Hate-crime arrests in Quran desecrations at Pace University

[Edward]

It is a book. Nothing more, nothing less. If I own said book, I am free to do with it what I want. Claiming it is a "hate" crime to do something with a book is retarded. I also think it is Unconstitutional. Where are all the liberals whining about the 4th Amendment, the 8th Amendment, the 1st amendment? NO ONE has a Constitutional right to be protected from being offended.

When did this man purchase the toilet? When did he become the owner of the bathroom? When did he buy the university? While I am not sure if the copy of the Quran belonged to him I do know that the University, bathroom and the toilet did not belong to him at the time. This act was first an act of vandalism, second an act of criminal mischief and third an act of aggravated assault. There is no violation of the 1st, 4th or 8th amendment here. This man's freedom of speech does not include defacing public or private property, nor does his right to free speech extend to the right to assault others or create fear. While no one has the right not to be offended. They do have the right to go out in public without having to deal with shitheads like you and to go about their daily life without fearing that they might walk into a public restroom to use the toilet only to find a copy of the Quran, the Bible, a black doll or any other offensive item in the toilet. They have the right to feel safe walking into the bathroom and not fear walking in on a man writing racial or religious insults on the walls and when they protest being attacked by that man. That you think the 1st, 4th or 8th amendment makes criminal acts legal and constitutional sickens me. That is the exact opposite meaning of the Bill of Rights. It isn't to give us the freedom to do whatever we want but to give us the freedom to live. I suggest you read Locke idiot since you don't seem to grasp that without law than can be no freedom. If everyone could place objects in a toilet (a picture of a naked woman isn't free speech) than we are in a shitload of trouble.

 

[Edward]

Lats burn the quran and post the video on you tube. Fuck those shit for brain idiots with their fanatical ideas. So those jackasses can burn our flag but its not ok for us to do anything to their stuff?? Screw their Holier than thou attitude.

Burning the Quran and posting it on YouTube is protected by the consitution just like being able to burn the flag is protected by the Constitution. It doesn't make you any less the idiot but a person doesn't have to view the YouTube video. In this instance, the crime wasn't what he did with the Quran but what he did on public property and in a public restroom. His actions were illegal because they constituted criminal mischief and aggravated assault and they only became a hate crime when it became clear that they were part of an attempt to cause fear in a specific group of people and to intimidate them so that their quality of life would change (i.e., they would be less likely to use the restroom on campus, they would be less likely to continue attending the university). This man's actions were not part of a political protest march, and his actions were illegal. If someone burned an American flag and then placed in the toilet of a public restroom at a Military College they would be commiting a hate crime.

 

[Edward]

It took me ten seconds on google to confirm these types of hate crimes are prosecuted against anti-muslim, anti-jewish, and anti-christian criminals.


A hate crime as a very specific legal definition, and hate crimes have been investigated and prosecuted against anarchists and nazis, who have desecrated christian churches and symbols.

In short, the assertion that hate crimes laws are only applied to anti-muslims acts, is poppycock.

The reason hate crimes exist and are prosecuted is because we cannot live in a free society if they weren't. If any person or group of people was able to create a state of fear and a hostile environment in public accomadations or on the private property of others than that leaves us with the choice of not enforcing the law or watching as people react violently. Regardless of the target these crimes cannot be tolerated and must receive a stronger response because the crime isn't against one person, or even a small group of individuals instead it is against an entire group of people and if we allow that to continue than we will watch as that group takes the law into their own hands. If Christians fear that their churches are going to be burnt because they are Christians, or if Jews fear to walk down the street without being attacked than their is going to be mob reaction and I for one do not intend to live in a society where the only recourse to protect ourselves is in us not waiting for election day and instead fighting it out.

 

[Edward]

let's say that the Koran was the guy's... that desecrated it....

Then if I were the school, and he were a student at the college, I would give him a major warning the first time with maybe some sensitivity courses, and suspend him or rather kick him out of the school if he repeated it.

In this you are wrong and the reason is simple. The crimes he committed were not victimless. It doesn't really matter whether the Quran was his or not because the restroom and university were public and did not belong to him. Every man, woman and child has the right to walk into a public restroom without fear of being assaulted by the actions of others. Smearing feces on the wall of a public restroom is an act of vandalism but in addition it is also aggravated assault and criminal mischief. If the smearing of the feces were written words to the effect of using the word ****** to describe blacks and to call them stupid animals than it would be a hate crime. When we begin to tolerate this sort of actions and only impose minor punishments than we will watch as others do the same thing and when another person does the exact same thing the next week, and the week following that another person does it and so on. Then what? Do we give each a major warning the first time they do it or do we treat them differently from the first and therefore be unfair to them in how we level punishment for the same action? Do we send them to sensitivity classes? When it happens the next semester do we start all over again?

