Ukraine bans activities of religious groups with ties to Russia, fearing their collaboration in war

Source: MSN.

The story reports, “Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a decree enacting a National Security and Defense Council decision to impose sanctions on representatives of religious organizations associated with Russia, which invaded Ukraine more than nine months ago.”

The decree signals the end of religious liberty in Ukraine, which is a very peculiar thing for the U.S. and NATO to support.

Ukraine isn’t worth fighting for.

89 thoughts on “Ukraine bans activities of religious groups with ties to Russia, fearing their collaboration in war

  1. Representatives of organizations, religious or otherwise, being sanctioned by the country INVADED is a national security issue, not a religious liberty one.

    Leaders of countries have an obligation to protect their country from enemies, foreign and domestic. Many of the oaths taken by politicians and military members in this country sate that clearly.

    The only thing peculiar here is YOUR continued support for Russia and Putin in this immoral attack on a neighboring country.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. RE: “Representatives of organizations, religious or otherwise, being sanctioned by the country INVADED is a national security issue, not a religious liberty one.”

      I disagree. In this case, national security is just an excuse for Ukrainian brown shirts to harass religious leaders. As reported, “Members of the Security Service of Ukraine, the National Guard and police searched the [Kyiv’s Pechersk Lavra] monastery last week after a priest spoke favorably about Russia during a service there. The Security Service said its agents searched more than 350 church buildings in all, including at another monastery and in a diocese of the Rivne region, 150 miles west of Kyiv, the capital.”

      If the FBI, National Guard and Metro police searched 350 synagogues in Washington D.C. because a rabbi said something Joe Biden didn’t like, that would be a comparable cause for concern.

      Like

      1. Of course you disagree. You are cheering for the downfall of Ukraine so anything that is done in protection of its sovereignty is anathema to your opinions.

        This is not about some priest or Rabbi saying something Zelensky doesn’t “like”. This is about the probable collaboration between the Kremlin and religious leaders inside Ukraine, undermining the country and its leadership. If a Rabbi in DC was collaborating with forces from a country invading the US, I would fully expect the synagogues in question to be looked into.

        Like

        1. RE: “If a Rabbi in DC was collaborating with forces from a country invading the US, I would fully expect the synagogues in question to be looked into.”

          In the U.S., searches require probable cause. In Ukraine, there is no rule of law.

          Like

    2. “Leaders of countries have an obligation to protect their country from enemies, foreign and domestic.” Then you must support internment/concentration camps too. War is war, right?

      Like

      1. Let’s start with concentration camps. Those were developed PRIOR to the actual war and were intended as a means to provide slave labor and then, ultimately, a path to carry out the “final solution”.

        The interment camps in this country during WWII were wrong.

        I have never proposed support for either of the two things you cite. For you to ASSume that says a lot more about you then what I said about probable collaboration in Ukraine by religious leaders who support or have ties to the leadership of the country that INVADED Ukraine.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I never specified any particular camp type during WW2 or any other war, just a general camp for these “collaborating” religous factions. That is what you “ASSume”. You seem to think religious persecution is acceptable because a “leader has a responsibility to protect their country”. Why not put them in camps too? War is war, right?

          Like

          1. Let me be perfectly clear, because it appears you want things both ways in your attempt to discredit my opinion.

            There is no indication of placing religious leaders in “camps” of any kind for their vocal support of the invading country. They could be arrested fore treason or banished from the country and the government would be justified in doing so.

            Like

  2. “The decree signals the end of religious liberty in Ukraine”

    Laughable. What part of being invaded do you not understand? The leader of the Russian Orthodox Church – Patriarch Kirill – has firmly taken a stand on the side of Russia in this fascist war of aggression. Kirill has made the Russian Orthodox Church a tool of Putin. If there are fifth columnists ready to do Putin’s bidding in Ukraine, it behooves the security services to find out wh0 they are and what they plan to do. The ROC is a good place to look.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. It is NOT religious persecution when the religious leaders in question are threatening the sovereignty of the country.

        I am sure you are just fine with Putin jailing, disappearing or assassinating those outside or inside of his country that have NOT invaded them.

