrote: »

The Russian punk group "pussy riot" found themselves in hot water when they entered an Orthodox Church and interrupted proceeding by performing an anti-Church dance on stage.

What they didn't figure on was that they'd have to spend six months in prison while waiting for a trial! They're scouring the internet looking for popular support and have to resort to begging Madonna to say a few words on their behalf at a rock concert.

They're also claiming they're "political prisoners" because they mentioned Putin in their little dance. No mention of the fact that they premeditatively entered a sacred place with the sole intention of causing scandal.

Here is the shocking video:

http://youtu.be/VtYw-d1CSxQ

Shame you can't do better research.

The group concerned is an anti-Putin regime group and its members have used every opportunity available to them to draw attention to human rights issues in Russia.

They have already issued apologies to the Church and its members.

They knew in advance about the treatment they would receive once arrested and these are the issues they wanted to high-light.

doctoremma

If religious folk want to the right to bellow through a megaphone at Pride marches, you've got to accept that such freedom should be extended to those wishing to rain on YOUR parade.

What's good for the goose....

mathepac

doctoremma wrote: »

If religious folk want to the right to bellow through a megaphone at Pride marches, you've got to accept that such freedom should be extended to those wishing to rain on YOUR parade.

What's good for the goose....

I'm not sure what your point is.

The purpose of my post was to correct the erroneous message in the OP. The group in not anti-Church, the group is pro-human rights.

I never said one way or the other if I agreed with what they did, whether it should be repeated or any of that stuff. I never said if I thought their demo was correct, appropriate or acceptable, just that it wasn't anti-Church.

But as the old proverb says "There's none so blind as those who will not see". The words I typed contain the message I wished to convey, attempting to construct straw men from them is demeaning of yourself.

PDN

doctoremma wrote: »

If religious folk want to the right to bellow through a megaphone at Pride marches, you've got to accept that such freedom should be extended to those wishing to rain on YOUR parade.

What's good for the goose....

Absolute codswallop. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Also, I think most reasonable people can see that there is a difference between interrupting an activity on private property, and protesting against an event being held in a public space.

For example:
Antiracists have the right to heckle a BNP march in public.
Arsenal fans have the right to boo the bus that carries the Chelsea team and their flukey Champions League trophy through the streets of London.
Gay activists have the right to heckle a procession of some saints bones through a public street.
Homophobes have the right to heckle a gay pride march.

While I only have sympathy for the first two of the scenarios listed above, they are all expressions of free speech and are generally permitted in most democratic societies.

However, consider the following:
A punk group interrupts a worship service in a church to make a political statement.
Homophobes disrupt a LBGT group who are holding a private meeting in a rented function room in a hotel.
The KKK march onto the pitch at Stamford Bridge, causing play to be halted, interfering with the really boring match taking place.
An evangelist enters a doctor's surgery and preaches a sermon at the people in the waiting room.

These are all unwarranted invasions and interruptions of activities on private property, and are rightly deemed illegal in most democratic societies.

In the case of the Russian punk group, even though I sympathise with them in their views of Putin, their actions were wrong. However, no more wrong than if they had interrupted a golf tournament, or any other secular event.

I suspect the heavy handed treatment they are receiving is reallly due to Putin's meglomania and paranoia rather than out of any notion of sacrilege or blasphemy. And, given the attention they are now garnering, that was probably the whole point of the exercise anyway.

doctoremma

mathepac wrote: »

I'm not sure what your point is.

It certainly wasn't directed at you! I was addressing the OP, who appeared to be railing against the protest happening in a church (albeit he got the intent of the protest wrong). Chill!

doctoremma

PDN wrote: »

Also, I think most reasonable people can see that there is a difference between interrupting an activity on private property, and protesting against an event being held in a public space.

Aren't churches public places? Where people can come and go as they wish?

PDN wrote: »

I suspect the heavy handed treatment they are receiving is reallly due to Putin's meglomania and paranoia rather than out of any notion of sacrilege or blasphemy. And, given the attention they are now garnering, that was probably the whole point of the exercise anyway.

