Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=NC_Skins;889785]Yes, I do know what conflict of interest means and your point is valid in regards to your example. What is evident is is that he allowed his bias to dismiss this case.[/quote]

The judge is a methodist or mormon (apparently) or some other superstitious group and so his bias as a theist allowed him to override common sense.

The religiously inclined tend to stick together when faced with Atheists, that's been my experience.

They hate me far more than they hate each other, which I appreciate.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=NC_Skins;889785]Yes, I do know what conflict of interest means and your point is valid in regards to your example. What is evident is that he allowed his bias to dismiss this case.[/quote]


What is his bias and is it the same as his judgment?

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=saden1;889789]What is his bias and is it the same as his judgment?[/quote]


Well, how is it he completely ignored the officer's testimony in his decision? No explanation to why his testimony was ignored?

Re: First Amendment Right
 

Here's My First Amendment Right!!

F^ck Dallas!!!

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=firstdown;890004]Here's My First Amendment Right!!

F^ck Dallas!!![/quote]


Yes, Fck the Cowboys...just make sure this doesn't happen to you when you say that while at a bar in Texas/Oklahoma.

[URL="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296466,00.html"]Texas Football Fan Nearly Castrated in Bar Fight in Oklahoma Bar | Fox News[/URL]

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=NC_Skins;889796]Well, how is it he completely ignored the officer's testimony in his decision? No explanation to why his testimony was ignored?[/quote]


How do you know the officer's testimony was disregarded? Are you assuming that if it wasn't the muslim guy do jail time?

Part of the job of being a judge is to pass a critical judgment...that includes disregarding testimony and interpreting the law how they see fit and if that doesn't jive with precedence then on to the next stage of the legal system.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

I think this is more of a case of what the judge said and along with the fact he dismissed the charges. I think when he started calling the guy names like "doofus" he crossed the line and showed he was letting his muslim faith get in the way of his decission making.

[URL="http://www.ccpa.net/directory.aspx?EID=101"][COLOR=#0066cc]District Judge Mark Martin[/COLOR][/URL] brought a Quran to court and told the alleged victim, American Atheists’ Pennsylvania State Director Ernest Perce V, “I think you misinterpreted a couple of things. So before you start mocking somebody else’s religion, you might want to find out a little more about it. It kind of makes you look like a doofus.”The judge added, “I think our forefathers intended to use the First Amendment so we can speak with our mind, not to p— off other people and cultures – which is what you did.”
Perce had worn a “zombie Muhammad” costume and proclaimed that he was the Prophet Muhammad risen from the dead at the Oct, 11, 2011, event in Mechanicsburg, Pa. A “zombie pope” was also featured in the parade that night.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=firstdown;890269]I think when he started calling the guy names like "doofus" he crossed the line and showed he was letting his muslim faith get in the way of his decission making. [/quote]

The judge isn't a moslem, he said "If I'm a muslim I'd find it offensive".

Still, so many other reasons to find this decision disgusting, not least of which is the fact he said [i]"And Mr. Thomas [Elbayomi's defense lawyer] is correct. In many other Muslim speaking countries – excuse me, in many Arabic speaking countries – call it “Muslim” – something like this is definitely against the law there. [b]In their society, in fact, it could be punishable by death, and it frequently is, in their society." [/b][/i]

So what? This is America and we don't kill people who disagree with us, particularly when that decision is based on superstition.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=RedskinRat;889787]The judge is a methodist or mormon (apparently) or some other superstitious group and so his bias as a theist allowed him to override common sense.

[B][I]The religiously inclined tend to stick together when faced with Atheists, that's been my experience.[/I] [/B]

They hate me far more than they hate each other, which I appreciate.[/quote]

For the most part, I was ignoring this thread. So much epic fail that it is just not worth "wrestling with the pig".

With that said, RR - your opinions of the "religiously inclined" are for you to hold, but the prejudice and intolerance you display towards the spiritual choices of others speaks damningly of your own beliefs and is no better than the wrong you claim they do you.

