• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Homeowner Jailed for Hosting Bible Study

Aberration said:
The codes violate the Constitution. Everyone should refuse to comply with codes that violate the Constitution. I support any and all such refusals to comply.
Click to expand...

So you are doing that now. You yourself are and have been resizing to comply with codes that violate the Constitution? Which codes? What have the responses from government been? How long have you been doing this?
 
Aberration said:
None if which he was trying to do.
Click to expand...

No, he's just breaking the law in other ways and you want him to get away with it.

Stop playing the idiotic religion card and just deal with the reality of the situation.
 
As I've stated before, I don't care who/what/where you worship. As long as I don't have to attend/donate/participate, have at it. The pastor/priest/whatever was in the wrong by breaking the law. IMO he felt strongly enough to take the punishment for breaking the law and that's okay by me, it's his/their belief. But I do and always will support anyone or everyone's right to worship the way they choose.
 
Billy the Kid said:
As I've stated before, I don't care who/what/where you worship. As long as I don't have to attend/donate/participate, have at it. The pastor/priest/whatever was in the wrong by breaking the law. IMO he felt strongly enough to take the punishment for breaking the law and that's okay by me, it's his/their belief. But I do and always will support anyone or everyone's right to worship the way they choose.
Click to expand...

Umm, someone who refuses to pay the fines is not "taking the punishment for breaking the law"
 
Billy the Kid said:
I'm saying the guy knew the rules and yet he chose to break them. He must have known the penalty and evidently expected to pay the penalty.
Click to expand...

There is evidence that Salam knew he was violating codes and civil laws, yes. You of course know that many legal penalties are not fixed and are thus left to the interpretation of the court. Did your man, Salam, know what his penalties would be? Of course not. He may have assumed a range of possibilities.

IMO, he did this as a religious protest.
Click to expand...

Fine, that is your opinion. Nothing supports your opinion, however. In fact, Salam hasn't been charged with being "religious". Your opinion is unfounded. You have not, and cannot, provide facts to support your opinion. Don't expect anyone here to rally behind you, because "Billy said so." The city and the state can and have provided facts to support their "opinion", if you like. Kind of makes the your argument suck hind tit.

He has the right to do so, whether you or I think it's okay or not.
Click to expand...

I once went to a nudist resort in Florida with a lady I was dating. She suggested the idea. It took me less than a minute to get in the car. While at the resort we met a group of people who were nude Baptists. Yep. I was fascinated. In fact, I spend part of the second day with the pastor and his wife, talking about their unique "view". They even invited us to lunch. The reverend and the nekkid members ;) wanted to have their own church. They couldn't find a local government that would permit it and thus they had services every Sunday at the nudist resort.

I'm betting that one hell of a lot of Americans wouldn't want a church full of nekkid people next door to their houses, in their neighborhoods. Would you, Billy? Can we assume most Americans would support that kind of religious worship? Can we assume that most Baptists would support that kind of religious worship?

Don't hand us all that crap about religious rights and all the sanctimony that goes with it. It simply isn't true. You know that as must anyone else.

No I can not say with authority his parishioners knew or didn't know about the code violations, nor can you, but I would think if they were members then they probably knew the rules/conditions.
Click to expand...

You said that you don't know if everyone was aware of the violations, but some people might have known, probably, maybe. That was a non-answer.
 
sangha said:
Umm, someone who refuses to pay the fines is not "taking the punishment for breaking the law"
Click to expand...

Well if he's not paying the fines, the local law enforcement will put him in jail, yes?
 
Quag said:
Misterveritis he was told he cannot hold his services untill he complies. I hope that satisfies you as the extra steps they took. Seems it was 96 code violations and 67 convictions of Class 1 Misdemeanors. I thought the OParticle was ambigous and missing facts (what the citations were for) but in fact they were wrong and called 67 convitions code violations.
Click to expand...
Yes. Actually it does.
 
sangha said:
Not necesarily, but once again, you are posting non-answers because your beliefs are unrealistic.
Click to expand...


Why would the law enforcement not arrest the man if he's broken the law? If they don't then they're not doing their job, yes?


