Muslims Allowed to Attack People for Insulting Mohammad

Marco · Feb 25, 2012

http://news.yahoo.com/penn-judge-muslims-allowed-attack-people-insulting-mohammad-210000330.html

Judge Martin threw the case out on the grounds that Elbayomy was obligated to attack Perce because of his culture and religion. Judge Martin stated that the First Amendment of the Constitution does not permit people to provoke other people. He also called Perce, the plaintiff in the case, a "doofus." In effect, Perce was the perpetrator of the assault, in Judge Martin's view, and Elbayomy the innocent. The Sharia law that the Muslim attacker followed trumped the First Amendment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ory-or-useful/2012/01/11/gIQAGFP1qP_blog.html
Sharia law ban: Is Oklahoma’s proposal discriminatory or needed?
The appeals court also noted that no example could be found in which Sharia law was used or cited in a U.S. court case

Looks like the Supreme Court needs to go back and rethink things.

REALteach4u · Feb 26, 2012

This isn't the first case where religious beliefs were allowed as an excuse for an attack in the US of late. Another recent case involved a woman whose estranged ex raped her and got the case dropped because the judge said it was the man's religious belief that he could conduct himself this way. Bad things ARE on the horizon with these cases. If we don't get them stopped immediately there WILL be an outbreak of religious attacks upon non-Muslim religions, non-believers, the infidel in the US.

http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/201...citing-religious-belief-overturned-on-appeal/

It's not fear mongering, it's not hatred, it's a fact. That's exactly what the extremist whack-o's are looking for. Give them the opening and they'll take advantage of it.

By the way, if those charged with crimes for 9/11 wanted to now make the claim that it was their religious belief for what they did they could quite easily use both of those cases as precedence to try to overturn their own cases. Now you know why those in NAVSTAGTMO want tried in the US. It's so they can get these kinds of cases to apply to them.

JoeSparky · Feb 26, 2012

REALteach4u said:
This isn't the first case where religious beliefs were allowed as an excuse for an attack in the US of late. Another recent case involved a woman whose estranged ex raped her and got the case dropped because the judge said it was the man's religious belief that he could conduct himself this way. Bad things ARE on the horizon with these cases. If we don't get them stopped immediately there WILL be an outbreak of religious attacks upon non-Muslim religions, non-believers, the infidel in the US.

http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/201...citing-religious-belief-overturned-on-appeal/

It's not fear mongering, it's not hatred, it's a fact. That's exactly what the extremist whack-o's are looking for. Give them the opening and they'll take advantage of it.

By the way, if those charged with crimes for 9/11 wanted to now make the claim that it was their religious belief for what they did they could quite easily use both of those cases as precedence to try to overturn their own cases. Now you know why those in NAVSTAGTMO want tried in the US. It's so they can get these kinds of cases to apply to them.

Just a thought on your last paragraph.... They WANT to claim that they have been involved in a CONSPIRACY to commit these CRIMES in the US...
My understanding that adding conspiracy to the actually crime just adds MORE TIME!

DangerClose · Feb 27, 2012

I don't think letting the guy off because of his religion is even the main thing here. He could have dismissed the charges with a "no real harm done/don't do it again" excuse. The main thing is the judge saying the atheist overstepped the First Amendment.

MilProGuy · Feb 27, 2012

If our current administration continues for another four years, we're likely going to be hearing a lot more about Sharia Law.

gunns · Feb 27, 2012

DangerClose said:
I don't think letting the guy off because of his religion is even the main thing here. He could have dismissed the charges with a "no real harm done/don't do it again" excuse. The main thing is the judge saying the atheist overstepped the First Amendment.

Thats BS, plan and simple. Overstepped? What about all the Christian bashing going on? Have we lost touch with reality that we say Islam is protected, but Christianity isn't? As far as I am concerned Islam is a cult and should be made illegal. I had Muslim friends and on 9/11 as they watched the second tower got hit they smiled and said they could understand why, then claimed that the Jews run the country. They stood there and said it to my face. No remorse, no pity, nothing, they didn't give a @#$%.

Sorry for the rant but this is getting too much, we need to step up and say NO MORE.

Oh by the way, no more Muslim friends for me, I don't trust them.

John Canuck · Feb 27, 2012

Talk about unrealistic. Why would zombie Mohamed be walking around without zombie virgins? And the zombie Pope was missing zombie little boys. Madness.

DangerClose · Feb 27, 2012

There's a recent story out of the UK where a guy is going through airport security, sees a Muslim woman with her face covered walk right through security, he jokes, "I wonder what would happen if I covered my face like that."

They accused him of racism and held him for an hour or more trying to get him to apologize and saying things like, "It's a different world now. You can't say things like that."

RockyMtnScotsman · Feb 27, 2012

MilProGuy said:
If our current administration continues for another four years, we're likely going to be hearing a lot more about Sharia Law.

no doubt, and as it escalates we'll start seeing mosques around the country being leveled due to "suspicious gas line leaks"

Muslims Allowed to Attack People for Insulting Mohammad

Marco

Regular Member

REALteach4u

Regular Member

JoeSparky

Centurion

DangerClose

Regular Member

MilProGuy

Regular Member

gunns

Regular Member

John Canuck

Regular Member

DangerClose

Regular Member

RockyMtnScotsman

Regular Member