Teen Mmay Get 2yrs For Sex With Jesus Pic

[QuickHitCurepon]

And in a related story....

“The statue was not a piece of City commissioned artwork and consequently it has been removed,” city spokeswoman Sara Couper told Global News.

Wtf is "Orly"? An airport in Paris AFAIK...

O really.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

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.

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.

Naw...pesky 1st amendment.

If he did it with his own statue, it would probably be fine under the 1st, however he did it to someone else's, and the 1st amendment doesn't allow you to fuck around with someone else's property.

The statue wasn't at all harmed or defaced, nor did its owners complain.

Anything else?

Police don't need a complaint to enforce the law.

But their prosecutor will need what's known as "evidence".

He posted it on Facebook. Case closed.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

This is a kid who doesn't need jail.

Bring back public floggings give this kid 10 lashes and let's move on.

 

[Ravi]

The boy is being punished more for his state of mind than the actual act. Most criminal laws have enhancements for state of mind.

A con supporting thought crimes. Can this get any better?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The boy is being punished more for his state of mind than the actual act. Most criminal laws have enhancements for state of mind.

A con supporting thought crimes. Can this get any better?

I disagree with this law, because it PRECISELY does what hate crime laws do. They try to punish someone for their THOUGHTS.

So, I assume you also disagree with hate crime laws.

 

[jknowgood]

About a week confined in a cell with someone who could force him to assume his "Jesus position" might be enough to focus his mind.

So you disagree with the First Amendment.
Fine, start a petition to rescind it. Until then, law of the land, like it or lump it.

You really don't understand the First Amendment, do you? If the church wished to press charges, the kid has no First Amendment defense. Why? Look at the picture, he is on the church's property, and as soon as he laid hands upon the statue, he became a criminal.

You can protest all you want, but you cannot touch someone else, or get on someone else's property, this includes businesses and places of worship.

Law of the land, like it or lump it. By the way, you just got schooled!

That's trespassing. Has nothing to do with the First Amendment or free expression.

You just flunked Social Studies.

It does in this case, and everyone on here with an ounce of smarts knows it. You cannot argue free expression, while breaking the law. And this boy was breaking the law, by trespassing, and if the DA wants to add more charges, then attempted vandalism,(his hands is on the statue's head, perhaps he is trying to rip the head off.) comes in to play from just the kid's on photograph.

I know you hate being wrong, but, as much as you are, you should be used to it, but you keep trying, one day you might be right.But, I'm sure it will be by mistake.

If the church allows others to be on their grounds they wouldn't be able to single out one person and charge him with trespassing. So in this case the only law they can enforce is the unconstitutional law about not giving offense.

I must admit that I am totally enjoying watching the hypocritical cons being the PC police.

I don't believe the boy should get time, probably make him get in front of the congregation on Sunday morning and apologize for being a stupid teenager would suffice. One thing for the ones sticking up for this boy. If he went to one of your loved ones grave site and did something similar, would you feel the same? Our children need to be taught to respect others.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

About a week confined in a cell with someone who could force him to assume his "Jesus position" might be enough to focus his mind.

So you disagree with the First Amendment.
Fine, start a petition to rescind it. Until then, law of the land, like it or lump it.

You really don't understand the First Amendment, do you? If the church wished to press charges, the kid has no First Amendment defense. Why? Look at the picture, he is on the church's property, and as soon as he laid hands upon the statue, he became a criminal.

You can protest all you want, but you cannot touch someone else, or get on someone else's property, this includes businesses and places of worship.

Law of the land, like it or lump it. By the way, you just got schooled!

That's trespassing. Has nothing to do with the First Amendment or free expression.

You just flunked Social Studies.

It does in this case, and everyone on here with an ounce of smarts knows it. You cannot argue free expression, while breaking the law. And this boy was breaking the law, by trespassing, and if the DA wants to add more charges, then attempted vandalism,(his hands is on the statue's head, perhaps he is trying to rip the head off.) comes in to play from just the kid's on photograph.

I know you hate being wrong, but, as much as you are, you should be used to it, but you keep trying, one day you might be right.But, I'm sure it will be by mistake.

