Page 48 of 54 FirstFirst ... 384647484950 ... LastLast
Results 471 to 480 of 540

Thread: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

  1. #471
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    Sorry, but no go. Desecration applies to both religious and non religious objects, so it is not an issue of religious freedom. Nor is this an issues of freedom of speech. As noted had the boy permission, or owned the statue, then a charge could be said to apply unconstitutionally by either of those reasons. But the law in and of itself really has no basis to be called unconstitutional.
    If there was any damage done to the statue, I would agree, however there was none. Again, I can flip off a bible all I want and it not being illegal. Blasphemy laws like this are unconsitutional and will be challenged as such. It's sad that people don't see that.

  2. #472
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Religious freedom. You are forcing the boy to conform to a strictly religious law, blasphemy which would be going against freedom of religion and is unconstitutional. It would be similiar to creating a law saying you cannot burn a bible.
    There are probably some sexual crimes he could be charged with if that would be preferable, but as long as ignorance is being encouraged in schools then this sort of behavior will continue.

  3. #473
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    There are probably some sexual crimes he could be charged with if that would be preferable, but as long as ignorance is being encouraged in schools then this sort of behavior will continue.
    Exposing himself or if damage was done to the statue maybe. But gestures and the like are not illegal. And sexual crimes? Gimme a break. Sexual crimes are rape, assault, etc. Not doing a gesture on a statue. That's about as ridiculous as putting someone on the sexual predator list for peeing on a tire when drunk.

  4. #474
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Exposing himself or if damage was done to the statue maybe. But gestures and the like are not illegal. And sexual crimes? Gimme a break. Sexual crimes are rape, assault, etc. Not doing a gesture on a statue. That's about as ridiculous as putting someone on the sexual predator list for peeing on a tire when drunk.
    I said he could be charged with sexual crimes, not that he would be found guilty.

  5. #475
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    I said he could be charged with sexual crimes, not that he would be found guilty.
    Unless he exposed himself, there would be NO sexual crime.

  6. #476
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Unless he exposed himself, there would be NO sexual crime.
    So you're saying a sexual crime cannot be committed unless there's nudity involved? I don't think that's correct....
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  7. #477
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Unless he exposed himself, there would be NO sexual crime.
    That would be for the courts to decide.

  8. #478
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    So you're saying a sexual crime cannot be committed unless there's nudity involved? I don't think that's correct....
    I'm referring to this case. Do you think the kid should be put on the sexual predator list for gesturing a statue?

  9. #479
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    That would be for the courts to decide.
    Common sense will decide that and the courts will side it isn't.

  10. #480
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,010

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    If there was any damage done to the statue, I would agree, however there was none. Again, I can flip off a bible all I want and it not being illegal. Blasphemy laws like this are unconsitutional and will be challenged as such. It's sad that people don't see that.
    Physical damage is not always the requirement for a law. Trespass is a good example. This statue was someone else's property, not his own, nor did he have permission, Desecration is a non-damage type law as much as trespass is. Since the desecration is applied equally to both religious and non-religious objects blasphemy is a non-issue.
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

Page 48 of 54 FirstFirst ... 384647484950 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •