Religious nut attacks atheist, judge berates victim

[GuyPinestra]

Right wing cunundrum....defend the Atheist or defend the Muslim.....what to do....what to do......

No conundrum at all, defend the Constitution.

 

[Peach]

Not at all. Sensitivity has nothing to with this. This is freedom of speech and this allows bashing any religion. If the attacker can't live by our constitution then he should move back to where sharia is loved. It really is as simple as that.

It has nothing to do with sensitivity and everything to do with responsible protest, the responsibility to not incite violence. The judge could have charged both or neither and made the right choice to just toss it.

Wrong. This was responsible and peaceful protest. The person protesting was attacked and the judge was wrong.

That sums it up well.

 

[GuyPinestra]

It has nothing to do with sensitivity and everything to do with responsible protest, the responsibility to not incite violence. The judge could have charged both or neither and made the right choice to just toss it.

Responsible protest?? In America we have the right to protest any way we want to, without violence. Violence was visited on the protester in violation of his rights. The nutjob Islamist should be in jail for assault, and the judge should be chasing stray cats.

So the guy that decides to do something incredibly offensive and provocative in public should not be held accountable for his actions? I can think of many costumes that would not play well in certain public situations, one could dress as a Nazi or a klansman or a terrorist or a priest in certain situations or locations and fully expect to get their asses beat. There had to be some expectation on this guy's part of the possibility of a beat down, if not he truly is a dumbass. Just ask yourself, would you have gone out in public and mocked the Prophet Mohammed?

In America we have the right to be offensive. Bill Maher offends me on a daily basis, do I have the right to go beat the shit out of him? You offend me, care for YOUR beatdown?

The other guy in the parade was dressed as a zombie Pope. Would you be so vehemently defending a nutjob Christian that attacked him? Don't bother to answer, we already know you wouldn't.

Hypocrite.

 

[occupied]

Responsible protest?? In America we have the right to protest any way we want to, without violence. Violence was visited on the protester in violation of his rights. The nutjob Islamist should be in jail for assault, and the judge should be chasing stray cats.

So the guy that decides to do something incredibly offensive and provocative in public should not be held accountable for his actions? I can think of many costumes that would not play well in certain public situations, one could dress as a Nazi or a klansman or a terrorist or a priest in certain situations or locations and fully expect to get their asses beat. There had to be some expectation on this guy's part of the possibility of a beat down, if not he truly is a dumbass. Just ask yourself, would you have gone out in public and mocked the Prophet Mohammed?

In America we have the right to be offensive. Bill Maher offends me on a daily basis, do I have the right to go beat the shit out of him? You offend me, care for YOUR beatdown?

The other guy in the parade was dressed as a zombie Pope. Would you be so vehemently defending a nutjob Christian that attacked him? Don't bother to answer, we already know you wouldn't.

Hypocrite.

The only thing I am defending here is responsible use of rights, if an occupier had desecrated a flag, which some of them irresponsibly did, and got punched would you be defending the occupier and condemning the puncher? Who's the hypocrite here?

 

[GuyPinestra]

So the guy that decides to do something incredibly offensive and provocative in public should not be held accountable for his actions? I can think of many costumes that would not play well in certain public situations, one could dress as a Nazi or a klansman or a terrorist or a priest in certain situations or locations and fully expect to get their asses beat. There had to be some expectation on this guy's part of the possibility of a beat down, if not he truly is a dumbass. Just ask yourself, would you have gone out in public and mocked the Prophet Mohammed?

In America we have the right to be offensive. Bill Maher offends me on a daily basis, do I have the right to go beat the shit out of him? You offend me, care for YOUR beatdown?

The other guy in the parade was dressed as a zombie Pope. Would you be so vehemently defending a nutjob Christian that attacked him? Don't bother to answer, we already know you wouldn't.

Hypocrite.

The only thing I am defending here is responsible use of rights, if an occupier had desecrated a flag, which some of them irresponsibly did, and got punched would you be defending the occupier and condemning the puncher? Who's the hypocrite here?

As a matter of fact I would. The only hypocrite here is in your mirror.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's pretty funny, they are both dumbasses.

Who are dumbasses? I hope you aren't talking about the guy wearing the Zombie Mohammad costume.

 

[Syphon]

So the guy that decides to do something incredibly offensive and provocative in public should not be held accountable for his actions? I can think of many costumes that would not play well in certain public situations, one could dress as a Nazi or a klansman or a terrorist or a priest in certain situations or locations and fully expect to get their asses beat. There had to be some expectation on this guy's part of the possibility of a beat down, if not he truly is a dumbass. Just ask yourself, would you have gone out in public and mocked the Prophet Mohammed?

In America we have the right to be offensive. Bill Maher offends me on a daily basis, do I have the right to go beat the shit out of him? You offend me, care for YOUR beatdown?