If the church allows others to be on their grounds they wouldn't be able to single out one person and charge him with trespassing. So in this case the only law they can enforce is the unconstitutional law about not giving offense.

I must admit that I am totally enjoying watching the hypocritical cons being the PC police.

I don't believe the boy should get time, probably make him get in front of the congregation on Sunday morning and apologize for being a stupid teenager would suffice. One thing for the ones sticking up for this boy. If he went to one of your loved ones grave site and did something similar, would you feel the same? Our children need to be taught to respect others.

Here's the truth, his parents should be fined.

I mean who's kid does something like that? Not the doing it part, the putting it on FB part?

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

About a week confined in a cell with someone who could force him to assume his "Jesus position" might be enough to focus his mind.

So you disagree with the First Amendment.
Fine, start a petition to rescind it. Until then, law of the land, like it or lump it.

You really don't understand the First Amendment, do you? If the church wished to press charges, the kid has no First Amendment defense. Why? Look at the picture, he is on the church's property, and as soon as he laid hands upon the statue, he became a criminal.

You can protest all you want, but you cannot touch someone else, or get on someone else's property, this includes businesses and places of worship.

Law of the land, like it or lump it. By the way, you just got schooled!

That's trespassing. Has nothing to do with the First Amendment or free expression.

You just flunked Social Studies.

It does in this case, and everyone on here with an ounce of smarts knows it. You cannot argue free expression, while breaking the law. And this boy was breaking the law, by trespassing, and if the DA wants to add more charges, then attempted vandalism,(his hands is on the statue's head, perhaps he is trying to rip the head off.) comes in to play from just the kid's on photograph.

I know you hate being wrong, but, as much as you are, you should be used to it, but you keep trying, one day you might be right.But, I'm sure it will be by mistake.

If the church allows others to be on their grounds they wouldn't be able to single out one person and charge him with trespassing. So in this case the only law they can enforce is the unconstitutional law about not giving offense.

I must admit that I am totally enjoying watching the hypocritical cons being the PC police.

I don't believe the boy should get time, probably make him get in front of the congregation on Sunday morning and apologize for being a stupid teenager would suffice. One thing for the ones sticking up for this boy. If he went to one of your loved ones grave site and did something similar, would you feel the same? Our children need to be taught to respect others.

That's the problem. If anyone wanted to spend their hard earned money on a statue of Jesus or Buddah or anything else, and take a crap on it, and post it on facebook, then who cares, it is their property, not someone else's. If you come on my property and desecrate my flag by spitting on it, rubbing it against yourself in a perverse way, or something to that effect, then you are going to get your assed kicked. If you want to piss on your own flag, then more power to you.

 

[Plasmaball]

About a week confined in a cell with someone who could force him to assume his "Jesus position" might be enough to focus his mind.

or....we don't.

 

[HenryBHough]

"Don't" what?

Focus?

 

[guno]

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.

This one will bring the phony christians out in droves.

Kind of like a story I heard about someone replacing he baby jesus in the nativity scene with a bart simpson doll

 

[jknowgood]

About a week confined in a cell with someone who could force him to assume his "Jesus position" might be enough to focus his mind.

So you disagree with the First Amendment.
Fine, start a petition to rescind it. Until then, law of the land, like it or lump it.

You really don't understand the First Amendment, do you? If the church wished to press charges, the kid has no First Amendment defense. Why? Look at the picture, he is on the church's property, and as soon as he laid hands upon the statue, he became a criminal.

You can protest all you want, but you cannot touch someone else, or get on someone else's property, this includes businesses and places of worship.

Law of the land, like it or lump it. By the way, you just got schooled!

That's trespassing. Has nothing to do with the First Amendment or free expression.

You just flunked Social Studies.

It does in this case, and everyone on here with an ounce of smarts knows it. You cannot argue free expression, while breaking the law. And this boy was breaking the law, by trespassing, and if the DA wants to add more charges, then attempted vandalism,(his hands is on the statue's head, perhaps he is trying to rip the head off.) comes in to play from just the kid's on photograph.

I know you hate being wrong, but, as much as you are, you should be used to it, but you keep trying, one day you might be right.But, I'm sure it will be by mistake.

If the church allows others to be on their grounds they wouldn't be able to single out one person and charge him with trespassing. So in this case the only law they can enforce is the unconstitutional law about not giving offense.