After a while the effect it has on people who are being assaulted will be greater than the punishment and when they lash out physically I don't doubt that everyone will call for harsh punishment for their actions. How is that fair to them? And if none of these individual ever repeat the same offense but a 100 of them do it on a hundred different occasions we can all just tell those who are under attack: Since no single individual did this more than once you will simply have to go on being assaulted since we aren't going to prosecuted these people for their crimes instead we are just going to wanr each of them the first time they do it and give them sensitivity training and if they do it again we will expel them but since no one will do it more than once you will have to accept it every time it is done.

 

[Edward]

The Bible is a book. Nothing more nothing less. The value of the Bible isnt in its binding or its cover. its the words inside that are valuable. The Words of God. You can destroy the Word of God by destroying a Bible. Even if all the Bibles in the world were destroyed, the Lord can still speak His Word according to His will.

The book itself is profitless. its only what we learn from it that has any value. and no act of destruction can destroy that.

The problem is that Muslim's don't share that belief about the Qu'ran. The teachings of Islam include a belief in the holiness, and sacred nature of "physical objects" including the very ground that a religious shrine sits on. This is why there was a law barring non-Muslims from entering the Holy City of Mecca because it desecrated holy ground. The reason physical objects are considered holy and sacred is because they are considered to be sanctified. This belief holds true of the Qu'ran. Is is considered sanctified and therefore holy and sacred and the power isn't just in the words themselves but in the object also. So destroying the Qu'ran is like destroying any other religious shrine. Burning the Qu'ran would be like destroying the body of Christ.

 

[Ninja]

Edhimmiward

 

[RetiredGySgt]

When did this man purchase the toilet? When did he become the owner of the bathroom? When did he buy the university? While I am not sure if the copy of the Quran belonged to him I do know that the University, bathroom and the toilet did not belong to him at the time. This act was first an act of vandalism, second an act of criminal mischief and third an act of aggravated assault. There is no violation of the 1st, 4th or 8th amendment here. This man's freedom of speech does not include defacing public or private property, nor does his right to free speech extend to the right to assault others or create fear. While no one has the right not to be offended. They do have the right to go out in public without having to deal with shitheads like you and to go about their daily life without fearing that they might walk into a public restroom to use the toilet only to find a copy of the Quran, the Bible, a black doll or any other offensive item in the toilet. They have the right to feel safe walking into the bathroom and not fear walking in on a man writing racial or religious insults on the walls and when they protest being attacked by that man. That you think the 1st, 4th or 8th amendment makes criminal acts legal and constitutional sickens me. That is the exact opposite meaning of the Bill of Rights. It isn't to give us the freedom to do whatever we want but to give us the freedom to live. I suggest you read Locke idiot since you don't seem to grasp that without law than can be no freedom. If everyone could place objects in a toilet (a picture of a naked woman isn't free speech) than we are in a shitload of trouble.

Does that mean I am free to be safe from your threats too?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The reason hate crimes exist and are prosecuted is because we cannot live in a free society if they weren't. If any person or group of people was able to create a state of fear and a hostile environment in public accomadations or on the private property of others than that leaves us with the choice of not enforcing the law or watching as people react violently. Regardless of the target these crimes cannot be tolerated and must receive a stronger response because the crime isn't against one person, or even a small group of individuals instead it is against an entire group of people and if we allow that to continue than we will watch as that group takes the law into their own hands. If Christians fear that their churches are going to be burnt because they are Christians, or if Jews fear to walk down the street without being attacked than their is going to be mob reaction and I for one do not intend to live in a society where the only recourse to protect ourselves is in us not waiting for election day and instead fighting it out.

