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: 4
54
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by LErickson
 


What laws did I state... U.S. Laws, which technically are based on Christian fundamentals. I'll jump in where I please. I also live in Pa. I did not push any laws on anyone, just what we live by in my Country.. I did get your point.
The judge should be basing his decisions on U.S./Pa. laws. Nothing else.




posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by LErickson

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Chickensalad
 
I'm a strong believer in protecting and adhering to the principles of religious freedoms.

But my (or anyone elses) religious freedoms end when they start to infringe on the freedoms of others.




Pretty funny considering that there is not one Muslim law on the books that infringes on your freedom but there are several Christian laws on the books that infringe upon mine.


What so called Christian laws infringe on your freedom ? Quite frankly this judge opened up a can of worms with his inane decision . Now any time a Christian hears a Muslim say Christ was not the son of God they can smash their faces open .......correct. I mean it's pretty insulting to us Christians .



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Azadok
 


How about "blue laws" I think they are called? In CT only certain businesses are allowed to be opened on sundays, liquor stores are not one of them NY gets a big boom in liquor and beer sales on sunday


That is one religious based law I can pull off the top of my head based on christianity.

Sadly, it is not a US only thing wither. It is like that up here in canada too, only there are some stranger ones here. I learned recently, that everyone born in my town has the same first name, males first names are joseph, and females mary. They are known by their middle names, but the BC tells the truth. I looked at my pops BC and thought it was a misprint lmao.
edit on Sat, 25 Feb 2012 18:18:26 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Azadok
 


Now any time a Christian hears a Muslim say Christ was not the son of God they can smash their faces open .......correct.

Not if that Christian goes before Judge Martin!

See ya,
Milt



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

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by Azadok
 


How about "blue laws" I think they are called? In CT only certain businesses are allowed to be opened on sundays, liquor stores are not one of them NY gets a big boom in liquor and beer sales on sunday


That is one religious based law I can pull off the top of my head based on christianity.


These "Blue Laws" exist in Texas as well, but given that Jesus reportedly turned water into wine it is hard to understand why anti-alcohol laws would be Christian based. Christians may use their faith to help inform them on such prohibitions, but arguably Muslims might do the same regarding alcohol.

Regardless of the basis for any "law" - and I know you all ready know this, I am just using your post as an excuse to spout out more of my pedantry - that legislation parading as law must actually be rooted in law, which is the protection or offer of remedy for any injury or harm caused that violated the right of another. Do "Blue Laws" violate the rights of People? Probably so. Arguably, alcohol in and of itself, or even the moderate drinking of it, causes no harm. Then again, "Blue Laws" do not demonstrably violate "the right to drink alcohol" they merely inconvenience those who would. Alcohol drinkers can still buy liquor, beer and wine on any other day, and knowing the "Blue Laws" it is arguable they have plenty of time to stock up before Sunday rolls around.

I use your post, my friend, to make the point that law is actual and legislation is not law, merely evidence of law, at best, and at worst, a travesty of justice.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   
do muslims seriously think they can use religion as an excuse to kill people? animals.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Chickensalad
 


Please tell me that the judge did not seriously say that.

Normally I wouldn't be joining in the rabbling but..

That man deserves to lose his job, and any benefits related to it. If I were the victim in this case I would sue both the defendant and Judge Martin.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by Azadok
 


How about "blue laws" I think they are called? In CT only certain businesses are allowed to be opened on sundays, liquor stores are not one of them NY gets a big boom in liquor and beer sales on sunday


That is one religious based law I can pull off the top of my head based on christianity.

Sadly, it is not a US only thing wither. It is like that up here in canada too, only there are some stranger ones here. I learned recently, that everyone born in my town has the same first name, males first names are joseph, and females mary. They are known by their middle names, but the BC tells the truth. I looked at my pops BC and thought it was a misprint lmao.
edit on Sat, 25 Feb 2012 18:18:26 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)





This law was designed to get them into the bars on Sunday , it was all about business.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
wow.
wow.
WOW.

REALLY?

Mocking someones religion = that person is insulted
Calling someone a bad name like "sh**head" or something = that person is insulted

...Both have the same result. One person is insulted. Pretty cut and dry.