I must admit that I am totally enjoying watching the hypocritical cons being the PC police.

I don't believe the boy should get time, probably make him get in front of the congregation on Sunday morning and apologize for being a stupid teenager would suffice. One thing for the ones sticking up for this boy. If he went to one of your loved ones grave site and did something similar, would you feel the same? Our children need to be taught to respect others.

Here's the truth, his parents should be fined.

I mean who's kid does something like that? Not the doing it part, the putting it on FB part?

I have an eighteen year old, he can still surprise me. Don't get me wrong he is a great boy, but wow. Lol

 

[Pogo]

About a week confined in a cell with someone who could force him to assume his "Jesus position" might be enough to focus his mind.

So you disagree with the First Amendment.
Fine, start a petition to rescind it. Until then, law of the land, like it or lump it.

You really don't understand the First Amendment, do you? If the church wished to press charges, the kid has no First Amendment defense. Why? Look at the picture, he is on the church's property, and as soon as he laid hands upon the statue, he became a criminal.

You can protest all you want, but you cannot touch someone else, or get on someone else's property, this includes businesses and places of worship.

Law of the land, like it or lump it. By the way, you just got schooled!

That's trespassing. Has nothing to do with the First Amendment or free expression.

You just flunked Social Studies.

It does in this case, and everyone on here with an ounce of smarts knows it. You cannot argue free expression, while breaking the law. And this boy was breaking the law, by trespassing, and if the DA wants to add more charges, then attempted vandalism,(his hands is on the statue's head, perhaps he is trying to rip the head off.) comes in to play from just the kid's on photograph.

I know you hate being wrong, but, as much as you are, you should be used to it, but you keep trying, one day you might be right.But, I'm sure it will be by mistake.

If the church allows others to be on their grounds they wouldn't be able to single out one person and charge him with trespassing. So in this case the only law they can enforce is the unconstitutional law about not giving offense.

I must admit that I am totally enjoying watching the hypocritical cons being the PC police.

I don't believe the boy should get time, probably make him get in front of the congregation on Sunday morning and apologize for being a stupid teenager would suffice. One thing for the ones sticking up for this boy. If he went to one of your loved ones grave site and did something similar, would you feel the same? Our children need to be taught to respect others.

That's the problem. If anyone wanted to spend their hard earned money on a statue of Jesus or Buddah or anything else, and take a crap on it, and post it on facebook, then who cares, it is their property, not someone else's. If you come on my property and desecrate my flag by spitting on it, rubbing it against yourself in a perverse way, or something to that effect, then you are going to get your assed kicked. If you want to piss on your own flag, then more power to you.

That has nothing to do with the law. Until you're charged with assault.

And again for the slow readers -- the statue was not spat on, marked, damaged or defaced in any way according to the story.
It simply serves as a prop. What the kid may do around it is a function of his own body. Which IS his property.

 

[Pogo]

About a week confined in a cell with someone who could force him to assume his "Jesus position" might be enough to focus his mind.

So you disagree with the First Amendment.
Fine, start a petition to rescind it. Until then, law of the land, like it or lump it.

You really don't understand the First Amendment, do you? If the church wished to press charges, the kid has no First Amendment defense. Why? Look at the picture, he is on the church's property, and as soon as he laid hands upon the statue, he became a criminal.

You can protest all you want, but you cannot touch someone else, or get on someone else's property, this includes businesses and places of worship.

Law of the land, like it or lump it. By the way, you just got schooled!

That's trespassing. Has nothing to do with the First Amendment or free expression.

You just flunked Social Studies.

It does in this case, and everyone on here with an ounce of smarts knows it. You cannot argue free expression, while breaking the law. And this boy was breaking the law, by trespassing, and if the DA wants to add more charges, then attempted vandalism,(his hands is on the statue's head, perhaps he is trying to rip the head off.) comes in to play from just the kid's on photograph.

I know you hate being wrong, but, as much as you are, you should be used to it, but you keep trying, one day you might be right.But, I'm sure it will be by mistake.

If the church allows others to be on their grounds they wouldn't be able to single out one person and charge him with trespassing. So in this case the only law they can enforce is the unconstitutional law about not giving offense.