My beliefs as to freedom to worship as you please, are basic, and Constitutaional, yes? Don't see how they have anything to do with this guys problems.

He, like you and me, have the same rights, yes? So he decided to exercise his this way. Legal or not legal is up to those in law enforcement/city council. But he has the right to fight for what he believes in, as we all do.
 
Billy the Kid said:
Why would the law enforcement not arrest the man if he's broken the law? If they don't then they're not doing their job, yes?
Click to expand...

For the same reason you won't answer simple questions or respond to simple points - because you're not doing a good job either


My beliefs as to freedom to worship as you please, are basic, and Constitutaional, yes?
Click to expand...

No. They're bizarre and convoluted

Don't see how they have anything to do with this guys problems.
Click to expand...

It's not the first time in this thread that you "havent seen" what most everyone else considers obvious


He, like you and me, have the same rights, yes? So he decided to exercise his this way. Legal or not legal is up to those in law enforcement/city council. But he has the right to fight for what he believes in, as we all do.
Click to expand...

There is no "his way" and no, he does not have any "right" to break the law.

This is Constitutional Law 101, and you have failed
 
Billy the Kid said:
Why would the law enforcement not arrest the man if he's broken the law? If they don't then they're not doing their job, yes?


My beliefs as to freedom to worship as you please, are basic, and Constitutaional, yes? Don't see how they have anything to do with this guys problems.

He, like you and me, have the same rights, yes? So he decided to exercise his this way. Legal or not legal is up to those in law enforcement/city council. But he has the right to fight for what he believes in, as we all do.
Click to expand...

You do not seem to understand what freedoms are. I will ask again is human sacrifice allowed do to freedom of religion? If you answer yes then you do not understand anything about freedom or the constitution and frankly are a very disturbed person. If you answer no then please explain where it says which laws you can break in exercising your freedom of religion.
 
sangha said:
For the same reason you won't answer simple questions or respond to simple points - because you're not doing a good job either




No. They're bizarre and convoluted




It's not the first time in this thread that you "havent seen" what most everyone else considers obvious




There is no "his way" and no, he does not have any "right" to break the law.

This is Constitutional Law 101, and you have failed
Click to expand...



The guy can break the law if he chooses, better wording? The law has the right to arrest him.
Because you don't agree is something you'll have to deal with.
 
Billy the Kid said:
The guy can break the law if he chooses, better wording? The law has the right to arrest him.
Because you don't agree is something you'll have to deal with.
Click to expand...

I didn't disagree that he's breaking the law or that the govt has the right to arrest him

I disagreed when you said

1) He's protesting
2) He has the right to break the law
3) this has something to do with freedom of religion
4) He's taking the punishment for his crimes
 
sangha said:
I didn't disagree that he's breaking the law or that the govt has the right to arrest him

I disagreed when you said

1) He's protesting
2) He has the right to break the law
3) this has something to do with freedom of religion
4) He's taking the punishment for his crimes
Click to expand...


Well then I guess we'll just have to disagree. Thanks.
 
Billy the Kid said:
The only legal way to combat this is to change the laws. Other than that you do what this gentleman did - break the law and accept the consequences. Sad, because this country was founded on "freedom of relgion", but true.
Click to expand...

I guess you missed the part that said he wasn't being arrested for his "religion" - it was because of safety violations. Sad.
 
Fishstyx said:
Responses so far depress me. Its an attack on property rights as much as religious freedom. The city is basically saying you can't have regular gatherings at your house at all if its religious in nature. Whats next? No drinking because you're not zoned as a bar? No BBQs cause you're not zoned and inspected as a restaurant.

This is simply ridiculous. If this guy was doing a weekly poker game, Dungeons and Dragons, get piss drunk fest, etc, etc...this wouldn't be crime. But because they do a bible study the city dubs it a Church?
Click to expand...

Am late to this conversation, and doubt I am saying anything new, but your post ignores too much. If you were to want to put up additions to your house, or a new Mother-in-Law suite, it would have to be built to codes. Almost all are safety based. For instance, here in Florida, it has to be built much more as a pillbox than in such as Pennsylvania, for fear of high winds.