So since you support hate laws on hate crimes does that mean I can bring charges against you for your "hatred" of anyone that doesn't believe what you do?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

In this you are wrong and the reason is simple. The crimes he committed were not victimless. It doesn't really matter whether the Quran was his or not because the restroom and university were public and did not belong to him. Every man, woman and child has the right to walk into a public restroom without fear of being assaulted by the actions of others. Smearing feces on the wall of a public restroom is an act of vandalism but in addition it is also aggravated assault and criminal mischief. If the smearing of the feces were written words to the effect of using the word ****** to describe blacks and to call them stupid animals than it would be a hate crime. When we begin to tolerate this sort of actions and only impose minor punishments than we will watch as others do the same thing and when another person does the exact same thing the next week, and the week following that another person does it and so on. Then what? Do we give each a major warning the first time they do it or do we treat them differently from the first and therefore be unfair to them in how we level punishment for the same action? Do we send them to sensitivity classes? When it happens the next semester do we start all over again?

After a while the effect it has on people who are being assaulted will be greater than the punishment and when they lash out physically I don't doubt that everyone will call for harsh punishment for their actions. How is that fair to them? And if none of these individual ever repeat the same offense but a 100 of them do it on a hundred different occasions we can all just tell those who are under attack: Since no single individual did this more than once you will simply have to go on being assaulted since we aren't going to prosecuted these people for their crimes instead we are just going to wanr each of them the first time they do it and give them sensitivity training and if they do it again we will expel them but since no one will do it more than once you will have to accept it every time it is done.

Yet your free to "smear " your foul language and your threats and your idiotic claims that your denied your rights by free legal elections and anyone that disagrees with you is a traitor and a danger to this country. Yup your credibility on this issue is stellar.

 

[Gunny]

”I think Christianity, Christians, and/or the Bible are vilified every day and no one is EVER charged with a hate crime.”


Never? Really??




A crime with the intent to intimidate people from the free practice of their faith - whether it be Christian, Muslim, or Jewish - is a denial of their civil rights. The free practice of religious faith, free from intimidation and coercion, is a federally protected right. It goes beyond a simple crime of arson or vandalism, if the intent is to intimidate americans from exercising a federally guaranteed right. As such, I would support a hate-crimes investigation if anarchists, or Satanists, tried to intimidate a Christian church.

What is it with you literalists? You can't win an argument on merit, so you have to resort to scrounging up one exception to a general statement in a lame attempt to refute it that rather than address the topic.

I think this is the third time you have attempted to engage me and used the same tactic each time.

And what's with the continual posting of the definition? Going for that "I'm smarter than everyone else" affect too?

 

[Truthmatters]

It amazes how so many think christianity should be the only religion in America that should be protected?

I just cant understand why they dont get it?

The vast majority of Americans are Christians ,just how and who intimidates them?

Ive never seen it.

I cant tell people what I believe when the subject comes up without expecting a shutdown of the conversation.

I want christianity as protected as any other belief its just that they are the vast majority and think they are being persicuted if you mention any ohter belief in a good light.....why is that?

 

[DeadCanDance]

Love your little speech on religion, so.. explain "art" work that denegrates the Christian religion and not only is allowed but gets money from the Government.

You can't possibly be this dense...can you? Do you even have the foggiest conception of the american legal system?

Intent is the very conerstone of hate crimes laws...and a host of other laws.

If you are an artist, with a private art gallery, you can put all the korans you want in a jar of piss, if the intent is to express some weird vision of artistic liscence. You might outrage and offend a lot of people, but you won't be charged with a hate crime.

If, on the other hand, you go into a public bathroom, flush some korans in the toilet, and scrawl anti-muslim slurs on a wall and a car outside, criminal investigators may well conclude that your intent was to intimidate students from the practice of a constitutionally guaranteed right: the free practice of the faith and association, because of your criminal intent to intimidate and frighten.

I personally would find bibles or korans in jar of piss in a private art gallery to be highly offensive. But, I couldn't charge the person with a hate crime. If you had a private party at your house, and flushed a bunch of Korans in your toilet with your friends, I would consider you idiots, but not criminals. The constitution of the united states does not protect me from being offended.

On the other hand, if you spray painted satanic and anarchist symbols on a christian church, or if you scrawled anti-muslim slurs and put korans in the toilet of a public bathroom on the property of a public institution, I may well conclude that your only intent was to intimidate fellow americans from practicing a federally guaranteed right: freedom to practice the religion of their choice.

 

[Gunny]

It amazes how so many think christianity should be the only religion in America that should be protected?

I just cant understand why they dont get it?

The vast majority of Americans are Christians ,just how and who intimidates them?

Ive never seen it.

I cant tell people what I believe when the subject comes up without expecting a shutdown of the conversation.

I want christianity as protected as any other belief its just that they are the vast majority and think they are being persicuted if you mention any ohter belief in a good light.....why is that?