So, in your atheistic paradise, it is fine to lump all "religiously inclined" together? It is okay to paint all those who believe that something exists beyond our finite senses as superstitious fools who believe in unicorns and magic? All who follow a religious paths are but dupes who are simply not smart enough to see the world as you do.

We poor religiously inclined fools, if only we were as brilliant and wise as you.

The intolerance and lack of understanding displayed by this and your multitude of other similar comments convinces me that, whatever your guiding ethos is, I am damn glad it's not mine and I certainly hope it never becomes that which is held by the majority of humankind.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

As for the case itself, IMHO, it is one in which all should be embarrassed. The atheist's choice was in poor taste regardless of who was insulted. I don't care if you're an atheist or "religiously inclined", blatantly insulting the beliefs of others, with the intent to mock them, is simply wrong. Not criminal, not illegal, but wrong nonetheless - "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a cornerstone of secular Confucian thought as well as Christian.

The muslim should not have engaged the atheist in any way other than use his own rights of free speech. I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

The judge should have simply ruled and shut up. His commentary is not the law. When judges opine about their personal take on things - as in this case - it almost always muddies the issue.

As to the decision, and as I understand it, the Judge's ruling was that it was one guy's word against another. I didn't see any assault on the video and my understanding (b/c I have not listened to the entire case) is that the police officer did not actually observe the altercation and was merely relaying that which was told to him (admittedly, I may be wrong about this). Would I have ruled differently? maybe, but the decision - based on what I have seen and read - is not so beyond the pale as to be anything other than one of hundreds (thousands even) of judgments made every day that different people will reasonably disagree on.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;890298]For the most part, I was ignoring this thread. So much epic fail that it is just not worth "wrestling with the pig". [/quote]

Stick with your instincts next time.

[quote=JoeRedskin;890298]With that said, RR - your opinions of the "religiously inclined" are for you to hold[/quote]

Ooooh, thank you for your permission!


[quote=JoeRedskin;890298]but the prejudice and intolerance you display towards the spiritual choices of others speaks damningly of your own beliefs and is no better than the wrong you claim they do you.[/quote]

Intolerance? Okay........ don't know what 'wrong' you're talking about but I do think it's odd to base so much of life on something that's superstitious.

[quote=JoeRedskin;890298]So, in your atheistic paradise, it is fine to lump all "religiously inclined" together?[/quote]

<sigh>Yeah, why not......

[quote=JoeRedskin;890298] It is okay to paint all those who believe that something exists beyond our finite senses as superstitious fools who believe in unicorns and magic?[/quote]

A little simplistic, but, yes.

[quote=JoeRedskin;890298] All who follow a religious paths are but dupes who are simply not smart enough to see the world as you do. [/quote]

How would you describe someone who believes in something unsubstantiated?


[quote=JoeRedskin;890298]We poor religiously inclined fools, if only we were as brilliant and wise as you. [/quote]

That's such an awesome temper-tantrum. Thanks for brightening my day.


[quote=JoeRedskin;890298]The intolerance and lack of understanding displayed by this and your multitude of other similar comments convinces me that, whatever your guiding ethos is, I am damn glad it's not mine and I certainly hope it never becomes that which is held by the majority of humankind.[/quote]

Intolerance? Again. Please tell me where I've been intolerant.

I'm also pleased, you sound like a really dull person. Thanks for sharing though!

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;890320]As for the case itself, IMHO, it is one in which all should be embarrassed. The atheist's choice was in poor taste regardless of who was insulted. I don't care if you're an atheist or "religiously inclined", blatantly insulting the beliefs of others, with the intent to mock them, is simply wrong.[/quote]

That's fine but who decides what's in poor taste? What do we do when someone gets acid thrown on them because <[B]fill in cult or group of choice[/B]> don't like <[B]fill in imagined slight[/B]>.

It was a Halloween Parade, FFS!

