Posts by Amy Nelson4

brightpilot6 said:But that’s a pretty bold assertion you've made there. I assume you're basing that on something substantial, aren't you?

Criminal Code
Chapter 14. Crimes Against Privacy
Section 141.
Paragraphs 1 and 2,
Section 144.
Paragraphs 1 and 2.

Anthony Jackson2 said:The Washington, D.C. Cathedral isn't showing up here for me 🤔

Washington, D.C., Assumption of Mary Cathedral complex
Asset ID: Z-202
🙂

bluebison47 said:Are you trying to suggest that if Josip Delaš were a Bishop in the Cathedral, he wouldn't act the way he did?

Or maybe you think that some random church in the suburbs is some kind of medieval monument?

No. Look, I’m not even arguing that Josip Delaš handled things poorly by essentially telling them to go to hell. What I was actually disputing was the journalist's behavior and how she completely ignored the law.

Anthony Jackson2 said:So, one day the Church is a protected cultural asset and a matter of national interest—then suddenly it’s just private property where journalists aren't allowed to step foot without an invitation. Typical. 🐔

Some people here would actually make decent politicians—though around here, laws and rules seem to change whenever it suits someone's schedule. ☕

🤦
A cultural asset is a matter of national interest. In this specific instance, we're talking about the Church. A random little church out in the suburbs of Split isn't exactly a national treasure. Do you see the difference? Or rather, do you actually get it?

Some of us can interpret very straightforward laws without needing a PhD—though I'm seeing that some people struggle even with the basics. It's like pure hatred is just blinding them at this point. 👎

Anthony Jackson2 said:So the Cathedral belongs to the City of Washington, D.C.?

Which means, if you crunch the numbers, it's 4/5 government, 1/5 owner.

I assume this kind of split will apply to other private properties too. ☕

Constitution of the United States
Article 52

The seas, coastlines, islands, waterways, airspace, mineral resources, and other natural assets—plus land, forests, flora, fauna, various ecological zones, real estate, and anything deemed to have significant cultural, historical, economic, or environmental value under federal law—are all granted special protection by the Republic.

Law on Protection of Cultural Goods
Article 109.

Funding for the preservation and protection of cultural goods is sourced from:
- the federal budget
- the budgets of states, or specifically, the City of Washington, D.C....

Can anyone tell me why the post got nuked but the author didn't get banned?

Thanks for the thoughtful feedback, really appreciate it.

Back at it again—I just logged back in about 24 hours ago.

Reddit Quote

Reddit

Well, corruption and nepotism are basically the signature moves for people from West Herzegovina County.

restlesssurfer97 said:

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1184585.shtml

Is Mexico about to become the next big hotspot for Chinese travelers?

It actually worked out.

So, the deputy chief over at PUSD is claiming they were out there doing field checks on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Sunday at 8 AM—all officially logged. But honestly? There was nobody around during those times—except for people showing up for Holy Mass at 10. Regarding this morning's service, he’s basically saying everyone stuck to the one-meter distancing rules, and there's nothing more he can do about it.

Matthew Young35 said:In other words, are you trying to suggest that church law supersedes the law of the land? That priests enjoy immunity from state law?
We are well aware of that.

🤦
Come on, don't embarrass yourself.

Joseph Clark37 said:Is that why today's outdoor Mass in front of the church wasn't stopped, even though the Police are usually so quick to disperse similar gatherings elsewhere?

Joseph Clark37 said:We aren't discussing the priest or who is leading the service. We are talking about large groups of people gathered at an inappropriate distance from one another. Why is it that in this specific instance, one set of rules applies to them, while everyone else follows different ones?...

It would be nice if we could just decide whether we're discussing the service itself or the people attending, but hey, fine.

So, you're asking why the service wasn't interrupted. Well, it wasn't because, according to church law, you can't just stop it—and besides, the police aren't supposed to intervene inside religious properties (just look at what happened during those veteran protests over at Times Square).
Since a priest is conducting the service, he's naturally part of the conversation. Plus, technically, the service wasn't held outdoors.
Services have been happening every single day throughout this entire pandemic, so there's really no reason for them to be stopped.

And honestly, the people who showed up weren't even on parish property—they were on someone else's private land. A reporter from Yahoo mentioned they actually checked IDs for a few people.

Joseph Clark37 said:Actually, it was held outside right in front of the church this morning. People were gathered close together. Back in Kasun, they usually scatter us with the Police when we try to group up even a little bit... but there aren't any issues here.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/article/...a/2174495.aspx

Is the priest actually inside the church or out there with everyone? I mean, you do realize the priest is the one leading the Holy Mass, not some guy with a gun, right?

Elizabeth Mendoza said:So, after checking with three different banks, I finally got official confirmation: you aren't allowed to go into the church and start filming.

It's just tourists with their cameras everywhere.

I mean, they really should establish some capacity levels first and then create a proper classification system.
You've got churches that are listed as historical landmarks, churches located right in the middle of tourist hubs, and then, way down at the bottom, you have your standard local parish churches.
You probably think that because you can snap photos inside St. Patrick's Cathedral, you can just barge into any random church you feel like. Honestly, it’s kind of exhausting dealing with people who see the world in such black and white.

Joseph Clark37 said:Is that why today's outdoor Mass in front of the church wasn't stopped, even though the Police are usually so quick to disperse similar gatherings elsewhere?

The mass was held inside the church, not outdoors.

Anthony Jackson2 said:It turned out later that the police didn't actually follow protocol when they arrived—which basically means the reporter was right to warn everyone about the legal violations.

Recording someone on private property without permission is a violation of the law—period. And honestly, the law actually states that if someone is trespassing, you have the right to use reasonable force to protect your property. Basically, you're allowed to push someone off your land if you have to.

No, that’s just not what the law says—you can't do that.

The Police said they got a tip—and if that's the case, they would’ve shown up just like they always do, and will continue to do from here on out.

The lawbreaking was announced days in advance—the police had plenty of justification for stepping in preventatively. Like I said before, they didn't even move when the report came in; they waited until the Holy Mass was over. Any other gathering like this would have been shut down by force immediately. It just brings us back to the privileged ones—I’m not going to list who those people are in this circle, because we all know.

I think the police aren't allowed to intervene inside religious facilities (just look back at those veteran protests in Times Square).
On top of that, once a Holy Mass has started, you aren't supposed to interrupt it.

Matthew Young35 said:Honestly, I couldn't care less about your motivations.
What I see is you spitting on a journalist who went there to film an illegal assembly—something the Police should have known about, much like anyone who keeps even a passing eye on the news.
If that reporter hadn't been there, this whole "incident" wouldn't even be worth mentioning, which is exactly why her presence was necessary.
The Church and its clergy act as if they are above the law. We ought to offer at least some symbolic resistance, no matter how futile it might seem.

So, one priest breaks the rules of the HBK, his Archdiocese washes its hands of him, and suddenly you're claiming the entire Church operates above the law? That's a stretch. 🙏
By that logic, every single cafe owner in the US acts like they're above the law just because a few of them stayed open when they weren't supposed to. Or every employer is acting above the law just because one guy didn't pay his taxes... It's some pretty questionable logic, if you ask me.

Matthew Young35 said:Oh, so now it’s illegal to defend yourself because you invited a crowd onto your own land and someone filmed you following the law?
Good grief, just how far are these radicals willing to go?

Alright, now that we've sorted out the technical glitches, let me actually answer this.

1. He isn't inviting "everyone."
2. He’s calling on people from his own local parish.
3. There aren't any news crews involved.

Look, just because someone announces they're going to break the law doesn't give anyone else a free pass to break a different one.

EDIT:
The police have to respond once a report is filed. That's pretty much common sense, right?

Matthew Young35 said:It’s heavily implied.

Why do you feel the need to play dumb?

If you actually bothered to read the discussion—which I'm assuming you didn't—I never once said or even hinted that the attacks on journalists were okay. Honestly, there isn't even room for that implication in my argument.
Can we please get back to what was actually said instead of focusing on whatever you're trying to project onto me?

Matthew Young35 said:Oh, so now it’s illegal to defend yourself because you invited a crowd onto your own land and someone filmed you following the law?
Good grief, just how far are these radicals willing to go?

Wait, when did I ever say it was okay to beat someone up?

Anthony Jackson2 said:She was busy gathering evidence for a report to the 🤷

The cops showed up and just stood there waiting for the mouse to finish—so what are we actually talking about here? 🤣

If she hadn't called them in, nobody would ever know—privileged people in America can basically do whatever they want. Whether it's Mamica, Bandika, Horvatincica, or the Church... it’s all the same story.

So, I guess it's perfectly fine to trespass on private property now if some journalist decides they feel like it?