        You continuing search for reasons to damn Ukraine idiotic.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. RE: “It is NOT religious persecution when the religious leaders in question are threatening the sovereignty of the country.”

        Of course it is. But tell us, how have the religious leaders in Ukraine threatenned the sovereignty of the country? Do they have an army; do they have assassins; do they have political spies?

        The source I provided doesn’t say.

        Like

        1. …”how have the religious leaders in Ukraine threatened the sovereignty of the country”

          Probable collaboration with Kremlin forces inside Ukraine.

          If you were alive during WWII, you probably would have supported the Parisians who collaborated with Germany. – IMO.

          Liked by 1 person

      3. War puts a lot of rights on the line. That is one of the reasons war is not a good choice. And in this case Russia made this a war of their choosing.

        Their intended victim is fighting back at great sacrifice to its lives and the nation. If a church is aiding and abetting the enemy then it is no longer a place of worship but rather a spy network hiding behind vestments and clerical rhetoric.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. RE: “If a church is aiding and abetting the enemy then it is no longer a place of worship but rather a spy network hiding behind vestments and clerical rhetoric.”

          I might agree in principle if there were evidence of material aid and abetting. But, as reported, the aid and abetting in this case is purely ideological: “Moscow Patriarch Kirill, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, has justified Russia’s war in Ukraine as part of a ‘metaphysical struggle’ to prevent a liberal ideological encroachment from the West.”

          In America we believe that the spiritual views of religious leaders are to be protected against state interference. It is dishonorable of us to support Ukraine by compromising our own values.

          Like

          1. RE: “Based on your history of counterfactualness, I seriously doubt it.”

            You are just guessing, but you can test your guess by providing evidence that the UOC is aiding and abetting Russia in some material way. Why don’t you?

            Like

          2. “I don’t know that Kirill’s views are anti-democratic or fascist in any way. . .”

            He is one of Putin’s strongest supporters and says the invasion and brutal war is justified because God wants Russia to stop the spread of western democratic and liberal values. Connect the dots, if you can. Of course, you won’t even try. That might involve thinking.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. Sorry, no.

            According to the article I used for a source, “Kirill, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, has justified Russia’s war in Ukraine as part of a ‘metaphysical struggle’ to prevent a liberal ideological encroachment from the West.”

            Being opposed to “liberal ideological encroachment from the West” doesn’t make Kirill anti-democratic or fascist.

            Like

          4. So now we have deNazification and Western liberal ideologies as the pretenses for invading a sovereign nation. Whatever happened to getting better access to the Black Sea, wheat fields and “Ukraine is not really a country anyway”? Those are infinitely more accurate as far as reasons by Putin.

            Can anyone make up their mind about why Russia is trying to destroy a nation?

            Liked by 2 people

          5. “Being opposed to “liberal ideological encroachment from the West” doesn’t make Kirill anti-democratic or fascist.”

            Supporting a fascist government does.

            And what is this “liberal ideological encroachment” that he is opposed to? The ideals of individual liberty, tolerance, and the rule of law. If being opposed to those is not essentially fascist, what is it then?

            Liked by 1 person

          6. RE: “Can anyone make up their mind about why Russia is trying to destroy a nation?”

            Sure. Had the Bay of Pigs invasion been successful the U.S. would have tried to destroy Cuba. One doesn’t have to be “pro-Russia” to recognize that their pursuit of self interest is a lot like our own.

            Like

          7. “One doesn’t have to be “pro-Russia” to recognize that their pursuit of self interest is a lot like our own.”

            The essence of fascism – might makes right. Well, it doesn’t. Not when we invaded Cuba, Vietnam, or Iraq and not when Russia invades Georgia and Ukraine.

            Liked by 1 person

        1. RE: “Protecting your country from the agents of your enemy is not religious persecution.”

          Why, because you say so? How is Ukraine protecting itself from the agents of its enemy by searching monasteries for “wrong think”?

          Like

          1. You calling for anyone to provide evidence if something when you and Don live in a speculative world, is milk out the nose funny.

            When YOU say it, just has to be true; when any one else says anything, you refuse to believe, evidence or not.