...So essentially, to that judge, it's legal to assault someone who makes you feel insulted.

Wow... Fire that judge. I hope this gets a lot more attention than it's getting. That judge doesn't deserve the job any more.

Cheers



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Attacking in the name of a non existent god!

I will pray to a bowl of warm tapioca pudding before I pray to anything that is "superior" to me.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
If this is the case I would like to publicly announce that I am starting my own religion. Wendalism. Part of the custom of my religion is that I can not be held accountable for anything I do. If another attempts to hold me accountable, my religion dictates that I have the right to whoop your arse.

So with that in mind, Judge Martin will you please hold me accountable for that speeding ticket I got? I dare you



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Now now the solution is simple.
All members on this board who are more violent prone even those not prone but enjoy the occasional fight move to Pennsylvania.
We start a religion that requires us to beat the living day lights out of anyone who annoys us.
We even establish a reform sect that only punches the offenders once or twice.

Claim it's our religious freedom.
Once this gets media attention we claim our prophet the good judge said it's okay to be violent if our religion says so.

I nominate me to be the crazy cult... I mean revered religious leader.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Qemyst
 


...So essentially, to that judge, it's legal to assault someone who makes you feel insulted.

Not quite... so far, that only works if the aggressor is a Muslim.

See ya,
Milt



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 07:41 PM
link   
I have a question.

If for centuries no one was allowed to draw the Prophet for fear of being killed how the hell did the person who committed the assault know that the other guy was making fun of Mohammad, maybe he was just a generic zombie Muslim.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
www.nationalreview.com...

I found a shaky source with a complete transcript of the ruling itself. I'll keep looking for something more official that covers the whole proceding.

This article is updated to state that, after hearing the audio, the judge may not actually be a muslim.

UPDATE: This post has been corrected because, after further review, it appears Judge Martin’s reported statement on the audio of the court proceeding, “I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive”, is actually, “F’Im a Muslim, I’d find it offensive.” For further details on the transcription, see this post.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Chickensalad
 


looks like im going to have a little trouble getting you the court transcript according to Andrew McCarthy :

One other point on this. In many court proceedings, an official court transcript is made, and most good judges take the time to read it before authorizing its publication to minimize transcription errors, which are common. In this case, not only does it appear that no transcript was made; the wayward judge is reportedly threatening to hold the assault victim in contempt for making and publishing the recording the judge would prefer that the public did not hear



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Chickensalad
 


That is absolutely disgusting.
That's just like Cops arresting someone for filming them in the act of screwing up.

Someone better get this man a good pro bono team and wipe the legal floor with that judge.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Chickensalad
 


this makes me curious though as to exactly why Perce felt that he needed to record it. did he has reason to believe that they were'nt planning on releasing the court docs? was he told to keep quiet? and from a legal stance, is it considered contempt, what he did?



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pigraphia
Now now the solution is simple.
All members on this board who are more violent prone even those not prone but enjoy the occasional fight move to Pennsylvania.
We start a religion that requires us to beat the living day lights out of anyone who annoys us.
We even establish a reform sect that only punches the offenders once or twice.

Claim it's our religious freedom.
Once this gets media attention we claim our prophet the good judge said it's okay to be violent if our religion says so.

I nominate me to be the crazy cult... I mean revered religious leader.


I have better credentials and volunteered last week. You'll have to wait until the Zombie God takes me to become my new prophet.

I shall officially make it part of my doctrine that stupid judges are "Asking For It" and required to be put in stocks and pelted with rotten tomatoes while being forced to watch Jerseyshore "Clockwork Orange" style for days on end. It is a divine commandment.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


But I became an ordained minister in HS while at a private christian HS just to marry my friend to a tree.
When the school cut down the tree I even held a funeral while he wept.

The teachers were very annoyed but I was quasi untouchable.
Him yelling murderer to every teacher at the start of class for a few days was priceless.

Aren't those good enough credentials to found a new religion to exploit the BS of a judge?

Although I might concede your point of a Zombie God I am a Christian and believe in Voodoo.
I am partial to the Barons Samde, and Nimbo who look over the dead.
edit on 25-2-2012 by Pigraphia because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join