The other guy in the parade was dressed as a zombie Pope. Would you be so vehemently defending a nutjob Christian that attacked him? Don't bother to answer, we already know you wouldn't.

Hypocrite.

The only thing I am defending here is responsible use of rights, if an occupier had desecrated a flag, which some of them irresponsibly did, and got punched would you be defending the occupier and condemning the puncher? Who's the hypocrite here?

you defend the law, even if you dont agree with application of it. if you take religion out of the equation, and you see it as a man walking in a parade who was then attacked by another man simply for what he was wearing you would come to a different conclusion.

heres another good example. if i attend the funeral of a war veteran and the westboro baptist church shows up and i punch one of the protesters. am i an the right simply because i dont agree with his views, even though most would agree that he deserved it?

 

[occupied]

In America we have the right to be offensive. Bill Maher offends me on a daily basis, do I have the right to go beat the shit out of him? You offend me, care for YOUR beatdown?

The other guy in the parade was dressed as a zombie Pope. Would you be so vehemently defending a nutjob Christian that attacked him? Don't bother to answer, we already know you wouldn't.

Hypocrite.

The only thing I am defending here is responsible use of rights, if an occupier had desecrated a flag, which some of them irresponsibly did, and got punched would you be defending the occupier and condemning the puncher? Who's the hypocrite here?

As a matter of fact I would. The only hypocrite here is in your mirror.

So you think our 1st amendment rights do not carry with it any responsibility? That we can be so offensive that people lose their minds and are provoked into violence and we share zero responsibility?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's pretty funny, they are both dumbasses.

Who? The religious nut and the judge? I agree. I don't see anything funny other than the clown suits that they were wearing.

I love the right of protest better than most around here but everyone knows by now how touchy Muslims can be about blasphemy, while he has the certain right to protest in any way he wants, what he did was pretty much incitement. Also the people who are trying make atheism a quasi-religious thing and be evangelists about it are just generally dumbasses.

If Muslims are "touchy" about people making fin of them they need to get over it. Being touchy does not excuse attacking a guy who is mocking a religious figure. Did anyone attack the Zombie Pope? Would you attack a guy dressed up as a Zombie Darwin?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I love the right of protest better than most around here but everyone knows by now how touchy Muslims can be about blasphemy, while he has the certain right to protest in any way he wants, what he did was pretty much incitement. Also the people who are trying make atheism a quasi-religious thing and be evangelists about it are just generally dumbasses.

Not at all. Sensitivity has nothing to with this. This is freedom of speech and this allows bashing any religion. If the attacker can't live by our constitution then he should move back to where sharia is loved. It really is as simple as that.

It has nothing to do with sensitivity and everything to do with responsible protest, the responsibility to not incite violence. The judge could have charged both or neither and made the right choice to just toss it.

What?

 

[Syphon]

The only thing I am defending here is responsible use of rights, if an occupier had desecrated a flag, which some of them irresponsibly did, and got punched would you be defending the occupier and condemning the puncher? Who's the hypocrite here?

As a matter of fact I would. The only hypocrite here is in your mirror.

So you think our 1st amendment rights do not carry with it any responsibility? That we can be so offensive that people lose their minds and are provoked into violence and we share zero responsibility?

they have ruled that the right to free speech is no absolute. this is akin to yelling fire in a crowded room. free speech or not?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It has nothing to do with sensitivity and everything to do with responsible protest, the responsibility to not incite violence. The judge could have charged both or neither and made the right choice to just toss it.

Responsible protest?? In America we have the right to protest any way we want to, without violence. Violence was visited on the protester in violation of his rights. The nutjob Islamist should be in jail for assault, and the judge should be chasing stray cats.

So the guy that decides to do something incredibly offensive and provocative in public should not be held accountable for his actions? I can think of many costumes that would not play well in certain public situations, one could dress as a Nazi or a klansman or a terrorist or a priest in certain situations or locations and fully expect to get their asses beat. There had to be some expectation on this guy's part of the possibility of a beat down, if not he truly is a dumbass. Just ask yourself, would you have gone out in public and mocked the Prophet Mohammed?

There is no law against people being offensive. If there were everyone in any occupy camp would have been arrested after not showering for a couple of days. Since there is no law against being offensive, ther is no need to hold offensive people accountable for their actions, which means you are very lucky, because I find the idea that people who are offensive deserve what happens to them offensive. Yes, that goes for people dressed like Nazis, KKK members, and even priests.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The only thing I am defending here is responsible use of rights, if an occupier had desecrated a flag, which some of them irresponsibly did, and got punched would you be defending the occupier and condemning the puncher? Who's the hypocrite here?

As a matter of fact I would. The only hypocrite here is in your mirror.

So you think our 1st amendment rights do not carry with it any responsibility? That we can be so offensive that people lose their minds and are provoked into violence and we share zero responsibility?

Rights do carry responsibility, they carry the responsibility not to attack people who you do not like.