Agreed.

mathepac

doctoremma wrote: »

... Chill!

Sound, will do. I apologise. I got your intent wrong. I was used to being an infallible yoof now I'm not infallible.

PDN

doctoremma wrote: »

Aren't churches public places? Where people can come and go as they wish?

No, they aren't. They are privately owned buildings to which people are invited. Now the invitation to certain events in churches is usually extended to all (you will see signs outside some churches that say 'Everyone Welcome') but such an invitation does not confer on you the right to go and behave in whatever way you wish. You don't have the right to attend the Open Golf Championship and blow a whistle every time a player tries to take a putt. Nor do you have the right to attend a 'public meeting' organised by a LGBT group, then grab the microphone and rant against gays. And you don't have the right to attend a church with the intention of deliberately disrupting a service.

doctoremma

PDN wrote: »

No, they aren't. They are privately owned buildings to which people are invited. Now the invitation to certain events in churches is usually extended to all (you will see signs outside some churches that say 'Everyone Welcome') but such an invitation does not confer on you the right to go and behave in whatever way you wish.

Yep, fair enough, not sure I have the will try to make this argument.

PDN wrote: »

You don't have the right to attend the Open Golf Championship and blow a whistle every time a player tries to take a putt. Nor do you have the right to attend a 'public meeting' organised by a LGBT group, then grab the microphone and rant against gays. And you don't have the right to attend a church with the intention of deliberately disrupting a service.

I actually think you have the right to at least two of of those things (I suspect the rules of your entry into the golf tournament will explicitly exclude distracting players at tee shots, whether with a whistle or cries of "mashed potato"). How you will fare when attempting to exert your right is a different matter.

A family member of mine once deliberately disrupted a church service, and left to great upheaval, although he hadn't attended in order to do so. I fully support his right to protest, even given the "privacy" of the meeting (for the record, he vocally objected to the priest eulogising Ceausescu).

Scioch

I dont care what their motives are they wont get one ounce of sympathy from me. There are a lot more people deserving of attention than morons who resort to this type of crap to gain publicity.

Whatever harsh treatment they have received doesnt change their actions to put themselves in that position. I dont agree with them being treated unfairly but then again their actions havent exactly painted them out to be people worth listening to either.

Onesimus

***** Riot will be in my prayers.

aloyisious

Viewing the following might assist in making a decision about Pussy Riot. Not all of Pussy Riot are imprisoned.

http://www.care2.com/causes/pussy-riot-member-speaks-out.html

Onesimus

I still think 6 months in Jail to await a trial to be sentenced to 7 years imprisonment is a bit much. Perhaps a slap on the wrist with a hefty fine for disturbing the peace on private property would be more appropriate.

Although communism there is no more, I still feel that the communist mentality still exists in the country somehow. and Russia tends to be still a country with a bit of harshness to it.

Fanny Cradock

doctoremma wrote: »

If religious folk want to the right to bellow through a megaphone at Pride marches, you've got to accept that such freedom should be extended to those wishing to rain on YOUR parade.

What's good for the goose....

You and the OP should do a little research. This wasn't an anti-religious demonstration, it was a political one. Your tit-for-tat logic about Pride marches is entirely besides the point of their protest and this thread.

doctoremma

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

You and the OP should do a little research. This wasn't an anti-religious demonstration, it was a political one. Your tit-for-tat logic about Pride marches is entirely besides the point of their protest and this thread.

Sigh. Again, I was making a point abbot protesting in church (which the OP disagreed with), not what the point of their protest was.

I have already clarified that. What was the point of you repeating, unless to add another little jab in?

Fanny Cradock

doctoremma wrote: »

Sigh. Again, I was making a point abbot protesting in church (which the OP disagreed with), not what the point of their protest was.

I have already clarified that. What was the point of you repeating, unless to add another little jab in?

Truth be told, I didn't make it past your post before I typed my reply. But if you have acknowledged that you were introducing irrelevancies to the topic then great.

doctoremma

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Truth be told, I didn't make it past your post before I typed my reply.

