Atheist assaulted by Muslim, case dropped, victim criticized by judge for offending religious belief
337 replies, posted
[QUOTE=thisispain;34915546]human rights have been restricted for a lot of reasons, disagreement with a religion has never been one.[/QUOTE]
I never expected anyone to say that.
[QUOTE=znk666;34915512]Almost every single war currently ongoing would be no longer.
Half of bigotry and restriction of human rights would be gone.
And we'd generally turn into a far more civilized and reasonable society.[/QUOTE]
You know, I find the saddest thing about this post is that you [I]actually believe[/I] it.
[QUOTE=znk666;34915512]Almost every single war currently ongoing would be no longer.
Half of bigotry and restriction of human rights would be gone.
And we'd generally turn into a far more civilized and reasonable society.[/QUOTE]
Downright lie, incredibly naive and even more incredibly naive.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;34915579]I never expected anyone to say that.[/QUOTE]
restriction of human rights has almost always been for political reasons.
[QUOTE=Paramud;34915543]The fact that it's impossible to entirely kill off an idea.[/QUOTE]
how many people believe in geocentrism nowadays
[editline]28th February 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=thisispain;34915601]restriction of human rights has almost always been for political reasons.[/QUOTE]
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition]you ruined the joke[/url]
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;34915613]how many people believe in geocentrism nowadays[/QUOTE]
Probably plenty of them.
[editline]28th February 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;34915613]
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition]you ruined the joke[/url][/QUOTE]
Execution would've been much better if you said 'nobody expected you to say that'.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;34915613]how many people believe in geocentrism nowadays[/QUOTE]
Unless you've interviewed everyone on Earth, I don't see how that'll help either of our arguments.
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_geocentrism]At any rate[/url]
[QUOTE=Paramud;34915668]Unless you've interviewed everyone on Earth, I don't see how that'll help either of our arguments.[/QUOTE]
so we use a proxy heuristic
is there substantial opposition to modern astrophysics nowadays? nope
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;34915613]
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition]you ruined the joke[/url][/QUOTE]
oh dear the spanish inquisition was an imperialist event. there's a reason why it was set up by the monarchy. it was to quell opposition towards the ruling class.
oh you were trying to reference monty python? i'm sorry but that was awful.
[QUOTE=Paramud;34915668]Unless you've interviewed everyone on Earth, I don't see how that'll help either of our arguments.
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_geocentrism]At any rate[/url][/QUOTE]
[quote]In three polls conducted in 1996 and 1999, 19% of Britons, 18% of Americans, and 16% of Germans said that they believed the Sun orbits the Earth.[/quote]
That's just plain disturbing.
i'm fucking sick of religious debates. nobody ever poses any new or interesting points. same old same old.
[QUOTE=thisispain;34915707]oh dear the spanish inquisition was an imperialist event. there's a reason why it was set up by the monarchy. it was to quell opposition towards the ruling class.[/QUOTE]
with religious justification and endorsement
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;34915829]with religious justification and endorsement[/QUOTE]
If it wasn't religion it would have been something else. I guess because in [I]this [/I]scenario it was religion, religion should be eradicated?
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;34915829]with religious justification and endorsement[/QUOTE]
that didn't really matter considering monarchs have slaughtered plenty without religious justification or endorsement.
the catholic church was used as a tool because it was basically the big stick of the spanish monarchy. pretty well removed from Jesus' teachings i'd say.
[QUOTE=thisispain;34915863]that didn't really matter considering monarchs have slaughtered plenty without religious justification or endorsement.
the catholic church was used as a tool because it was basically the big stick of the spanish monarchy. pretty well removed from Jesus' teachings i'd say.[/QUOTE]
so remove the god damn tool
So the atheist was using his freedom of speech in order to provoke? Oh my well that's totally not what it's for so he certainly needs to be assaulted and the perpetrator set free!
Ah, it's one of those cases where no one is right.
The judge is a biased idiot
The guys who assaulted the atheists are hot blooded idiots who can't ignore dumbness when they see it
The atheists are intolerant douchebags for wearing hateful costumes and pissing people off on purpose
In the end, everyone gives an even shittier reputation to whatever they represent. People will think even more that the legal system is biased and shitty, that religious people (especially Muslims) are lunatics and that Atheists are all crybaby attention whores.
[editline]28th February 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cheezy;34915945]So the atheist was using his freedom of speech in order to provoke? Oh my well that's totally not what it's for so he certainly needs to be assaulted and the perpetrator set free![/QUOTE]
While the judgment was biased and that the judge should get some sort of punishment for having taken such a terrible decision, the dumbass atheists who did that shit in the first place had the whole assault coming.
