Teen Mmay Get 2yrs For Sex With Jesus Pic

Luddly Neddite

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2011
63,945
9,973
2,040
Teen May Get 2 Years For Pic Of Fake Oral Sex With Jesus PHOTO

The photo was taken in front of Love in the Name of Christ, a Christian organization in Everett, Pennsylvania, and posted on Facebook back in July.

On Tuesday, the 14-year-old — whose name has not been released by police — was charged with desecration of a venerated object, the Smoking Gun reported. If convicted, he could wind up spending two years in a juvenile jail, according to Kron 4.

“Desecration” is defined in Pennsyvlania as ““Defacing, damaging, polluting or otherwise, physically mistreating in a way that the actor knows will outrage the sensibilities of persons likely to observe or discover the action.”

Patheos.com notes that in Pennsylvania, a vandalism charge usually carries a maximum penalty of only one year in jail. JT Eberhard writes:

So let’s say an adult (subject to harsher penalties than minors) elected to spray paint “Jesus loves dicks” on the side of this boy’s school. That guy, at most (and the “at most” comes in to play for people with previous criminal records, which this boy doesn’t have), would serve a year in jail – and that’s assuming the cost of having the wall re-painted exceeds $150, otherwise the penalty would be less.

But a 14 year-old does something stupid that causes literally zero property damage and he could face two years in juvenile jail because it’s a “venerated object”? That’s insane. That’s really ludicrous.

o-JESUS-STATUE-BLURRED-570.jpg


This one will bring the phony christians out in droves.
 
Teen May Get 2 Years For Pic Of Fake Oral Sex With Jesus PHOTO

The photo was taken in front of Love in the Name of Christ, a Christian organization in Everett, Pennsylvania, and posted on Facebook back in July.

On Tuesday, the 14-year-old — whose name has not been released by police — was charged with desecration of a venerated object, the Smoking Gun reported. If convicted, he could wind up spending two years in a juvenile jail, according to Kron 4.

“Desecration” is defined in Pennsyvlania as ““Defacing, damaging, polluting or otherwise, physically mistreating in a way that the actor knows will outrage the sensibilities of persons likely to observe or discover the action.”

Patheos.com notes that in Pennsylvania, a vandalism charge usually carries a maximum penalty of only one year in jail. JT Eberhard writes:

So let’s say an adult (subject to harsher penalties than minors) elected to spray paint “Jesus loves dicks” on the side of this boy’s school. That guy, at most (and the “at most” comes in to play for people with previous criminal records, which this boy doesn’t have), would serve a year in jail – and that’s assuming the cost of having the wall re-painted exceeds $150, otherwise the penalty would be less.

But a 14 year-old does something stupid that causes literally zero property damage and he could face two years in juvenile jail because it’s a “venerated object”? That’s insane. That’s really ludicrous.

o-JESUS-STATUE-BLURRED-570.jpg


This one will bring the phony christians out in droves.
:boohoo:

Hope they keep him in there until he turns 18 and it costs his parents a fortune, they should have taught the boy to respect others.
 
The boy's father should beat the crap out of him for his disrespectful actions and acting gay. ..... :cool:

Hey, you work with the "army" you have. Whattya want the kid to do, go have a sex change first?

But I agree about the "disrespectful actions" -- anyone wearing a baseball cap backwards had better be wearing a catcher's mitt too. Then there's that underwear hanging out. Disgraceful.
 
there's a big difference between "may" and "will"

he'll get some community service, tops. nobody wants to lock up a 14 year old over a picture that caused no damage.
 
Teen May Get 2 Years For Pic Of Fake Oral Sex With Jesus PHOTO

The photo was taken in front of Love in the Name of Christ, a Christian organization in Everett, Pennsylvania, and posted on Facebook back in July.

On Tuesday, the 14-year-old — whose name has not been released by police — was charged with desecration of a venerated object, the Smoking Gun reported. If convicted, he could wind up spending two years in a juvenile jail, according to Kron 4.