Nice to know that we are all capable of speaking before we have the whole story

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

But if you have acknowledged that you were introducing irrelevancies to the topic then great.

Yadda yadda yadda

Shall we stop?

Fanny Cradock

doctoremma wrote: »

Shall we stop?

I'm tempted not to but it's probably for the best.

Juza1973

Onesimus wrote: »

I still think 6 months in Jail to await a trial to be sentenced to 7 years imprisonment is a bit much. Perhaps a slap on the wrist with a hefty fine for disturbing the peace on private property would be more appropriate.

Although communism there is no more, I still feel that the communist mentality still exists in the country somehow. and Russia tends to be still a country with a bit of harshness to it.

Russia can be a tough place against transgressors. The anarchy after the fall of communism forced them to enforce the law with an iron fist. If you want to act like a punk in Russia (whatever your reasons for doing it are) you have some guts because you will pay really hard. It's not easy publicity for little price as it is in Ireland and many other countries...

Actor

Zombrex wrote: »

They are considered political prisoners because of the harsh treatment after arrest (including having their defense tampered with, leading to accusations that they will face a show trial) and the political nature of the protest (it was primarily to criticise Putin's re-election and the support Putin received from the Russian church).

These types of stunts are not my thing, but there is little question that there is political interference in their treatment and that they are not being treated proportionately. Various groups including Amnesty International have stated that they are political prisoners. Remember it doesn't require that you agree with a person's views or even actions for them to be considered a political prisoner.

Amnesty International... You mean the pro-abortion, anti-Church group?

Benny_Cake

Actor wrote: »

Zombrex wrote: »

They are considered political prisoners because of the harsh treatment after arrest (including having their defense tampered with, leading to accusations that they will face a show trial) and the political nature of the protest (it was primarily to criticise Putin's re-election and the support Putin received from the Russian church).

These types of stunts are not my thing, but there is little question that there is political interference in their treatment and that they are not being treated proportionately. Various groups including Amnesty International have stated that they are political prisoners. Remember it doesn't require that you agree with a person's views or even actions for them to be considered a political prisoner.

Amnesty International... You mean the pro-abortion, anti-Church group?

Anti-church?

It should be remembered that this group were protesting the explicitly support that the Russian Orthodox churches has given to Putin. The church chose to side with the powerful. While I think interrupting a service is wrong and counter-productive, they do have a legitimate complaint and to imprison these women would be grossly unjust.

Actor

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Anti-church?

It should be remembered that this group were protesting the explicitly support that the Russian Orthodox churches has given to Putin. The church chose to side with the powerful. While I think interrupting a service is wrong and counter-productive, they do have a legitimate complaint and to imprison these women would be grossly unjust.

Probably due to Peter Benenson, a man of one time Catholic persuasion, being bitter that his moral stance was incompatible with church teaching (not uncommon amongst ex-Catholics). Matters pertaining to abortion are a case in point.

Any Catholic cannot support "Amnesty International" in good conscience. Many bishops have spoken out against the organisation. No surprises that AI support this anti-Church group.

aloyisious

The girls have been given two years in prison for hooliganism and anti-religious behaviour by the judge, who's reported as saying from the bench that the protestors were mentally-ill, as evidenced by the fact that they had carried out a protest.

I hope that judge never get's a position on our Republic's judicial bench. I

It's also reported that the Russian Orthodox Church gent the girls were protesting about has been given an office in the Kremlin where he can give advice to the President and Gov't.

Juza1973

In my opinion two years for hooliganism and violence against a Church (entering a sacred place for the sole purpose of offending) is a fair term. That law was in act before the crime and they did know what they were doing. A judge disapproving a crime is no ground to claim an unjust judgement, and if they wanted to protest against a single man in the clergy there was no need to offend all the believers in their sacred place...

