Impeding a business yet he was not, from the videos I saw, preventing people from going in. Yet on that same note, people are allowed to riot, block streets, and similar, and police are LITERALLY ordered to stand down and not do a thing. Is that right or just, then? For they are also impeding businesses and, instead of being arrested, are actually applauded by many.
On the note of somebody entering a church and reading another religion's, in most cases this is privately owned property, no? A DMV, being a governmental office, is open to public and not privately held, but governmentally held. So there is a difference; If the owner allows it, fine. Same as with, say, Walmart; If somebody stands in the greeting area of the privately owned building and shouts doomsday threats, but the managers allow it, fine, as long as he doesn't actually try to harm anybody.
I also note you didn't mention the laws I brought up preventing prayer in any public place, which goes against the first amendment stating that the government (and yes, this includes state even though it says Congress, as the fourteenth incorporated it) can neither encourage nor prohibit religions or people engaging in them (one can make the argument as well that since DMV is government-owned, they are technically again breaking the amendment by prohibiting it). Yet by making it illegal to pray, they are prohibiting people from engaging in their religion. Is this right in your view?
Are Christians as persecuted in America as elsewhere? No, not by a long shot, as has been proven; Middle East is the worst offender. Are they persecuted at all? Yes, many are, if we are to be 100% honest. As are Muslims, Atheists, Mormons, Jews, and every other religion.
Personally I believe there is good and bad in each group. And I do my best to judge (since I fail in the "Judge not", being human and all) based on one's character, not their beliefs or lack thereof. Yet when I see laws such as that passed, yes, it does anger me, particularly since, as I read, the North Carolina law mentioned, for example, actually explicitly states "Prayers in Jesus' name". So not prayers in any others, but specifically banning the words "Jesus Christ" from prayers that may be said in public.
You are free to your interpretation of the law. The men were arrested for "impeding a business". The statute was in the post. We may choose to believe that it is legal to go into a place where folks have congregated and use the opportunity to read to them. For you, perhaps, it would have been OK for someone to have spouted off obscenities, read from a Muslim tract, or from a Mormon tract. It is NOT a matter of being offensive. If that were the issue (I suppose a court will decide), than the men could have said anything at all, except the obvious "fire" or similar.
As an aside, would it be OK if someone walked into your church and started reading to your congregation or youth group? Or, if not your church, how about starting reading Muslim propaganda to a youth group meeting?
