It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Penn Judge: Muslims Allowed to Attack People for Insulting Mohammad

page: 3
54
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Chickensalad
 


I am not sure your understand of Sharia law is going to help in this context. It seems almost no one on ATS actually knows what Sharia law is. Mainly I say that because nothing in this thread has anything to do with Sharia law and to bring it up makes it appear that people hear Muslim and just respond.




posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I'll agree to that.

I was just tryin to clear the muddied point he's trying make. Alot gets lost in translation when people try to attack others rather than debate.

I also agree, though, that this IS a social issue as well, considering the current American veiw of muslims.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

It's a freedom of speech issue, not a religious one.

The costume wearer had his rights violated.


You know damn well had it been a zombie Jesus outfit and a Christian puncher we would be having a different conversation.

Just look how many of you here alone have posts praising Buzz Aldrin for doing the exact same thing you are denouncing here to Bart Sibrel?



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by mugger
Don't fret, burning the flag is till legal

Something doesn't sound right with the whole case. assault is still assault, regardless of any religion or anything else for that matter.


Exactly.

According to this ruling, I could punch someone in the throat if they put a cross in a jar of urine.

When did I land in Bizzaro World?



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Chickensalad
 


Who did I attack?
I would be more than happy to apologize for any perceived attack.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by LErickson

Originally posted by beezzer

It's a freedom of speech issue, not a religious one.

The costume wearer had his rights violated.


You know damn well had it been a zombie Jesus outfit and a Christian puncher we would be having a different conversation.

Just look how many of you here alone have posts praising Buzz Aldrin for doing the exact same thing you are denouncing here to Bart Sibrel?


Liar. Don't assume.

People have every right to express themselves. Get ofended? Then leave.

Just read the Westboro Baptist threads.

Perfect bloody example.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by LErickson
 





I am not sure your understand of Sharia law is going to help in this context. It seems almost no one on ATS actually knows what Sharia law is. Mainly I say that because nothing in this thread has anything to do with Sharia law and to bring it up makes it appear that people hear Muslim and just respond.


I could give a squat about any of their laws. I live in the United States and governed by my Countries laws. Sharia,Muslem laws do not apply to me or any other person living here.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by LErickson
 


I understand Sharia, and I also understand that this judge being a muslim, and adhering to a certain moral code, made a ruling in the court of law based on his own religious belief. He believes it immoral to dress as a zombie prophet, based on his own undertanding of Sharia.

He may not have passed a law citing Sharia, but he in affect, invoked sharia law by enacting his own muslim moral code in his ruling.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by LErickson
reply to post by Chickensalad
 


I am not sure your understand of Sharia law is going to help in this context. It seems almost no one on ATS actually knows what Sharia law is. Mainly I say that because nothing in this thread has anything to do with Sharia law and to bring it up makes it appear that people hear Muslim and just respond.


The links the O.P. provided, whether factual or not in their reporting, most assuredly make this thread - in part - about Sharia Law. If the judge did in fact cite Sharia Law or refer to it as a justification for throwing the case out, and that was this judges only reason for dismissing the case, that judge no doubt acted outside of the scope of his jurisdiction, which is found in the State Constitution that grants that judge authority.

The Pennsylvania State Constitution does not in any way bind that judge to Sharia Law - regardless of what Sharia Law actually states - and instead expressly states this:


Religious Freedom Section 3.

All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship or to maintain any ministry against his consent; no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience, and no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious establishments or modes of worship.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Liar. Don't assume.


Whenever I call someone a liar or something a lie, it is because I can and do show what was claimed is demonstrably false.

I will wait.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chickensalad
reply to post by LErickson
 


I understand Sharia, and I also understand that this judge being a muslim, and adhering to a certain moral code, made a ruling in the court of law based on his own religious belief.


You are going to have to show me what this has to do with Sharia law then. I cannot just discuss any random idea anyone wants to pretend is related. That does not work for me.
If you can show me where this is Sharia based then I guess we can discuss it.


reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Speaking of lies. You know damn well until you fix that mess of lies in that other thread I have no interest in anything else you have to say. You spent posts completely making up things I said that no one can find written anywhere on ATS and you cannot quote. I do not play those kinds of games you have been told this. Move along or get honest.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by mugger
reply to post by LErickson
 





I am not sure your understand of Sharia law is going to help in this context. It seems almost no one on ATS actually knows what Sharia law is. Mainly I say that because nothing in this thread has anything to do with Sharia law and to bring it up makes it appear that people hear Muslim and just respond.


I could give a squat about any of their laws. I live in the United States and governed by my Countries laws. Sharia,Muslem laws do not apply to me or any other person living here.


Wow did you miss the point.

If you do not care about Sharia law or understand Sharia law, then do not try to use Sharia law as part of your defense. Maybe not jumping in here would have been wiser for you.
You do understand the point you are making only amplifies mine, right?
My point is, you cannot keep complaining that you live in the US and will not be subject to Muslim religious laws ALL WHILE CONSTANTLY TRYING TO MAKE ME ADHERE TO CHRISTIAN ONES and expect to get sympathy when this # happens.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by LErickson
 





Speaking of lies. You know damn well until you fix that mess of lies in that other thread I have no interest in anything else you have to say.


Really? Is that the truth? If it is, then why are you replying now? Your silly game of "when did I say that" "I never said that" "Quote me and show me where I said that" has no bearing in this thread, and you seem to show a pattern of willfully derailing threads.




edit on 25-2-2012 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by LErickson

Originally posted by beezzer
Liar. Don't assume.


Whenever I call someone a liar or something a lie, it is because I can and do show what was claimed is demonstrably false.

I will wait.



You said


You know damn well had it been a zombie Jesus outfit and a Christian puncher we would be having a different conversation.


I not only called you out on it, I provided as example, the Westboro Baptist threads.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Chickensalad
 


The truth of the matter is: This judge should have recused himself if he couldn't keep his own religion from influencing his decision in a US court of law.

See ya,
Milt



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

I not only called you out on it, I provided as example, the Westboro Baptist threads.




Where is zombie jesus in any of those threads?
Are you trying to get me to believe something is there that is not?



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
get over it already....Those Muslims take that crap far too seriously



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by LErickson

Originally posted by beezzer

I not only called you out on it, I provided as example, the Westboro Baptist threads.




Where is zombie jesus in any of those threads?
Are you trying to get me to believe something is there that is not?

You're obviously not willing to rationally debate.

Good day, sir.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by LErickson
 


I think he is saying that westboro IS the "zombiejesus". They are the offensive ones. I won't put words in his mouth, but I think that was what he is getting at.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   
I cant imagine this clown will be a judge very long and I am sure the defendant will be back in court soon. This judge just sealed his fate. Judges cant use a religions rules to support assaulting anyone.



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join