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=RedskinRat;890327]That's fine but who decides what's in poor taste? What do we do when someone gets acid thrown on them because <[B]fill in cult or group of choice[/B]> don't like <[B]fill in imagined slight[/B]>.

It was a Halloween Parade, FFS![/quote]

Where was the acid in this case? Please cite to me one case where someone throwing acid on another person was deemed constitutionally protected freedom of speech. I guess you missed my point that violence is an unacceptable ... and in the example you now cite, a criminal action.

In the case at hand, poor taste is, as I said, intentionally mocking the beliefs of others. Since you recognize no other belief as correct but your own, I am sure poor taste is a way of life for you.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=saden1;890038]How do you know the officer's testimony was disregarded? Are you assuming that if it wasn't the muslim guy do jail time?

Part of the job of being a judge is to pass a critical judgment...that includes disregarding testimony and interpreting the law how they see fit and if that doesn't jive with precedence then on to the next stage of the legal system.[/quote]


Jail time? For a simple battery or assault? Hell no...lol That's a misdemeanor at most. I just felt with the admission of guilt from the defendant to the cop, and with the video putting the defendant at the scene (as well as the defendant acknowledging this), I thought sufficient evidence warranted a guilty verdict. I've seen guilty verdicts with waaaaaay less evidence. Then again, I've seen not guilty verdicts with waaaay more evidence too. Oh well.


Not even going to step into the whole first amendment crap which I don't think is even at issue here.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;890320]As for the case itself, IMHO, it is one in which all should be embarrassed. [/quote]


Agree 100%. Not sure why people would go out of their way to offend people that do believe in religion. Let people think what they want to unless their beliefs somehow interferes with your life.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;890346]Where was the acid in this case? [/quote]

Did I say there was a case?

[quote=JoeRedskin;890346]Please cite to me one case where someone throwing acid on another person was deemed constitutionally protected freedom of speech. I guess you missed my point that violence is an unacceptable ... and in the example you now cite, a criminal action.[/quote]

And my point, which you chose to ignore, was, who decides what is poor taste? I don't trust your judgment, you wouldn't trust mine. I have a list of friends I could give you but they'd probably side with you to piss me off.

[quote=JoeRedskin;890346]In the case at hand, poor taste is, as I said, intentionally mocking the beliefs of others.[/quote]

It's fine you saying it but I don't agree. Nothing should be above satire or being made fun of, once things become taboo then we lose the opportunity for honest examination. There wasn't a raging catholic assaulting the Zombie Pope, was there?

[quote=JoeRedskin;890346] Since you recognize no other belief as correct but your own, I am sure poor taste is a way of life for you.[/quote]

Where did I say that I refuse to recognize other beliefs? I recognize them as what they are: Superstitious nonsense. Please prove me wrong.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=RedskinRat;890276]The judge isn't a moslem, he said "If I'm a muslim I'd find it offensive".

Still, so many other reasons to find this decision disgusting, not least of which is the fact he said [I]"And Mr. Thomas [Elbayomi's defense lawyer] is correct. In many other Muslim speaking countries – excuse me, in many Arabic speaking countries – call it “Muslim” – something like this is definitely against the law there. [B]In their society, in fact, it could be punishable by death, and it frequently is, in their society." [/B][/I]

So what? This is America and we don't kill people who disagree with us, particularly when that decision is based on superstition.[/quote]


So the article has been found to be incorrect. Quote from the article.

"A Muslim judge in Pennsylvania – who scolded a local atheist for offending Islam, called him a doofus and accused him of “using the First "

This article says he is muslim.

[url=http://www.shoebat.com/2012/02/29/video-muslim-judge-in-pennsylvania-interviewed-by-cnn-reporter/]Video: Muslim Judge in Pennsylvania interviewed by CNN Reporter | Walid Shoebat Foundation[/url]

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=firstdown;890405]So the article has been found to be incorrect. Quote from the article.

