4368

Well, a committed Christian would likely believe that heaven is better than life on earth. But I also think they believe abortion violates the sixth commandment.

4369

I don’t what you mean by “committed” Christian, but if all the anti-choice group isn’t going to care what she says because I don’t think they believe there are fates worse than death. If they did, their logic would implode.

4370

I meant a sincere one who actually believes in the doctrines of their faith.* Such a person presumably thinks heaven is more pleasant than an earthly existence. That doesn’t mean, I hasten to add, that they think it’s okay to kill someone to put them in heaven, because that would violate a separate part of Christian doctrine, i.e., the sixth commandment.

Quite separately, for all I know some might believe that an aborted, therefore unbaptized, fetus might actually be condemned to hell. If one’s theology tends that way, it would make the fight against abortion all the more urgent. I’m not sure if anyone actually holds that belief, though.

** I’m speculating here, as I am not a Christian myself. But I have seen the sentiment reflected in literature, such as:

Death, be not proud, though some have called thee
Mighty and dreadful, for thou art not so;
For those whom thou think’st thou dost overthrow
Die not, poor Death, nor yet canst thou kill me.
From rest and sleep, which but thy pictures be,
Much pleasure; then from thee much more must flow,
And soonest our best men with thee do go,
Rest of their bones, and soul’s delivery.
Thou art slave to fate, chance, kings, and desperate men,
And dost with poison, war, and sickness dwell,
And poppy or charms can make us sleep as well
And better than thy stroke; why swell’st thou then?
One short sleep past, we wake eternally
And death shall be no more; Death, thou shalt die.

4371

Although Catholics don’t know for sure, some think that it’s a distinct possibility. And this indeed further motivates their opposition to abortion.

4372

That also means there would be a shitload of miscarried babies burning in hell too.

4373

It’s all part of God’s plan.

4374

Yes, possibly. But there is no burning in the modern Catholic hell. Just separation and loneliness. Sort of like the various AI hells in Black Mirror.

4375

If you are a Christian, at least from the major versions of Christianity, then of cours you believe heaven is perfection, but even the stories showcase key persons, say Samson, asked for god to give him the strength he needed to end his enemies, and he also ended himself. I don’t recall the part where he said now that I am blind and weak and a slave I should just live out my life in misery.

Anti-choice is that, exactly a choice, and all I am saying is I am not sure the anti-choice group actually believes that an living in existence could be so miserable and so wretched that it is best avoided.

You don’t have to be committed to be a Christian. You just have to have faith and belief. I am sure the Evangelicals would call themselves committed but they are not more Christian than other Christians simply because they say so and their leaders are on TV.

4376

Right, but add to that analogy that 1) the officials told you the rabbi could ‘visit’ you without mentioning that they actually meant ‘from the other side of a bulletproof glass partition that makes it impossible for him to perform the bris’, and 2) you found out about that two weeks before, not the same day, and 3) you made the request 10 days before, not the day of, and 4) a duly constituted panel decided that you might be in the right and wanted to consider it, and 5) 5 other people decided to overrule them when it wasn’t necessary for them to do that.

I mean, those do seem to be the actual facts in the case, right?

4377

Well, that’s the question isn’t it. Was it reasonable for a prisoner to assume that his visitor would be allowed in the chamber? The district court heard the most testimony and thought it wasn’t reasonable. The Eleventh disagreed, and the SCOTUS sided with the district court.

Who’s right? I really don’t know enough about prison life to be certain, but it’s not obviously reasonable to me. I have worked in other government settings enough to know that getting a third party access to a secure area is often going to take a lot of effort and planning, and bureaucrats are notoriously inflexible.

You’re putting the burden on the state, but that’s not where it lay. The burden was on Ray to demonstrate that his argument very likely to prevail, not just “might be right” or “worth considering.” The default was to proceed with execution, and the SCOTUS decided that overruling the initial decision was not necessary.

4378

Was that the question? I’m losing track here of what was the question. It sounds like everyone agrees that if the prisoner found out about the issue on the 23rd of January and raised the issue in the 28th of January, then that’s not an unreasonable delay and wouldn’t constitute an unreasonable last minute objection, and you have to actually assume negligence prior to that date on the prisoner’s part to get to a conclusion that it was an unreasonable last minute objection. That’s…special.

Edit: Even the conservative National Review dissents.

4379

Because it doesn’t matter when Ray found out. What matters is what a reasonable person would have done.

If I find out on May 10 that I was supposed to file my tax return by April 15, I am SOL.

And yes, the initial court decided that someone who waits years before making the necessary inquiries must not be genuinely interested in the process.

Ray argued that the state didn’t even have a firm policy until after he raised the issue. The state disagrees.

Who is right? I don’t know, but it’s not obviously Ray.

4380

…and that only people who demonstrate what you think is ‘genuine interest in the process’ have rights. That’s a shit ruling.

4381

That’s my paraphrase, not the court’s language:

Let me also point out that the notion that one should be able to ignore filing deadlines if they have a really strong case is… special.

4382

Your citation just confirms what I said: That the lower court ignored when Ray learned that his imam would not be permitted, and decided instead that he should have learned earlier, and that because he didn’t learn earlier, his religious freedom claim needn’t be treated as sincere.

Here is the SCOTUS majority in Masterpiece:

In this country, the place of secular officials isn’t to sit in judgment of religious beliefs, but only to protect their free exercise,

4383

Despite my poor paraphrasing, the court did not judge Ray’s “sincerity”. It judged whether he was “reasonable”. Because the standard is always what a “reasonable person” would have done, not what actually happened.

If you are served a lawsuit but don’t actually read the summons, you might miss your court date. And therefore lose the lawsuit. At that point no court will listen to your defense, even if it has a rock-solid basis on your fundamental rights. It’s too late. And no court will care if you didn’t know your court date, because the papers were literally in your hands and you should have known.

4384

Sure, but that’s a terrible analogy to this case. Ray was given information that led him to believe his Imam would be permitted, because the information the prison provided didn’t clearly distinguish between in the chamber and in the audience. You’re basically arguing that I should be scouring the legal databases and filings every day to see if I have been served a subpoena that has somehow gotten lost, and that if I don’t do that, it’s on me.

We can agree to disagree, but there’s really no doubt that SCOTUS could have kept this whole thing at arms length and let the 11th circuit here the argument on Ray’s rights. Even conservatives are arguing that point. Basically the court determined that the state’s procedures and rules trumped his rights without ever hearing the case.

4385

The reality is though, this guy was likely not actually a devout Muslim. So the effect of the decision likely didn’t actually have a significant impact, beyond not delaying his execution for a horrific crime.

4386

I’m pretty sure that SCOTUS has similarly opined that it isn’t their place to decide if someone’s avowed beliefs are sincere or not.

Alabama’s laws / rules are transparently biased in favor of Christians. Why isn’t that a matter worthy of review by the 11th circuit? Why cut off that review to expedite an execution that not even Ray was fighting any more?

4387

No, I’m arguing that if he had made the same request sooner, he would have succeeded.

Is it reasonable to wait until the last minute to make a request from an administrator, particularly if you’ve never filed it before and are not well-versed in the bureacracy? I don’t think so. Even for something as mundane as a passport, I’m sure not going to wait until the last possible minute to file an application. And if I did that and there were a misunderstanding (eg application rejected because the photo did not meet requirements) then I would accept the blame.