            Liked by 1 person

          1. Wow. No body cares? I don’t care what YOU think about my calling out your rhetoric for what it is.

            Your BS is fertilizer for your soul. Enjoy it while it lasts.

            Like

          2. “That would be you, if you support Zelenski. I support the religious freedom of the UOC.”

            Zelensky is neither a fascist not a dictator. He came to power in an honest election and murdered nobody on the way.

            Religious freedom does not include the freedom to aid and abet an invader. Duh!

            Liked by 1 person

          3. RE: “Zelensky is neither a fascist nor a dictator.”

            I say he is. To be elected he promised peace, but once in office he started killing Ukrainian citizens (ethnic cleansing).

            Like

          4. “I say he is”

            You are wrong and the reason you give is a LIE. Zelenskyy’s “ethnic cleansing” is Russian propaganda bullshit. Zelenskyy was elected promising to find a way to work with Russia. Putin saw that as weakness and doubled his efforts to sieze more of Ukraine. The war in Donbas started by Russia in 2014 continued.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. BZZZZ! Another lie from our resident pro-Putin lackey. Kremlin backed separatists attempting to take over the country do not qualify as citizens. Especially when many of them were shipped in from Russia.

            Liked by 1 person

  3. I remember when liberals supported free speech, no exceptions. But I guess that became inconvenient.

    If the priests were hiding spies or weapons that would be one thing, but simply taking sides with the Russians in a country with a significant ethnic Russian population is not reason to suppress the church.

    On the contrary, it provides more justification for freeing the ethnic Russian portions of the country from the fascist Ukrainian regime.

    Like

    1. “the fascist Ukrainian regime.”

      Your blindness to reality is getting worse and worse. Is it senescence setting in?

      I too can remember. I remember when conservatives in this country were not fascists. No exceptions.

      According to the story posted, a monastery was searched by the security services because one of the priests used the pulpit to praise Russia. When your country is at war because an actual fascist has invaded and thousands of your countrymen are facing death at their hands, that is the kind of “free speech” that cannot be allowed.

      You people can now get all exercised about freedom of religion or whatever the propaganda spin of the day is, but the truth is you have been rooting for the murderous fascist dictator ever since your Dear Leader declared him to be making a “genius” move.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. So, if a US President decided that reporting on a particular point of view were a threat to the country, you would be OK with him silencing those voices?

        Remember that a majority of the people in the Donbas have voted to be part of Russia. It is not a cut and dried issue as to who the aggressor is.

        Those churches have a right to state their case, including the desire to accept the outcome of the plebicite.

        Like

        1. “So, if a US President decided that reporting on a particular point of view were a threat to the country, you would be OK with him silencing those voices?”

          If the “particular point of view” was that the people invading our country, bombing our cities, killing our children and raping our women were in the right I would expect them to be silenced. The first duty of the President is to protect and defend the Constitution.

          “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

          Trying to apply peacetime standards to the Zelensky government is not honest. IMHO. Maybe Mr. Roberts doesn’t, but you know better.

          And I would add that anything Zelensky may have done in defense of his country, Putin has done far worse for far less reason so – as you always do – you have two standards. One for those you agree with and one for those who you don’t.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. If your assessment of the situation were correct, why would you fear losing in the marketplace of ideas? If the Russians are as bad as you say, and Zelensky is the hero you claim, that should be an easy debate to win.

            That Zelensky, and you, see silencing those voices as the only way to prevail says more about your side than the Russians.

            Like

          2. Putin has been silencing voices since he assumed power. Thousands are in prison for objecting to, or even mentioning, the invasion.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. Ukraine was working hard to cleanup and join the civilized Western world. Russia would have none of that.

            If a nation wants to join the EU, or even NATO, that is of no concern to Russia just because it says so.

            Liked by 2 people

          4. “If your assessment of the situation were correct, why would you fear losing in the marketplace of ideas? Blah blah blah”

            All this may seem clear and easy to you from the comfort of your Lazy Boy but Ukraine has been pushed into a life and death struggle and not some bloodless debate. Maybe you can get back to us with similar thoughts about the “marketplace of ideas” in Russia where referring to the war as a “war” was made a crime and, as early as March, priests were prosecuted and punished for preaching about peace.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. Incredible! Russian human rights violations for wholesale murder and torture, removing children to Russia and destroying infrastructure gets nary a nod. But a country about 1/5 the population struggles to avoid a brutal takeover and you go off on a Russian priest who was investigated for spreading Russian propaganda.