I must admit that I am totally enjoying watching the hypocritical cons being the PC police.

I don't believe the boy should get time, probably make him get in front of the congregation on Sunday morning and apologize for being a stupid teenager would suffice. One thing for the ones sticking up for this boy. If he went to one of your loved ones grave site and did something similar, would you feel the same? Our children need to be taught to respect others.

Faulty comparison. Gravesites represent real people.

Trotting him in front of a "congregation" to "confess" something he doesn't believe amounts to mind control.

 

[Pogo]

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.

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.

Naw...pesky 1st amendment.

If he did it with his own statue, it would probably be fine under the 1st, however he did it to someone else's, and the 1st amendment doesn't allow you to fuck around with someone else's property.

The statue wasn't at all harmed or defaced, nor did its owners complain.

Anything else?

Police don't need a complaint to enforce the law.

But their prosecutor will need what's known as "evidence".

He posted it on Facebook. Case closed.

Exactly. That's not "evidence" of anything except having posted something on Nosebook.
He could simply say it's photoshopped. Who's going to prove it isn't with no witnesses?

"Case closed" is right.

 

[rdean]

The boy's father should beat the crap out of him for his disrespectful actions and acting gay. .....

Yea, it's the "gay" thing. Beating up gays works, right?

Did it work for you?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

About a week confined in a cell with someone who could force him to assume his "Jesus position" might be enough to focus his mind.

So you disagree with the First Amendment.
Fine, start a petition to rescind it. Until then, law of the land, like it or lump it.

You really don't understand the First Amendment, do you? If the church wished to press charges, the kid has no First Amendment defense. Why? Look at the picture, he is on the church's property, and as soon as he laid hands upon the statue, he became a criminal.

You can protest all you want, but you cannot touch someone else, or get on someone else's property, this includes businesses and places of worship.

Law of the land, like it or lump it. By the way, you just got schooled!

That's trespassing. Has nothing to do with the First Amendment or free expression.

You just flunked Social Studies.

It does in this case, and everyone on here with an ounce of smarts knows it. You cannot argue free expression, while breaking the law. And this boy was breaking the law, by trespassing, and if the DA wants to add more charges, then attempted vandalism,(his hands is on the statue's head, perhaps he is trying to rip the head off.) comes in to play from just the kid's on photograph.

I know you hate being wrong, but, as much as you are, you should be used to it, but you keep trying, one day you might be right.But, I'm sure it will be by mistake.

If the church allows others to be on their grounds they wouldn't be able to single out one person and charge him with trespassing. So in this case the only law they can enforce is the unconstitutional law about not giving offense.

I must admit that I am totally enjoying watching the hypocritical cons being the PC police.

I don't believe the boy should get time, probably make him get in front of the congregation on Sunday morning and apologize for being a stupid teenager would suffice. One thing for the ones sticking up for this boy. If he went to one of your loved ones grave site and did something similar, would you feel the same? Our children need to be taught to respect others.

Faulty comparison. Gravesites represent real people.

Trotting him in front of a "congregation" to "confess" something he doesn't believe amounts to mind control.

well, that's sort of the point of punishment isn't it? He needs to go apologize to the church for insulting THEIR beliefs with THEIR property. He doesn't have to agree with their beliefs to do that.

 

[Pogo]

This is a kid who doesn't need jail.

Bring back public floggings give this kid 10 lashes and let's move on.

"cruel and unusual punishment" (Amendment VIII, op. cit.)

 

[rdean]

Monica recovered and all she had was a stain.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

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.

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.

Naw...pesky 1st amendment.

If he did it with his own statue, it would probably be fine under the 1st, however he did it to someone else's, and the 1st amendment doesn't allow you to fuck around with someone else's property.

The statue wasn't at all harmed or defaced, nor did its owners complain.

Anything else?

Police don't need a complaint to enforce the law.

But their prosecutor will need what's known as "evidence".

He posted it on Facebook. Case closed.

Exactly. That's not "evidence" of anything except having posted something on Nosebook.
He could simply say it's photoshopped. Who's going to prove it isn't with no witnesses?

"Case closed" is right.

Forensics can tell if a photo has been 'shopped, I assure you.