"A Muslim judge in Pennsylvania – who scolded a local atheist for offending Islam, called him a doofus and accused him of “using the First "[/quote]

Yes, that's my understanding from reading the court transcripts that the judge had released.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=RedskinRat;890407]Yes, that's my understanding from reading the court transcripts that the judge had released.[/quote]

Everything I have read says the judge was muslim.

Edit:
I stand corrected the judge himself said he was muslim and is now trying to say he is not muslim.

[url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/exclusive_interview_infidel_victim_of_pennsylvania_sharia_judge_reveals_inside_details_of_case.html]Articles: Exclusive Interview: Infidel Victim of Pennsylvania Sharia Judge Reveals Inside Details of Case[/url]

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=firstdown;890408]Everything I have read says the judge was muslim.[/quote]

Non-moslem with a lisp or other speech impediment, but the facts shouldn't get in the way of self-righteous indignation.

He's listed as '[I]something beginning with 'M'[/I]' but I didn't make a note of it as the absurdity of the case remained regardless of his religious affiliation. Him being moslem would have made it more outrageous.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

I find the responses here from the left interesting. They kind of say they understand why the guy attacked the guy and how he was provoked. If this was a guy mocking god and was attacked the left would call the attacker a right wing extremist nut job that needs to be in jail.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=firstdown;891051]I find the responses here from the left interesting. They kind of say they understand why the guy attacked the guy and how he was provoked. If this was a guy mocking god and was attacked the left would call the attacker a right wing extremist nut job that needs to be in jail.[/quote]

Yes, there seems to be a double standard. Everyone knows desecrating the Bible and demeaning Jesus is fair game in America. Why just last week I saw someone doing some awful things to a miniature statue of Jesus...when was the last time you've seen something of that nature?

Re: First Amendment Right
 

Ok, it's been a few weeks since you posted your question, saden1, so I'll take it that a) nobody has seen it happen, or b) nobody cares.

What do you consider '[I]desecration[/I]'? I ask because I'm sure there's a sliding scale.

Most christians that I know would be able to ignore an obvious insult as an attempt to provoke.

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[url=http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/17/nyt-anti-catholic-ads-are-ok-but-anti-islam-ads-put-our-troops-in-danger/]NYT: Anti-Catholic ads are OK, but anti-Islam ads put our troops in danger « Hot Air[/url]

Re: First Amendment Right
 

We all know that not all religions are treated equally.

I saw this an 'Hmmmm'ed

[URL="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/03/21/149084816/dutch-catholic-church-is-accused-of-castrating-boys"]Dutch catholic church accused of castrating boys[/URL]

But, yeah, what about all the good the church does?

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=RedskinRat;902618][B]We all know that not all religions are treated equally.[/B]

I saw this an 'Hmmmm'ed

[URL="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/03/21/149084816/dutch-catholic-church-is-accused-of-castrating-boys"]Dutch catholic church accused of castrating boys[/URL]

But, yeah, what about all the good the church does?[/quote]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Isnt this a major part of the reason you started this thread? Sure i know youre an atheist and all, but isnt atheism just as much an ideology as Christianity or Islamism? So why is it that that its okay to offend one and not the other. Sure its a pretty shitty situation that people actually want to offend people who are believers, non-believers, or believe differently, but we should all have the right to voice our opinion even if it is offensive. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]The whole problem is that different ideologies are being able to behave differently. And worst of all its because of positive reinforcement of bad and irrational behavior.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]What does the horrible acts of the Dutch Catholic church have to do with people having the right to offend Muslims or Christians? [/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][/FONT][/COLOR]
[/FONT][/COLOR]

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=mlmpetert;902747][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Isnt this a major part of the reason you started this thread? [/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/quote][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]

No.

[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][quote=mlmpetert;902747][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Sure i know youre an atheist and all, but isnt atheism just as much an ideology as Christianity or Islamism?[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/quote][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]

No, Atheism is the disbelief of the existence of a god. It's only an ideology to theists who are desperate for a position to argue from.