 

[occupied]

Responsible protest?? In America we have the right to protest any way we want to, without violence. Violence was visited on the protester in violation of his rights. The nutjob Islamist should be in jail for assault, and the judge should be chasing stray cats.

So the guy that decides to do something incredibly offensive and provocative in public should not be held accountable for his actions? I can think of many costumes that would not play well in certain public situations, one could dress as a Nazi or a klansman or a terrorist or a priest in certain situations or locations and fully expect to get their asses beat. There had to be some expectation on this guy's part of the possibility of a beat down, if not he truly is a dumbass. Just ask yourself, would you have gone out in public and mocked the Prophet Mohammed?

There is no law against people being offensive. If there were everyone in any occupy camp would have been arrested after not showering for a couple of days. Since there is no law against being offensive, ther is no need to hold offensive people accountable for their actions, which means you are very lucky, because I find the idea that people who are offensive deserve what happens to them offensive. Yes, that goes for people dressed like Nazis, KKK members, and even priests.

Bookmarking statement for later. Lots of protesters are going to get beaten this summer, let's see how you feel then.

 

[GuyPinestra]

The only thing I am defending here is responsible use of rights, if an occupier had desecrated a flag, which some of them irresponsibly did, and got punched would you be defending the occupier and condemning the puncher? Who's the hypocrite here?

As a matter of fact I would. The only hypocrite here is in your mirror.

So you think our 1st amendment rights do not carry with it any responsibility? That we can be so offensive that people lose their minds and are provoked into violence and we share zero responsibility?

Now you're saying this person is not sane enough to be on the streets. He "lost his mind" over a COSTUME! This person is better suited to living under Sharia law in Yemen than he is to living under our Constitution. Maybe he should be DEPORTED!!

 

[Syphon]

So the guy that decides to do something incredibly offensive and provocative in public should not be held accountable for his actions? I can think of many costumes that would not play well in certain public situations, one could dress as a Nazi or a klansman or a terrorist or a priest in certain situations or locations and fully expect to get their asses beat. There had to be some expectation on this guy's part of the possibility of a beat down, if not he truly is a dumbass. Just ask yourself, would you have gone out in public and mocked the Prophet Mohammed?

There is no law against people being offensive. If there were everyone in any occupy camp would have been arrested after not showering for a couple of days. Since there is no law against being offensive, ther is no need to hold offensive people accountable for their actions, which means you are very lucky, because I find the idea that people who are offensive deserve what happens to them offensive. Yes, that goes for people dressed like Nazis, KKK members, and even priests.

Bookmarking statement for later. Lots of protesters are going to get beaten this summer, let's see how you feel then.

you can not take a law associated with a right, and apply differently simply because you disagree with how a group is using that law. freedom is speech is afforded to everyone. whether you agree or disagree with exactly what they are saying. i disagree with everything the GOP says during rallys and debates. some things even offend me. such as the guy saying that a 30 year old male without health insurance who develops cancer deserves to die. thats extremely offensive to me. but does that give me the right to physically assault that man?

 

[Missourian]

The judge was correct in this ruling.

It is analogous to someone calling your mother a whore to your face.

He may have a first amendment right to say it, but you are still going to do your best to make them eat those words.

They knew what was coming, and no judge out here is going to put you in jail after someone baited to into an altercation.

And that was exactly what this was...baiting an altercation.

 

[GuyPinestra]

The judge was correct in this ruling.

It is analogous to someone calling your mother a whore to your face.

He may have a first amendment right to say it, but you are still going to do your best to make them eat those words.

They knew what was coming, and no judge out here is going to put you in jail after someone baited to into an altercation.

And that was exactly what this was...baiting an altercation.

I'll ask you the same question... Would you feel the same way if it was a Catholic nutjob beating on the guy dressed as the zombie Pope?

 

[Syphon]

The judge was correct in this ruling.

It is analogous to someone calling your mother a whore to your face.

He may have a first amendment right to say it, but you are still going to do your best to make them eat those words.

They knew what was coming, and no judge out here is going to put you in jail after someone baited to into an altercation.

And that was exactly what this was...baiting an altercation.

what part of the constitution gives you the right to assault another person for what was already determined to be a peaceful protest? offensive, maybe depending on your point of view, but peaceful none the less.

just because you disagree with his views and beliefs, does not give you a right to assault another person without repercussions. this will end up getting overturned on appeal.

 

[Peach]

The judge was correct in this ruling.

It is analogous to someone calling your mother a whore to your face.

He may have a first amendment right to say it, but you are still going to do your best to make them eat those words.

They knew what was coming, and no judge out here is going to put you in jail after someone baited to into an altercation.

And that was exactly what this was...baiting an altercation.

I'll ask you the same question... Would you feel the same way if it was a Catholic nutjob beating on the guy dressed as the zombie Pope?

YES. LOOK AWAY. No excuse for physical attack. No one forced the attacker to watch his religion being mocked; one of our freedoms is of association.