[QUOTE]"You have that right, but you're way outside your bounds of First Amendment rights," Martin said, according to a recording Perce made of the court hearing. "I think our forefathers intended that we use the First Amendment so that we can speak our mind, not to piss off other people and other cultures, which is what you did."[/QUOTE]
So this is going outside First Amendment rights but groups like WBC are perfectly fine?
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;34915991]
While the judgment was biased and that the judge should get some sort of punishment for having taken such a terrible decision, the dumbass atheists who did that shit in the first place had the whole assault coming.[/QUOTE]
Had it coming? Sure. Should it have any effect on the case? If you want to disrespect the whole freedom of speech thing, sure.
All three of them should be sent to jail.
(the atheist, the muslim, and the judge)
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;34916070]They should both be sent to jail.[/QUOTE]
lol no
[QUOTE=Cheezy;34916064]Had it coming? Sure. Should it have any effect on the case? If you want to disrespect the whole freedom of speech thing, sure.[/QUOTE]
Heh, never said otherwise. The judgment should be made again and not only count the whole case as assault, punishing the Muslims for having acted this way, but I think the Atheists should also be sentenced with something minor. Technically this goes with the first amendment deal, but there's a point where you go from expressing yourself to borderline hate speech.
This is so fucking stupid. If the situation was reversed and a religious person was assaulted for insulting gays/soldiers/whathaveyou, the assailant would definitely be sentenced and the case wouldn't have been dropped.
Fuck that judge and everything that he is.
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;34916070]All three of them should be sent to jail.
(the atheist, the muslim, and the judge)[/QUOTE]
That's retarded, the atheist didnt violate any laws.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;34915991]While the judgment was biased and that the judge should get some sort of punishment for having taken such a terrible decision, the dumbass atheists who did that shit in the first place had the whole assault coming.[/QUOTE]
that's like saying a rape victim had it coming for wearing slutty clothing
[QUOTE=Strongbad;34912773]People in this thread clearly fail to grasp why the Muslim was enraged. He was enraged because disrespecting what he believes in is disrespecting him, and an offense he couldn't bear. This entire case is stupid, but anyone who sympathizes with the Atheist jackass who deliberately tried to piss people off is also stupid.
[editline]28th February 2012[/editline]
This is like spitting on someone and then whining about it when you get punched in the face and have your lunch money taken in return.[/QUOTE]
You don't have much place in a modern society if you "can't bear" the someone being disrespectful to your beliefs, people are going to be stupid and childish, that doesn't mean you should assault them.
And whoever came up with that arguement about Darwin. Why the fuck would that offend anyone. I would just laugh my ass off because the person being "disrecpectful" is obviously a huge moron in my book. I think the muslims could learn from this, if you think people are trying to piss you off on purpose, just pity them, laugh at them, ignore them. As soon as you turn to violence you're just going to make it worse for yourself. I honestly don't know if it has to do with the culture itself, and I don't want to generalise at all, but you do see a lot of muslims having a very hard time accepting that violence is not the way you should handle a situation like that. It's not like the pope guy dressed as God (or pope or whatever it was) was attacked. But then again it is just one or two guys attacking the atheist, so I guess it is just a couple of bad apples.
It's basically just the whole Religion < Law thing. In my opinion religion should be treated just like any other personal interest or lifestyle.
The guy dressed as the prophet is quite a jerk, but in some way I am glad that we have these jerks, because really, it gives people a chance to prove that they can handle such attacks. Freedom of Speech should be tested to the full extent from time to time, or else it is my belief that it would fall apart gradually.
The whole matter of the judge being biased is just stupid and he is absolutely incompetent and should be fired. Judges don't make laws, they judge people according to the law.
This is the US, you're not supposed to get a "but he offended me" card. If you attack someone because you're offended then you're a bitch.
Both as bad as each other, how about keeping our opinions on religion to ourselves and don't throw a tantrum every time someone says anything remotely offensive about said opinions?
[QUOTE=Grimgor13;34916750]Both as bad as each other, how about keeping our opinions on religion to ourselves and don't throw a tantrum every time someone says anything remotely offensive about said opinions?[/QUOTE]
The atheist didn't physically assault anyone, so I don't see how he's just as bad.
[QUOTE=waxrock;34916120]This is so fucking stupid. If the situation was reversed and a religious person was assaulted for insulting gays/soldiers/whathaveyou, the assailant would definitely be sentenced and the case wouldn't have been dropped.
Fuck that judge and everything that he is.[/QUOTE]
Did anyone in this fucking thread even watch the video? You cant see any "assault" taking place. Hell even when the guy is claiming to be choked he is talking in a clear voice.
This is why the judge dismissed the case, there is no fucking evidence for assault. The comments the Judge made did not effect the case in anyway. He only stated that he did not believe the first amendment should be used to antagonize people. Regardless if you agree with this statement or not the judge did nothing wrong.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.