[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][quote=mlmpetert;902747][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]So why is it that that its okay to offend one and not the other.[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/quote][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]

All religious positions are open to the same level of doubt and ridicule to me.

[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][quote=mlmpetert;902747][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Sure its a pretty shitty situation that people actually want to offend people who are believers, non-believers, or believe differently, but we should all have the right to voice our opinion even if it is offensive.[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/quote][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]

Um.....
[/FONT][/COLOR]
[/FONT][/COLOR][quote=mlmpetert;902747][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]The whole problem is that different ideologies are being able to behave differently. And worst of all its because of positive reinforcement of bad and irrational behavior.[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/quote][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]

Er.........
[/FONT][/COLOR]
[/FONT][/COLOR][quote=mlmpetert;902747][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]What does the horrible acts of the Dutch Catholic church have to do with people having the right to offend Muslims or Christians?[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/quote]

I was substantiating your post with another anti-catholic media article, I rarely see anything anti-islam unless it's CLEARLY STATED that these were 'mis-understanders' or 'a small minority'.

Do you think that religion or belief should be off limits to ridicule or scrutiny?

Re: First Amendment Right
 

I think you’ve completely missed what I was trying to say.

I absolutely do not believe religion or belief of any kind should be off limits to ridicule or scrutiny. Rather i just think its sad that people find purpose in insulting and mocking the beliefs of others. However, what I find even more unfortunate is the selective scrutiny and extremist sympathizing many of us seem to display.

I was trying to ask why are most of us okay with the NY Times allowing attacks on Catholics but not Muslims? Why is selective discrimination allowed on a variety of fronts? Im not all that outraged by the NY Times and I don’t think anyone else here is either, but shouldn’t we be? Should we care that Muslims are treated differently because people are worried about what some of them they might do?

You started a thread about a Muslim getting off for assaulting an atheist for dressing up as the Prophet Mo, and titled it First Amendment Right. To me that came across as why is offensive speech seemingly not allowed for some things but okay for others, particularly in regards to different ideologies or a nuance outside the word ideology. Whats your reason behind this thread? What do you find interesting in regards to the First Amendment and this case? Prior to knowing more about the case, why did you find the judge’s decision horrendously inept?

Re: First Amendment Right
 

[quote=mlmpetert;903990]I was trying to ask why are most of us okay with the NY Times allowing attacks on Catholics but not Muslims?[/quote]

I'm certainly not but I don't like the NYT in the first place.

[quote=mlmpetert;903990]Why is selective discrimination allowed on a variety of fronts? Im not all that outraged by the NY Times and I don’t think anyone else here is either, but shouldn’t we be?[/quote]

Which discrimination are you referencing? It's a bigoted newspaper, it's not a surprise.

[quote=mlmpetert;903990] Should we care that Muslims are treated differently because people are worried about what some of them they might do? [/quote]

Absolutely, as the judge mentioned The atheist would have been killed in the Middle East for his beliefs.



[quote=mlmpetert;903990]You started a thread about a Muslim getting off for assaulting an atheist for dressing up as the Prophet Mo, and titled it First Amendment Right. To me that came across as why is offensive speech seemingly not allowed for some things but okay for others, particularly in regards to different ideologies or a nuance outside the word ideology. Whats your reason behind this thread? What do you find interesting in regards to the First Amendment and this case? [/quote]

Primarily my post was to gauge whether people even care about the erosion of rights under this administration. Certainly there appears to be an incredibly out of proportion application of 'kid-glovery' regarding a very tiny but extremely vocal minority.

[quote=mlmpetert;903990] Prior to knowing more about the case, why did you find the judge’s decision horrendously inept?[/quote]

He decided that a police officers sworn testimony wasn't relevant ( I read the court transcripts early on so I'm not sure what you mean by 'prior') despite the fact that the defendant admitted to assaulting the victim.

The judge seemed, from everything I've read, to allow his experience in the Middle East to allow a sliding scale of justice here instead of correctly applying the the law for assault.

I appreciate your response, thanks.