            What you see going on in Ukraine is a sample of the right wing love affair with a civil war here. Unless you have experience watching your homeland being attacked and summarily destroyed, I can’t give much credence to the anti-Zelensky crowd.

            Green t-shirts and all.

            Liked by 2 people

          6. You bought up the marketplace if ideas and losing it. I used the lack of any real ideas from the GOP as a reference.

            Putin is losing in the marketplace of ideas so he invades, has his troops commit warcrimes, orders attacks on civiilans asnd civilian infrastructrure.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. …”silencing those voices as the only way to prevail says more about your side than the Russian”

            To quote my dearly departed Grandmother, “Horseshit!”

            Your hypocrisy rises to levels beyond belief at times.

            Liked by 1 person

          1. Still waiting for evidence of voting problems severe enough to affect the outcome.

            Just because you don’t like the results does n’t mean they aren’t real, you guys are getting of Trumpy on that.

            Like

          2. “Still waiting for evidence of voting problems severe enough to affect the outcome.”

            It is not about “voting problems.” Duh!

            It is about the fact that the elections were ILLEGAL – you don’t get to organize plebiscites in someone else’s country – and the fact that a large proportion of the potential voters had been killed, intimidated, or driven away by Russian soldiers, militia, and mercenaries. This is not really hard to understand. So WTF is your problem?

            Liked by 1 person

          3. The outcome of the plebiscite is supported by the fact that the people of the Donbass had been trying to break free if Ukraine for a decade before the Russians invaded.

            Like

          4. “The outcome of the plebiscite is supported by the fact that the people of the Donbass had been trying to break free if Ukraine for a decade before the Russians invaded.

            Uh, that is not true. Russia invaded Donbas at about the same time as they invaded Crimea. That was in 2014.

            I grant you that there are SOME people living in what LEGALLY became Ukraine who would rather be Russian than Ukrainian. The legal and moral choice was there for the taking – move to Russia. They did not take that choice. Instead, instigated by Russia and with Russian military help, they decided on civil war. Well fuck them. The Ukraine government has every right to subdue their violent insurrection and had been trying to do that for almost a decade killing thousands of Russian soldiers and mercenaries in the process.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. Th borders of the Ukraine were set by the Soviets for the purpose of breaking up ethnic Russian cohesion.

            There is nothing legitimate about the polictal asperations of the Soviets.

            Like

          6. “There is nothing legitimate about the polictal asperations of the Soviets.”

            However they came to be Ukraine has legal borders recognized by international law and by the explicit agreement with Russia whereby Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons. So, as is often the case, you are just plain wrong.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. “Because you say so?
            The people who live there are the rightful arbiters of those borders.”

            No, they are not. That is not how it works. And, besides that, they do not agree.

            Like

          8. There were no problems with the votes themselves. Only people that were in favor of annexation or were bussed in from Russia to live in the region voted. Those who feared for their lives if they voted against it didn’t vote, left of their own accord or were disappeared into reeducation camps inside of Russia.

            Like

      2. RE: “that is the kind of ‘free speech’ that cannot be allowed.”

        What an extraordinary thing to say. In all the 66 years of my life, I never imagined I would ever hear an American refute basic liberties so egregiously. I feel like the USA has become the USSR.

        Like

        1. “What an extraordinary thing to say. . .”

          Not really. Giving aid and comfort to those making war on us is the only crime specifically identified in the Constitution and the punishment can be death.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. “ Ukraine isn’t worth fighting for.”

    Putin is betting the lives of 100,000 plus countrymen, many of his tanks, some ships, thousands of missiles and probably millions of artillery shells that it is. Zelensky saw his bet, and raised.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. “Zelenski is a loser for us.”

        But Putin is a winner to you. Says a lot more about YOU as an American than it does Zelensky as the leader, democratically elected, by the way, of a sovereign nation invaded by its overly aggressive, paranoid neighbor.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s