And Islam is the second largest religion in the world .. who intimidates THEM?

Who is the majority and who is not is irrelevant where the law is concerned, right? The law should apply equally to all, right?

If flushing a Koran is a hate crime, then so too is flushing the Bible. The only one screaming persecution here is the Muslim. But the second someone questions why Chirsitians are not treated equally, you want to try and turn the entire accusation around.

My point is simply that the law is not applied equally. It's hard to tell someone they're feeling persecuted when they really don't give a damn what you think of their beliefs.

 

[DeadCanDance]

What is it with you literalists? You can't win an argument on merit, so you have to resort to scrounging up one exception to a general statement in a lame attempt to refute it that rather than address the topic.

I think this is the third time you have attempted to engage me and used the same tactic each time.

And what's with the continual posting of the definition? Going for that "I'm smarter than everyone else" affect too?

I'm not a mind-reader, dude.

You said that hate crimes are never investigated or prosecuted when they involve crimes against christians.

It took me ten seconds on google to show you that they were.

How many links do you need, before you withdraw your statement, that it "never" happens?

Here's another hate crime that was investigated involving vandalism at a christian church:

(NEW YORK) Four Myspace profilers have been placed under arrest, charged , and arraigned for allegedly committing hate crimes against the Middle Island Baptist church in Yaphank, NY. The individuals, all had profiles up on MySpace depicting Satanic rituals and descriptions of their goings-on.

Police went to the suspects' Myspace profiles and indeed, found all that they were looking for. Details about the vandalism, as well as, grotesque pictures of re-enacted necrophilia, and descriptions of their rituals could all be found on the popular web site.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/244745/four_myspace_profilers_charged_in_satanic.html

 

[Gunny]

I'm not a mind-reader, dude.

You said that hate crimes are never investigated or prosecuted when they involve crimes against christians.

It took me ten seconds on google to show you that they were.

How many links do you need, before you withdraw your statement, that it "never" happens?

Here's another hate crime that was investigated involving vandalism at a christian church:

I'm not going to withdraw the general statement. For your edification I will caveat it with "with the usual exceptions to the rule."

Feel better now?

 

[DeadCanDance]

-Gunny, July 28: ”I think Christianity, Christians, and/or the Bible are vilified every day and no one is EVER charged with a hate crime.”

-Gunny, July 29: “I'm not going to withdraw the general statement. For your edification I will caveat it with "with the usual exceptions to the rule."

Thank you for the clarification. However, you’re still wrong. Hate crime arrests of an anti-Christian nature, are neither non-existent, nor are they rare “exceptions”. Leaving aside anti-jewish hate crimes, hate crimes against protestants and catholics are traditionally the most reported anti-religious hate crime in the united states.

Now, most religious hate crimes investigated in the U.S., are traditionally overwhelmingly anti-Jewish in nature --typically, 70-80% of all the anti-religious hate crimes are anti-jewish. Obviously, because Jews have been more targeted throughout history than any other religion. That's simply a given, that the vast majority of hate crimes will be anti-jewish.

But, prior to 9/11, the number of hate crimes against Christians reported by the FBI far exceeded the number of hate crimes reported and investigated against muslims.

In the year 2000, there were nearly 3.5 times (i.e. 350%) more hate crime arrests of an anti-christian nature, than of an anti-muslim nature…. i.e., there were 125 hate crime arrests of an anti-Christian nature, versus 36 hate crimes of an anti-muslim nature reported in the U.S. in the year 2000.

FBI Hate Crime Statistics, year 2000 (Table 7):
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_00/hate00.pdf

Your assertion, that hate crimes against Christians virtually never are reported, or are a rare exception was incorrect.

Now, after 9/11, reported hate crimes against Muslims went significantly up - for obvious reasons. The 2005 hate crime statistics, show that the number of anti-Christian and anti-muslim hate crimes is nearly identical: 10.7% of religious hate crimes in 2005 were perpetrated against Muslims, versus 8.4% of religious hate crimes directed against Catholics or protestants.

FBI Hate Crime Statistics, year 2005:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/victims.htm

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I'm not a mind-reader, dude.

You said that hate crimes are never investigated or prosecuted when they involve crimes against christians.

It took me ten seconds on google to show you that they were.

How many links do you need, before you withdraw your statement, that it "never" happens?

