[MR] Policy on Religion (very long)

[Velsthe1 at aol.com]

[The Following is the majority of a response to a private e-mail from this topic. The original points have been paraphrased for continuity while keeping the senders original mail private]

>>

{Question of Interpretation of Corpora and the allowances of private practices}

Alright, perhaps we are dealing with differant dictionaries. What is your definition of 'Private Expression of Religion'? 'An individual evading the majority to do what they will in a place that will not interfere, or even be noticed by anyone else' is the extreme but legally defined definition that I've dealt with.

{Membership in the SCA does not overshadow Constitutional Rights, despite current public opinion in schools}

Certainly this is true. But in any public place, we not only have the right to have our own beliefs, but the right to be free from the beliefs of others. With few exceptions, events take place at locations that are open to the public. Everyone has the right to their beliefs, but there is no right to practice (see below).

{On recent litigation against the U.S. Army for supressing the beliefs and practices of Wiccans and Pagans actively serving, and it's relation to this topic and percieved litigation against the Society} 

I am well aware of this, as I was at ground zero, so to speak. I was a representative for my Battalion during the 5th Corps review of Pagans in the Command. Of 2500 active duty members on the Kaserne, we had a high 11% falling outside the "Big Three (Christianity, Judaism, Islam)" accepted Religions. These personnel previously had not been accounted for becuase of the lack of acceptance of their beliefs and had filed as "No Religious Prefenance" to protect themselves from the fears and conceptions of their co-workers.

This is how I came to find the arguements as to why Wiccan and other "Pagan" Service Members were not allowed time and location to practice and were not covered by Equal Opportunity Regulations, and this comes from civilian laws that are still in place. 
The first Ammendment garuantees everyone the right to believe any way one chooses. However, there are local and state laws within the borders of the United States that prohibit practices of many of these systems (remember the Mormon/Polygamy thing 130 years ago, still happens). Ownership of certain items that would be used in these ceremonies, in some states, is considered conspiracy to commit a felony. It isn't illegal to be a homosexual, but many states have Sodomy Acts that prohibit activities chiefly practiced by homosexuals. The only difference is, Sodomy Acts aren’t so much enforced as they once were. 
Pennsylvania, as a state, has a laundry list of laws prohibiting ownership as items associated with Wiccan and Pagan practice. This is chiefly because through the 70’s and 80’s a number of ‘Satanic Cults’ were implicated in several cases of kidnapping and murder. There are also “Public Decency” Acts that may cuase many cases public practice (outside of someone’s home/permenant domicile) of Non-Mainstream religions are considered contributing to moral degredation, or contributing to the delinquency of a minor if present (I saw this happen firsthand).
There are other similar laws in other U.S. States, usually on local levels and enforced when the it suits the local constabulary to do so. 

The SCA spread overseas in large part to the activities of U.S. Service Members, and, for the most part, covers the same area. Part of the Status Of Forces Agreements that allow for American Forces to be stationed in foreign countries is jurisdiction and enforcement of Local National Law. It surprises many to hear that there are countries in ‘The Free Western World’ where the practice of ‘Witchcraft’ is still punishable by imprisonment and confiscation of “Sorcerous Implements”.  It is for these reasons that the ‘Official Line’ did not support the activities of Service Members with other than ‘traditional’ belief systems. Similar too, the SCA. Corpora is the governing document of the ENTIRE Society, with that, international laws have to be taken into account when making legal descisions. 

“Legal Religious Observances” then become subject to many different layers of legal and illegal, as does the flexibility of the term ‘neither condone nor encourage’. 

Certainly, anyone who sees a Practice of Religious Significance may leave the immediate area quietly with no problems. Even if the situation is questionable as to what is legal and isn’t, so long as a casual observer has no compulsion to file a complaint, there is still no problem. But if a casual observer has a vendetta, or has an overdeveloped sense of strict adherence to the law, or is local law enforcement official, then there is a serious problem. This section is worded in such a way that SCA Inc. cannot be held liable for any infractions. The Site Officials and persons taking part may all face legal action and, even if charges are dropped, will have to pay court costs, lose time from work, etc. As an Autocrat, one may stop a religious observance, as SCA Inc is protecting it’s own skin, so may an autocrat.

Again, personally, I have no issue with anyone actively practicing their beliefs, and so long as I am not expected to take part, nor is it forced in my face what despite my efforts to leave. Not everyone is so open-minded. It is merely my intention to expound on the counter arguments of which not everyone may be aware.

Apologies if this is beating a dead horse,


Vels