No, I don't think that the rest of the world has any right to critisize the penalty as it was not the political act that was condamned but an actual violence against a group of people. And no famous singer or politician is above the law. If somebody starts a violent act of protest and they are unharmed by the law there will be an escalation of these acts until a new dictator will "sort things out".

Actor

aloyisious wrote: »

The girls have been given two years in prison for hooliganism and anti-religious behaviour by the judge, who's reported as saying from the bench that the protestors were mentally-ill, as evidenced by the fact that they had carried out a protest.

I hope that judge never get's a position on our Republic's judicial bench. I

It's also reported that the Russian Orthodox Church gent the girls were protesting about has been given an office in the Kremlin where he can give advice to the President and Gov't.

Great news. Let this be a lesson that anti-church bigotry will not e tolerated.

Fanny Cradock

Actor wrote: »

Great news. Let this be a lesson that anti-church bigotry will not e tolerated.

Yeah, because this was really about anti-Church bigotry and not the sham that is Russian freedom of speech. Wake up and see the bigger picture.

Check out the Democracy Index - Russia is all the way down in 117 place

Juza1973

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Yeah, because this was really about anti-Church bigotry and not the sham that is Russian freedom of speech. Wake up and see the bigger picture.

Check out the Democracy Index - Russia is all the way down in 117 place

And why did this people had to do an act of violence that was rightfully sanctioned? The mixed violence in their protest so that you if you justify them you justify violence too... The idea that if you arer right you are above the law is unjustifiable. But this is no more about Christianity anymore, more about basic politics...

Logical_Bear

PDN wrote: »

Arsenal fans have the right to boo the bus that carries the Chelsea team and their flukey Champions League trophy through the streets of London.

please retract that statement PDN :pac:

we beat barca 1-0 at home,drew 2-2 at the nou camp and beat bayern on peno's.

Chelsea were the better team in over 270 minutes of football.Thats not a fluke:)

Sonics2k

Juza1973 wrote: »

And why did this people had to do an act of violence that was rightfully sanctioned? The mixed violence in their protest so that you if you justify them you justify violence too... The idea that if you arer right you are above the law is unjustifiable. But this is no more about Christianity anymore, more about basic politics...

What violence? They sang and danced around on an alter.

They were protesting the Orthodox Church backing what is rapidly becoming a fascist and completely non-democratic society.

They weren't arguing against Christianity itself, they were protesting the betrayal of the Church there and horrible Govt.

Slav

Juza1973 wrote: »

In my opinion two years for hooliganism and violence against a Church (entering a sacred place for the sole purpose of offending) is a fair term. That law was in act before the crime and they did know what they were doing. A judge disapproving a crime is no ground to claim an unjust judgement, and if they wanted to protest against a single man in the clergy there was no need to offend all the believers in their sacred place...

Speaking of Russian law, what they did was not a crime but misdemeanour. 15 days of your freedom is the max you're risking but usually it's just a fine (and a rather small one). The judge, investigation, prosecution, witnesses and even the girl's barristers worked really hard to make a crime case out of it.

Actor wrote: »

Great news. Let this be a lesson that anti-church bigotry will not e tolerated.

The news is not great at all. The story is long and rather dirty but the bottom line is that there are clearly four losers in it: the three girls and the Russian Church. I would not call them victims though because it's purely due to their stupidity these four found themselves now where they are. As for all the others they are receiving now their dividends.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Yeah, because this was really about anti-Church bigotry and not the sham that is Russian freedom of speech. Wake up and see the bigger picture.

Check out the Democracy Index - Russia is all the way down in 117 place

Do you know much about Russia and Russian freedom of speech to see the bigger picture yourself? Or The Economist's indexes are your only source of information about the country?

Sonics2k wrote: »

what is rapidly becoming a fascist and completely non-democratic society

Give me a break

JohnMc1

Onesimus wrote: »

I still think 6 months in Jail to await a trial to be sentenced to 7 years imprisonment is a bit much. Perhaps a slap on the wrist with a hefty fine for disturbing the peace on private property would be more appropriate.

Although communism there is no more, I still feel that the communist mentality still exists in the country somehow. and Russia tends to be still a country with a bit of harshness to it.

Too be honest. I think we can do with a little harshness with our prison sentencing too. Obviously not to the extreme like Russia but the slap the wrist approach isn't working here.

Slav

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Too be honest. I think we can do with a little harshness with our prison sentencing too. Obviously not to the extreme like Russia but the slap the wrist approach isn't working here.

Some wise voices of the Russian Church suggested that the priest who was at the Cathedral at that time instead of calling the police should have invited the girls for pancakes (it was Pancake Week in Russia - Slavic version of Shrove Tuesday lasting for the whole week followed by Forgiveness Sunday and then the Great Lent starting the following week). But who listens to wise people these days...

Sonics2k

Slav wrote: »

Give me a break

Well, maybe fascist was a bit harsh. But we are talking about a country which is cracking down greatly on freedom of speech, any form of anti-Putin commentary and has just recently (November 2011) banned the printing of anything that be considered 'Homosexual propaganda'. The big problem of this being is that anything shows positive sides to homosexuals is considered propaganda, and so only negative things are allowed.

They have also just made Gay Pride marches of any form illegal.

This is a country where individual freedoms are being removed, anything that's 'considered' anti-State, anti-Church and so on is being made illegal.

This whole Pussy Riot thing is not religiously motivated, but anti-oppression motivated.

Slav

Sonics2k wrote: »

Well, maybe fascist was a bit harsh. But we are talking about a country which is cracking down greatly on freedom of speech, any form of anti-Putin commentary and has just recently (November 2011) banned the printing of anything that be considered 'Homosexual propaganda'. The big problem of this being is that anything shows positive sides to homosexuals is considered propaganda, and so only negative things are allowed.

They have also just made Gay Pride marches of any form illegal.

This is a country where individual freedoms are being removed, anything that's 'considered' anti-State, anti-Church and so on is being made illegal.

This whole Pussy Riot thing is not religiously motivated, but anti-oppression motivated.

Lol, when was it last time you've been to Russia and for long you stayed there mind if I ask you?

Sonics2k

Slav wrote: »

Lol, when was it last time you've been to Russia and for long you stayed there mind if I ask you?

Can you prove me wrong?

Are these things not happening? Have they not done each thing I just pointed out?

Please, if I'm wrong and they haven't banned these things, correct me and I will happily retract my statement.

Don't try and claim you need to actively be in a country to have any form of opinion on their politics, because that's just nonsense.

Slav

Sonics2k wrote: »

Can you prove me wrong?

Are these things not happening? Have they not done each thing I just pointed out?

Please, if I'm wrong and they haven't banned these things, correct me and I will happily retract my statement.

Don't try and claim you need to actively be in a country to have any form of opinion on their politics, because that's just nonsense.

It was a genuine interest, not an argument from my side. It just looked like your only source of information is your normal Western European/American media so I only wanted to confirm my guess, nothing more really.

Not that I'm really interested in having an argument but if you like me addressing your points here they are:

country which is cracking down greatly on freedom of speech, any form of anti-Putin commentary

It's a general statement without any specifics, so I there is nothing here to prove wrong. Based on my knowledge the statement is inaccurate.

and has just recently (November 2011) banned the printing of anything that be considered 'Homosexual propaganda'. The big problem of this being is that anything shows positive sides to homosexuals is considered propaganda, and so only negative things are allowed.

They have also just made Gay Pride marches of any form illegal.

That's democracy my friend, like it or not... BTW, that controversial 'homosexual propaganda' act is only a local law of one city, it's not a Federal law.

This is a country where individual freedoms are being removed, anything that's 'considered' anti-State, anti-Church and so on is being made illegal.

Again, general statement and from my experience highly inaccurate one. Any references or any specifics at all?

This whole Pussy Riot thing is not religiously motivated, but anti-oppression motivated.

I admit that for someone whose access to information about the country and the case is limited by Western media it might look like Pussy Riot action was either anti-religious or anti-government. In reality it was neither one nor the other.

martinedwards

If you engage in a protest, you have tyo be willing to take the concequences of the action at the time.