The codes he violated are almost all fire-safety related. They are logical, legal, and he had been warned.
 
mertex said:
I guess you missed the part that said he wasn't being arrested for his "religion" - it was because of safety violations. Sad.
Click to expand...


Nope. Read that part. Posted on that part. Break the law and you pay the price.

Did you hear that the county prosecutor, that sent this guy/priest to jail for 60 days, probation for 3 years and a $12K+ in fines, allowed Occupiers, who caused $200K in damages in the county, and were arrested for felonies go? He claimed they were "patriots".

This sure smacks of political bias and anti-religion to me. Matter of fact it stinks of bias and using the law for political reasons.
 
Billy the Kid said:
Nope. Read that part. Posted on that part. Break the law and you pay the price.

Did you hear that the county prosecutor, that sent this guy/priest to jail for 60 days, probation for 3 years and a $12K+ in fines, allowed Occupiers, who caused $200K in damages in the county, and were arrested for felonies go? He claimed they were "patriots".

This sure smacks of political bias and anti-religion to me. Matter of fact it stinks of bias and using the law for political reasons.
Click to expand...

Although I disagree with the judge letting the OWS people off, there is a distinction. OWS was a political protest which have often been treated differently in the past by law enforcement and the judiciary, this guy was not making any kind of political statement he was just disobeying the law. Having said that why would you say that because 1 group disobeyed the law and got away with, everyone should be able to do the same?

Since you never answered my previous post on freedom of religion i'll repost it.

You do not seem to understand what freedoms are. I will ask again is human sacrifice allowed do to freedom of religion? If you answer yes then you do not understand anything about freedom or the constitution and frankly are a very disturbed person. If you answer no then please explain where it says which laws you can break in exercising your freedom of religion.
 
Quag said:
Although I disagree with the judge letting the OWS people off, there is a distinction. OWS was a political protest which have often been treated differently in the past by law enforcement and the judiciary, this guy was not making any kind of political statement he was just disobeying the law. Having said that why would you say that because 1 group disobeyed the law and got away with, everyone should be able to do the same?

Since you never answered my previous post on freedom of religion i'll repost it.

You do not seem to understand what freedoms are. I will ask again is human sacrifice allowed do to freedom of religion? If you answer yes then you do not understand anything about freedom or the constitution and frankly are a very disturbed person. If you answer no then please explain where it says which laws you can break in exercising your freedom of religion.
Click to expand...



He was holding Bible Study, as the article stated in his home. Religious service in his mind, IMO. Broke the law because of no Exit sign and no Handicapped Parking were the violations, per the article.

I don't remember anything in the article about "human sacrifice", so nice red herring, but no go.
 
Billy the Kid said:
He was holding Bible Study, as the article stated in his home. Religious service in his mind, IMO. Broke the law because of no Exit sign and no Handicapped Parking were the violations, per the article.

I don't remember anything in the article about "human sacrifice", so nice red herring, but no go.
Click to expand...

No you said this was about freedom of religion, WHICH IS IS NOT. You said the constitution says he can break the law based on freedom of religion, WHICH HE CANNOT. So I want to see where exactly you think he has the right to break the law in the constitution. If he was running a puppet theatre in his "garage" he would have met the same fate so how exactly is this about religion?
It is not a red herring to ask what you believe freedom of religion is. You who seem to have read the term "bible study" and decided that regardless of anything else, this is about freedom of religion. I am merely trying to point out toyou that freedom of religion does not give anyone the right to do anything they want.
 
Quag said:
No you said this was about freedom of religion, WHICH IS IS NOT. You said the constitution says he can break the law based on freedom of religion, WHICH HE CANNOT. So I want to see where exactly you think he has the right to break the law in the constitution. If he was running a puppet theatre in his "garage" he would have met the same fate so how exactly is this about religion?
It is not a red herring to ask what you believe freedom of religion is. You who seem to have read the term "bible study" and decided that regardless of anything else, this is about freedom of religion. I am merely trying to point out toyou that freedom of religion does not give anyone the right to do anything they want.
Click to expand...


This guy/priest was hold Bible study. He fought back because he wanted to continue to hold Bible study in his home/church. Now what would you call it. A cooking class?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom