Over the years, the Universal Life Church has served as a haven for the downtrodden. It would open its doors to those that did not have a place to go. On the whole, we as a society are not very welcoming, but that was not the case with this particular establishment.
Sadly, as the saying goes, no good deed will go unpunished. As the cases piled up against Presiding Minister George Freeman and his establishment, the opposition kept bringing up parts of the law that would serve their case, instead of protecting the community that they so adamantly claimed to defend.
Claims against the church would state that it’s not specifically sanctioned to be a sanctuary. The laws that bind society are those that help stop wrong from happening. The definition of wrong in this context is referring to actions that would harm the general population. There is no logical reason why a society should constitute providing safe harbor to the shunned and under-served as a crime.
Problems always arise with litigation that seeks to define religious freedoms. Such litigation hopes to define our world in black and white when the world is far more complex. It is built on shade of grey. The world is built on shade of grey that protect and help societies grow.
People like Mr. Freeman help societies grow. Establishments such as the Universal Life Church are what societies need to build around, in order to help its citizens, and to grow. Taking establishments and their leadership to court because they are trying to help people get back on their feet is unacceptable. Laws that hinder people from helping their fellow man are unacceptable.
This leads to the question being asked – whose side is the law actually on? From where we stand, it sure feels as if the law is working against the people.