I haven't followed Pussy Riot's carreer but at a wild guess, this probably wasn't the first time they had annoyed the authorities.

different societies have different ways of doing things and reacting to protests.

if theyd done similar things in 12th century europe, they'd likely have been burned at the stake, so 2 years in jail woild be light IN COMPARISON.

for us in 21st century western Europes anything goes society, it's harsh, but 3 girls taking on the Might of the Bear? like a butt kicking competition with a porcupine

aloyisious

The Pussy Riot Christians have long since apologized to their fellow-Russian Christians for their actions in the cathedral and stated that they see their acts within it were wrong as it was an act of disrespect to the church. They have stated that their acts within the cathedral were a protest against one person, the churchman who's seat is the cathedral, and not against the church.

They believe that the churchman should not be have been working directly to assist the re-election of Putin, a man directly intent on not allowing free speech and civil rights to his fellow-Russians, a man who believes that he alone should decide what is good for his fellow-Russians. They believe that they should have the right that you have, the right to protest in public on the street, a right to free speech and a right to a genuine voting system with the rules not set by the candidate to ensure his re-election, or gerrymandering of the system to ensure his place (in rotation with his friends) on the ballot-paper.

Pussy Riot are guilty of no physical violence act, rather that of a verbal violence act. If', as the judge said while reading out the judgement made to explain the inprisonment-decision, the definition of insanity is the act of public protest, then I could well be reasonable in hazarding a guess that the girls might well be in receipt of psychiatric treatment while in prison. I don't know about you, but I'm glad that here in Ireland, the act of non-violent protest is not defined by law or judge as proof of insanity.

As some-one else put it in the past "religion is the opiate of the masses" and Putin is using it to ensure that he keep's his hands on the reins in Russia.

Onesimus

Communism is gone. But it will take a while for Russia to get rid of the communist mindset, something putin still has.

Wiggles88

Pussy Riots closing statements if anyone's interested.

PopePalpatine

I keep hearing about this being an "anti-Church" protest...but didn't they pray to the Virgin Mary to help them? It may be "anti-Church" (i.e. the Orthodox Church) but I wouldn't call it "anti-Christian".

Onesimus

***** Riot are anti-Church and Christian end of story. All over the world since their mad riot in Christ the Saviour Church and their sentencing, people have since copied their behaviour and have been doing this all over Russia in other Churches and Icons Orthodox Churches have been vandalized, .



In Ukraine, a half naked female took a chainsaw and cut down a large Ukrainian Monument Crucifix ( and took photos of it too ) and so it continues.


Has this been reported in the western Media? NO!


They are receiving support from the west and pop stars such as Paul Mc Cartney and Madonna, yet the ''occupy wall street'' crowd get horrible reactions from the western Media as do those who deny the Holocaust get imprisoned and so on when they speak out. But to those who attack and oppose the Orthodox Church/Christians we westerners support eh?



Yet here is the western Media praising **** Riot for entering private ( not Public ) property and creating moral injury on Orthodox Christians present and disturbing the peace and it is not seen as a hate crime by the west, in fact, by some as a prayer? it is viewed as freedom of speech and applauded?



Something is seriously wrong here.

The Idyll Race

Actor wrote: »

Probably due to Peter Benenson, a man of one time Catholic persuasion, being bitter that his moral stance was incompatible with church teaching (not uncommon amongst ex-Catholics). Matters pertaining to abortion are a case in point.

Any Catholic cannot support "Amnesty International" in good conscience. Many bishops have spoken out against the organisation. No surprises that AI support this anti-Church group.

This sort of utter nonsense gives Catholics a bad name. Besides, I didn't know that Actor was the arbiter of Catholic behaviour. Since when and under whos' authority?

The Sky

Why didn't they even try stop this from happening?

Benny_Cake

Onesimus wrote: »

***** Riot are anti-Church and Christian end of story. All over the world since their mad riot in Christ the Saviour Church and their sentencing, people have since copied their behaviour and have been doing this all over Russia in other Churches and Icons Orthodox Churches have been vandalized, .

They are indeed against the current leadership of the Russian Orthodox church, but does that make them anti-Christian? According to this AP article, Patriarch Kirill has recently engaged in acts such as consecrating nuclear missiles and calling for young Russians to volunteer for military service in Chechnya. How un-Christian is that? If the Russian church is going down the road of unquestioning collusion with the state, as it did in Soviet times, it will reap the whirlwind.

Onesimus wrote: »

In Ukraine, a half naked female took a chainsaw and cut down a large Ukrainian Monument Crucifix ( and took photos of it too ) and so it continues.


Has this been reported in the western Media? NO!

There are currently articles on this event on 5961 news outlets on Google News, it seems to have been widely reported to me. A topless woman chainsawing a cross is an image unlikely to be ignored by anyone! It's a stupid act but one which Pussy Riot can hardly be considered responsible for.

Onesimus wrote: »

They are receiving support from the west and pop stars such as Paul Mc Cartney and Madonna, yet the ''occupy wall street'' crowd get horrible reactions from the western Media as do those who deny the Holocaust get imprisoned and so on when they speak out. But to those who attack and oppose the Orthodox Church/Christians we westerners support eh?

Yet here is the western Media praising **** Riot for entering private ( not Public ) property and creating moral injury on Orthodox Christians present and disturbing the peace and it is not seen as a hate crime by the west, in fact, by some as a prayer? it is viewed as freedom of speech and applauded?

Something is seriously wrong here.

Again, if the church is taking a partisan political stance in support of the state, then it can expect to take some flak for that. Had these women simply been slapped on the wrist with a small fine a few months back would we even be having this conversation? Instead they have been on remand since February and now face 2 years in jail. The Russian state has turned this into something a lot bigger than it ever had to be.

aloyisious

It seem's some Russians fear that Russia itself is at risk, thus there is a backlash against any person/s carrying out any form of anti-establishment protest. The Moscow City courts have put a ban on all Homosexual parades within the city for the next 100 years. The judge in the Pussy Riot case stated that one would have to be mentally-ill to carry out a public protest.

Then there's this piece of paranioa lifted from this storyline: http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/08/17/russian-anti-gay-group-sues-madonna-for-10m-for-causing-moral-suffering/

(Alexei Kolotkov, one of the activists who claims that Madonna caused him moral suffering said: “Maybe someone does not see the link but after Madonna’s concert maybe some boy becomes gay, some girl becomes lesbian, fewer children are born as a result and this big country cannot defend its borders – for me it causes moral suffering.”)

Morbert

Shame on those girls for disrespecting the church like that.

Also, shame on Jesus for storming the temple. These people clearly have no respect for religion.

Juza1973

Onesimus wrote: »

In Ukraine, a half naked female took a chainsaw and cut down a large Ukrainian Monument Crucifix ( and took photos of it too ) and so it continues.

They are receiving support from the west and pop stars such as Paul Mc Cartney and Madonna, yet the ''occupy wall street'' crowd get horrible reactions from the western Media as do those who deny the Holocaust get imprisoned and so on when they speak out. But to those who attack and oppose the Orthodox Church/Christians we westerners support eh?

Yet here is the western Media praising **** Riot for entering private ( not Public ) property and creating moral injury on Orthodox Christians present and disturbing the peace and it is not seen as a hate crime by the west, in fact, by some as a prayer? it is viewed as freedom of speech and applauded?

Something is seriously wrong here.

Note that Kasparov has been arrested and it seems that he is risking five year for having bitten a policeman. Nothing has been confirmed yet, however he is going to be interrogated and since he has not offended religion and he is not a sexy woman that can entertain masses his freedom is not held sacred by the circus that is santifing P**** Riot. I can understand that P is more entertaining than a politician in a tie chanting old slogans, but even sexy young women are not authorised to use violence no matter what Madonna and Paul McCarney think.