Monday, March 12, 2012 9:18:38 AM
A man dresses up as a KKK member or a Nazi and walks through a neighborhood with at least some black people. He is assaulted and it goes to court. We don't know what the verdict is, what evidence was used, what legal arguments were made, OR how the judge scolded the assaulter for his actions. All we know is that the judge also told the victim why his actions were offensive, and why common sense told him his costume might get a reaction. He does not say that the reaction was justified. He does not say that the reaction should be expected because black people are violent, or that the criminal is let off the hook because the victim had it coming. He simply says: This is why what you did is offensive, and here`s why it was more offensive than you may have realized.
Monday, March 12, 2012 9:17:18 AM
Dead-Kittens: No, it wouldn't. The actual holding here had nothing to do with what we`re all arguing about, and there`s no claim he didn`t follow the law. All the recording shows it that at some point in the trial the Judge explains why the victim`s actions were offensive. Here`s an analogy:
Sunday, February 26, 2012 12:10:05 PM
I couldnt be bothered to hear more than half... (foreign) but from what I understand..wouldnt this decision also allow every dumbkid on the block to beat up their teacher for believing their answeris correct?
Beliefs should be mocked, beliefs inform ones actions and if a persons beliefs are irrational that irrationallity should be pointed out. Religious beliefs of others affect all of us, they don't exist in a vacuum. The religious beliefs of our world leaders, and the masses have a direct effect on all of us.
"You're bemoaning that everyone cannot be treated equally in all respects and approving of the fact that the judge gave "special consideration" to the defendant ?"
Really!!!!!????? Really???? Your reading comprehension really needs to improve OR you are being intentionally dishonest. Go back to my first post where I called the judge a moron. I do not aggree with the judge BECAUSE of the special consideration he gave the defendant and especially because that consideration was based on religion, ANY religion. Try reading what I write instead of assuming you know what I think.