via ABA Journal:
So the victim (an atheist) is assaulted (allegedly) by a Muslim who was offended (predictably) by his Halloween costume, and the judge scolds ... the victim. For his Halloween costume. What is surprising is not that other people were offended by the judge's actions, but that the judge, who scolded the victim for being offensive to others, seems to be genuinely shocked that his abysmal handling of the situation might also be considered offensive.
From the comments:
"Note that, in the course of his denials, the judge did not deny being a doofus."
Indeed.
UPDATE:
Just to be clear, I don't support (1) the costume idea, (2) the assault, (3) the judge's interpretation of the 1st Amendment, or (4) people threatening the judge. But the costume is the only thing that I would stand up for in court, because even though it's offensive it's still his right to be offensive. That's what Halloween is all about. And candy.
UPDATE via Instapundit:
CATHY YOUNG: Islam, Free Speech, and Democracy: What really happened in the Pennsylvania “zombie Mohammed” case? “In fact, there was no ‘Sharia court,’ and the judge is not a Muslim. But, however egregious the misreporting of the story and the vilification of the judge—Cumberland Country, Pennsylvania magistrate Mark W. Martin, who graciously answered my queries in an email exchange—the actual facts of the story are troubling. Judge Martin’s intent may have been entirely benign, but his handling of the case sends a bad message not only about freedom of speech, but about the place of Islam in American culture. . . . American religious practice, overall, is strongly tied to a hard-won tradition of freedom of religion—and irreligion. Judge Martin’s comments seem to suggest that Muslims are far less capable than Christians of dealing sensibly with insults or challenges to their faith. That does a serious disservice both to American democracy and to American Muslims.”
Indeed.
UPDATE:
Just to be clear, I don't support (1) the costume idea, (2) the assault, (3) the judge's interpretation of the 1st Amendment, or (4) people threatening the judge. But the costume is the only thing that I would stand up for in court, because even though it's offensive it's still his right to be offensive. That's what Halloween is all about. And candy.
UPDATE via Instapundit:
CATHY YOUNG: Islam, Free Speech, and Democracy: What really happened in the Pennsylvania “zombie Mohammed” case? “In fact, there was no ‘Sharia court,’ and the judge is not a Muslim. But, however egregious the misreporting of the story and the vilification of the judge—Cumberland Country, Pennsylvania magistrate Mark W. Martin, who graciously answered my queries in an email exchange—the actual facts of the story are troubling. Judge Martin’s intent may have been entirely benign, but his handling of the case sends a bad message not only about freedom of speech, but about the place of Islam in American culture. . . . American religious practice, overall, is strongly tied to a hard-won tradition of freedom of religion—and irreligion. Judge Martin’s comments seem to suggest that Muslims are far less capable than Christians of dealing sensibly with insults or challenges to their faith. That does a serious disservice both to American democracy and to American Muslims.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
I believe in free speech. Please don't abuse it. I will take down posts which are absurdly offensive to others. Thanks for your comment!!