【法の崩壊】なぜ70年間一度も使われなかった“禁じ手”が突然使われたのか？現役牧師が告発する「家庭連合解散命令」に隠された強引なルール変更の罠
〜言葉の解釈だけで奪われる自由：オウム真理教の例外を『当たり前のルール』に書き換える現代の不条理〜
「証拠がないのに“推認”で裁く恐怖」バプテスト教会牧師が世論に流される裁判所に放った痛烈な一撃。宗教法人法81条の歪められた解釈を徹底解剖
〜【徹底検証】山尾志桜里氏の主張vs黒瀬牧師の異議。感情で法を曲げた先に待つ、民主主義の暗黒時代〜
・70年間の禁じ手発動
・現役牧師の異議申し立て
・ルールは途中で変えられた
・「証拠なき有罪」の罠
・次に裁かれるのは誰だ？
#宗教法人法81条 #解散命令請求 #法治主義の危機 #信教の自由 #黒瀬博 #バプテスト教会 #山尾志桜里 #法律の解釈
#世界平和統一家庭連合 #旧統一教会 #オウム真理教 #裁判所の暴走 #世論誘導
#マスコミが報じない真実 #知っておくべき不都合な真実
〜言葉の解釈だけで奪われる自由：オウム真理教の例外を『当たり前のルール』に書き換える現代の不条理〜
「証拠がないのに“推認”で裁く恐怖」バプテスト教会牧師が世論に流される裁判所に放った痛烈な一撃。宗教法人法81条の歪められた解釈を徹底解剖
〜【徹底検証】山尾志桜里氏の主張vs黒瀬牧師の異議。感情で法を曲げた先に待つ、民主主義の暗黒時代〜
・70年間の禁じ手発動
・現役牧師の異議申し立て
・ルールは途中で変えられた
・「証拠なき有罪」の罠
・次に裁かれるのは誰だ？
#宗教法人法81条 #解散命令請求 #法治主義の危機 #信教の自由 #黒瀬博 #バプテスト教会 #山尾志桜里 #法律の解釈
#世界平和統一家庭連合 #旧統一教会 #オウム真理教 #裁判所の暴走 #世論誘導
#マスコミが報じない真実 #知っておくべき不都合な真実
カテゴリ
🗞
ニューストランスクリプション
00:00A huge organization was created using a theory that had never been used in 70 years.
00:05They are about to be disbanded
00:08Hide-chan, what do you think about this from the perspective of a country governed by the rule of law?
00:13It hasn't been used for 70 years, and now of all times...
00:16Isn't that like changing the rules midway through?
00:20That's precisely the biggest mystery of this whole situation.
00:24Today, Dr. Kurose of Tokyo West Baptist Church will be using it.
00:29He threw
00:29A strong challenge to the courts and public opinion
00:33If you watch this video to the end
00:35Why is there a single interpretation of the term "freedom of religion" in Japan today?
00:41Therefore
00:41Is it about to be completely overturned?
00:44You will understand everything behind that shock.
00:47Now, before we get to the main topic, I have one promise for all of you viewers.
00:52Please let me
00:53This video defends a particular religious group or
00:57Conversely, this is not meant to incite criticism.
01:00yes
01:01We do not give any instructions or endorsements whatsoever.
01:05This is based solely on Dr. Kurose's climate text as the source.
01:09What is being discussed there?
01:11We will analyze it objectively from a neutral standpoint.
01:15Rather than taking one side or the other
01:18Unraveling the inconsistencies in legal logic and historical context.
01:22This is a discussion/analysis piece.
01:24As material to help everyone think for themselves with peace of mind.
01:28I hope you'll immerse yourself in it until the very end.
01:31Hey Macchan, what were you saying earlier?
01:34What exactly is the reasoning behind it not being used for 70 years?
01:39That is, well, it's in Article 81 of the Religious Corporations Act.
01:43It all boils down to "violating the law."
01:46Dr. Kurose agrees with the claims of former Diet member Shio Yamao and others.
01:50They are expressing a strong sense of unease.
01:53What did Ms. Yamao say?
01:55Ms. Yamao, it's a law.
01:58It's only natural that it includes not only criminal law but also civil law, right?
02:02He is saying this with certainty.
02:03But Dr. Kurose replies:
02:06Isn't that a bit too simplistic?
02:10That's a rather simplistic and harsh way of putting it.
02:14But if you think about it normally, doesn't "laws and regulations" refer to all laws?