“Desecration” is defined in Pennsyvlania as ““Defacing, damaging, polluting or otherwise, physically mistreating in a way that the actor knows will outrage the sensibilities of persons likely to observe or discover the action.”

Patheos.com notes that in Pennsylvania, a vandalism charge usually carries a maximum penalty of only one year in jail. JT Eberhard writes:

So let’s say an adult (subject to harsher penalties than minors) elected to spray paint “Jesus loves dicks” on the side of this boy’s school. That guy, at most (and the “at most” comes in to play for people with previous criminal records, which this boy doesn’t have), would serve a year in jail – and that’s assuming the cost of having the wall re-painted exceeds $150, otherwise the penalty would be less.

But a 14 year-old does something stupid that causes literally zero property damage and he could face two years in juvenile jail because it’s a “venerated object”? That’s insane. That’s really ludicrous.

o-JESUS-STATUE-BLURRED-570.jpg


This one will bring the phony christians out in droves.
:boohoo:

Hope they keep him in there until he turns 18 and it costs his parents a fortune, they should have taught the boy to respect others.

While his actions are tawdry and disrespectful it doesn't warrant any lengthy stay in a dentition center. The taxpayers of my state shouldn't have to pay to feed, shelter, and clothe this buffoon for dry humping a statue.
 
Clearly any law that proscribes "offending the sensibilities of others" runs contrary to the First Amendment. Let's hope this byzantine bullshit gets wiped off the books.
 
Curiouser and curiouser... who's got the agenda here?

>>
A spokesperson for the ministry told Raw Story that Love In the Name of Christ did not ask police to press charges against the teen.

“And repercussions that have come from this have been because of what he has posted on Facebook,” the spokesperson said. “We have asked for prayer for this young man. And Love Inc. did not press charges against him. So, what is happening is from the police. It is not from the ministry.” << (here)​
 
Have we raised such a stupid millennium generation that they commit vandalism and photograph it for the freaking Police to see? Let him plead insanity for all I care.
 
There are a lot of religious statues out there, and we should not want to start to see this happening a lot which is likely to happen if nothing is done. It is despicable.
 
There are a lot of religious statues out there, and we should not want to start to see this happening a lot which is likely to happen if nothing is done. It is despicable.

No one seems to stop and ask this ---

outside of simple narcissism, why do you suppose the kid would do this? Why Jesus specifically?
 
Teen May Get 2 Years For Pic Of Fake Oral Sex With Jesus PHOTO

The photo was taken in front of Love in the Name of Christ, a Christian organization in Everett, Pennsylvania, and posted on Facebook back in July.
You're sick.
On Tuesday, the 14-year-old — whose name has not been released by police — was charged with desecration of a venerated object, the Smoking Gun reported. If convicted, he could wind up spending two years in a juvenile jail, according to Kron 4.

“Desecration” is defined in Pennsyvlania as ““Defacing, damaging, polluting or otherwise, physically mistreating in a way that the actor knows will outrage the sensibilities of persons likely to observe or discover the action.”

Patheos.com notes that in Pennsylvania, a vandalism charge usually carries a maximum penalty of only one year in jail. JT Eberhard writes:

So let’s say an adult (subject to harsher penalties than minors) elected to spray paint “Jesus loves dicks” on the side of this boy’s school. That guy, at most (and the “at most” comes in to play for people with previous criminal records, which this boy doesn’t have), would serve a year in jail – and that’s assuming the cost of having the wall re-painted exceeds $150, otherwise the penalty would be less.

But a 14 year-old does something stupid that causes literally zero property damage and he could face two years in juvenile jail because it’s a “venerated object”? That’s insane. That’s really ludicrous.

o-JESUS-STATUE-BLURRED-570.jpg


This one will bring the phony christians out in droves.
 
Teen May Get 2 Years For Pic Of Fake Oral Sex With Jesus PHOTO

The photo was taken in front of Love in the Name of Christ, a Christian organization in Everett, Pennsylvania, and posted on Facebook back in July.

On Tuesday, the 14-year-old — whose name has not been released by police — was charged with desecration of a venerated object, the Smoking Gun reported. If convicted, he could wind up spending two years in a juvenile jail, according to Kron 4.