Here's another hate crime that was investigated involving vandalism at a christian church:

Since you support the hate crimes legislation, I'd like to hear your justification for this particular so-called "hate crime":
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929

or this one:
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929

 

[manu1959]

based on your definition of hate crime burning an american flag would be an act intended to intimidate or coerce a group based on race, creed, religion, or ethnicity .... i am a white christian american male and it offends me on all four....

Astonishing. You're clueless.

First, the burning of the american flag is a virtual myth. There are only a handful of cases of it ever happening in the United States. What you see on TV, is from other countries: Pakistan, Iran, etc.

Second, you're are ignorant of our history and of your own alleged religion. The flag of the United States does not represent your church, your religion, or your skin color:

Ergo, the burning of the flag (which virtually never even happens in this country), is not a violation of any of your constitutional rights to freely excercise your religion, nor is it any kind of racial violation against your skin color or creed.

The constitution doesn't protect you from being offended, dummy. It protects your civil rights to practice freedom of faith and association. Free of intimidation or coercion.

you actually belive your bullshit don't you....

so tell me mr know it all ... what does the american flag represent and what are the cornerstones of the the country it represents?

if burning the flag is not meant to itimidate americans and what they stand for .... what is the purpose of burning it and why should that be protected and burning flushing or peeing on a koran not be protected for the same reason.....

why in your bubble are the rights of a religous sect more protected than the rights of those that repsect the american flag and what it stands for ....

 

[Care4all]

Since you support the hate crimes legislation, I'd like to hear your justification for this particular so-called "hate crime":
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929

or this one:
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929

Screaming Eagle.....first let me ask you this question...Why do Eagles Scream like that? Gees louise, I thought the darn thing was in MAJOR DISTRESS, the first time I heard one circling overhead and screaming.

Now, I have skimmed the first link article and not the 2nd one yet, but on the first one....

There is nothing that took place that involved Hate Crime Laws.... all that these people were charged with were 8 other crimes, NONE of which involved hate crimes legislation, soooooooooooo......precisely what point are you trying to make? What does Hate crimes legislation have to do with this incident that took place at the Gay Festival?

I guess what I am trying to say is that although I am against Hate Crime legislation because I believe that we all are created equal and hate crime legislation singles out and gives greater protection to certain individuals over others and punishes the exact sme crimes only done to different people, differently....

HOWEVER, this first article has nothing to do with hate crime legislation, so I don't understand what you are trying to say. The cops were idiots imo....but has nothing to do with a hate crime.

Care

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Screaming Eagle.....first let me ask you this question...Why do Eagles Scream like that? Gees louise, I thought the darn thing was in MAJOR DISTRESS, the first time I heard one circling overhead and screaming.

Now, I have skimmed the first link article and not the 2nd one yet, but on the first one....

There is nothing that took place that involved Hate Crime Laws.... all that these people were charged with were 8 other crimes, NONE of which involved hate crimes legislation, soooooooooooo......precisely what point are you trying to make? What does Hate crimes legislation have to do with this incident that took place at the Gay Festival?

I guess what I am trying to say is that although I am against Hate Crime legislation because I believe that we all are created equal and hate crime legislation singles out and gives greater protection to certain individuals over others and punishes the exact sme crimes only done to different people, differently....

HOWEVER, this first article has nothing to do with hate crime legislation, so I don't understand what you are trying to say. The cops were idiots imo....but has nothing to do with a hate crime.

Care

You got it, our country is in MAJOR DISTRESS.

These Christians were doing nothing but peacefully exercising their right to FREE SPEECH in the public square, as were the homosexuals.

Maybe you need to stop "skimming" and read the article more thoroughly. It says the Christian protestors obeyed all laws, all ordinance, and all requests by the police officers.

Even though they did all that they were STILL charged with:
criminal conspiracy - why, because they got together to protest?
possession of instruments of crime - what, their signs?
reckless endangerment of another person - how? with their singing?
ethnic intimidation - another "victim" group is born
riot - I'd say the only ones rioting were the obscenity-screaming God haters
failure to disperse - why should they?
disorderly conduct - how so? what about the heckling and obscenity-spewing homos?
obstructing highways - the heckling homos blocked them, not the reverse

What a bunch of trumped up crap. This is what happens when one group becomes a favored and politically protected "victim" group. In this case I'd say the Christians were definitely the victims of hate.

What's next?

Will preachers be arrested for Biblical passages against homosexuality?

Will people be arrested for speaking against homosexuals on chat boards?

Will you and your children be required by law to accept homosexual behavior as normal and acceptable?