02:20Certainly, it looks that way if you only look at the words themselves.
02:23But laws have a history of being applied.
02:26Dr. Kurose's point expands from here to a macro perspective.
02:31In fact, for about 70 years since this law was enacted...
02:35Based on torts under civil law
02:37There had never been a case where a religious corporation was dissolved.
02:41Yo
02:41Huh?
02:43Not even once?
02:45If that's the case, then why can you suddenly say that civil law will be included this time only?
02:51That part feels really unnatural to me.
02:55That feeling of unease is precisely the conviction that Dr. Kurose wants to convey.
02:59Many legal experts in the past have also cited the basis for the dissolution order.
03:04I have interpreted that civil law is not included in this.
03:06They try to push it through simply because the definition of the word is broad.
03:11That's far too forceful
03:13But why is there a rule that allows dissolution for violating the law in the first place?
03:18When was it made?
03:20Was it a sword meant to judge someone from the very beginning?
03:23Actually, there's a surprising fact about that too.
03:26According to Dr. Kurose, the main purpose for which the Religious Corporations Act was created
03:31To grant legal personality to a religious organization
03:34The dissolution order was merely a supplementary provision.
03:38Was it just a bonus item?
03:41yes
03:41Specifically, a non-existent corporation that has ceased operations.
03:46In other words, they were planning to restructure the civil society corporations.
03:50Therefore, we use the broad term "laws and regulations" to be able to handle anything.
03:55there was
03:56But to apply that indiscriminately to religious organizations that are still actively operating
04:01No
04:01Applying strict conditions such as "significantly" or "clearly" to the brakes
04:07I was wearing it.
04:09I see
04:10The criteria for dismissing those who have been absent are quite lenient.
04:15They are trying to force this onto people who are actively reactivating their skills.
04:19It's certainly understandable that the pastor would be angry.
04:22Dr. Kurose's first experience was with the Aum Shinrikyo cult in 1996.
04:28It has been pointed out that this was an exception.
04:30At that time, it was a heinous crime aimed at overthrowing the government, so
04:35The only way to deal with it was through the Religious Corporations Act.
04:37But the question is whether we should treat the current case in the same category as that one.
04:42I'm throwing a question at them.
04:44Historical exceptions have somehow become accepted as commonplace rules.
04:47It looks like they're trying to rewrite it, which is a little scary.
04:51It feels like the scope of our freedom is narrowing without our knowledge.
04:55do
04:56Dr. Kurose holds a doctorate in the Baptist Church, but this
05:00I don't see this problem as someone else's problem.
05:03It's not about protecting a specific religious group, but about upholding the rule of law.
05:08That's why.
05:09Even if it differs from what I believe, the way they judge is correct.
05:14If it doesn't exist, speak up.
05:15That takes a lot of courage, doesn't it?
05:19I agree
05:20Why did he do this when so many legal interpreters have remained silent?
05:25Are you claiming that civil law is included only in this instance?
05:28I question the court's stance of being swayed by public opinion.
05:32If you bend the law for the sake of your money, who will be the next target?
05:37I don't know
05:38That sense of crisis is palpable between the lines of this statement.
05:43Today's discussion was mainly about the interpretation of words, but that was all we talked about before we disbanded.
05:47It's decided.
05:48Isn't there any more solid evidence?
05:52Actually, the story doesn't end there.
05:56This article introduced the first part of Pastor Kurose's organizational structure.
06:00In the next installment, we will delve into even more shocking content.
06:04This will
06:05Shocking content
06:07The magic word "inference" used by the court
06:11I cannot provide a single specific example of an illegal act that is currently occurring.
06:16Ma
06:16They must be doing something shady because they've amassed so much money.
06:20do not have
06:20The criticism is that the conclusion is based on subjective predictions.
06:24So, they've concluded that he probably did it, even though there's no evidence?
06:30thing
06:30Moreover, the decision itself
06:33The relationship failed to resolve any of the issues raised, which is a fatal flaw.
06:38It even has contradictions.
06:40How unconvincing inferences make us anxious about our future
06:44Will it be fixed?
06:45Wait a minute, that's something I absolutely have to hear!
06:50In the next video, I will thoroughly dissect the trap of that inference.
06:55How will history judge this decision?
06:58Let's identify that turning point together.
07:02Subscribe to the channel and wait so you don't miss the next episode!
07:07See you in the next video!
07:10See you in the next video!
コメント