“Desecration” is defined in Pennsyvlania as ““Defacing, damaging, polluting or otherwise, physically mistreating in a way that the actor knows will outrage the sensibilities of persons likely to observe or discover the action.”

Patheos.com notes that in Pennsylvania, a vandalism charge usually carries a maximum penalty of only one year in jail. JT Eberhard writes:

So let’s say an adult (subject to harsher penalties than minors) elected to spray paint “Jesus loves dicks” on the side of this boy’s school. That guy, at most (and the “at most” comes in to play for people with previous criminal records, which this boy doesn’t have), would serve a year in jail – and that’s assuming the cost of having the wall re-painted exceeds $150, otherwise the penalty would be less.

But a 14 year-old does something stupid that causes literally zero property damage and he could face two years in juvenile jail because it’s a “venerated object”? That’s insane. That’s really ludicrous.

o-JESUS-STATUE-BLURRED-570.jpg


This one will bring the phony christians out in droves.
I bet if he had fake sex with an Obama statue you would demand 2 years at a minimum.
 
To me, this is a very simple case. If the kid damaged or defaced the statue he may be prosecuted; however the penalty cannot be enhanced because the damage was to a venerated religious object. If the damage to the statue was $50, he would get the same penalty as someone who caused $50 worth of damage to his neighbor's old Volvo. No law can require anyone to show deference to any religious object.

If there was no damage there can be no crime. This is one of the strongest cases I have ever heard involving freedom of speech. The fact that his conduct/speech was offensive is meaningless under the law. The First Amendment was created for the purpose of protecting offensive speech (non-offensive speech really needs no protection). A lot of people are offended by the burning of the American Flag but the SCOTUS ruled this conduct to be protected under the First Amendment. The kid's manners are atrocious but what he did does not rise to the level of a crime.

It appears that the young man can claim two violations of his first amendment rights: (1) he is being punished for his religious (anti-Christian) activities; and (2) his speech, whether through words or conduct, is Constitutionally protected and the government is unlawfully trying to silence him.

I have studied many First Amendment cases and I know how the court SHOULD rule in this case; however, it seems that the whole damn word has gone looney tunes lately so I can never be certain how it WILL rule.
 
To me, this is a very simple case. If the kid damaged or defaced the statue he may be prosecuted; however the penalty cannot be enhanced because the damage was to a venerated religious object. If the damage to the statue was $50, he would get the same penalty as someone who caused $50 worth of damage to his neighbor's old Volvo. No law can require anyone to show deference to any religious object.

If there was no damage there can be no crime. This is one of the strongest cases I have ever heard involving freedom of speech. The fact that his conduct/speech was offensive is meaningless under the law. The First Amendment was created for the purpose of protecting offensive speech (non-offensive speech really needs no protection). A lot of people are offended by the burning of the American Flag but the SCOTUS ruled this conduct to be protected under the First Amendment. The kid's manners are atrocious but what he did does not rise to the level of a crime.

It appears that the young man can claim two violations of his first amendment rights: (1) he is being punished for his religious (anti-Christian) activities; and (2) his speech, whether through words or conduct, is Constitutionally protected and the government is unlawfully trying to silence him.

I have studied many First Amendment cases and I know how the court SHOULD rule in this case; however, it seems that the whole damn word has gone looney tunes lately so I can never be certain how it WILL rule.

I concur, especially with the underlined. If I were defending this case I'd go straight to the law itself, where it purports to prohibit actions that may "outrage the sensibilities of persons likely to observe or discover the action.” Clearly counterconstitutional on its face, let alone the ludicrousness of legislating emotion. Then add in that the church who owns the statue didn't even complain about it -- it was simply a cop, presupposing that somebody might object. Activist policing. That alone might get it thrown out but one hopes not, so that the law itself may be challenged.

Hard to believe this law has been on the books since 1972. Also hard to believe that's its origin date -- when I looked it up I expected 18th century.
 

Forum List

Back
Top