Secular Right | Reality & Reason

Feb/12

25

Respecting the law of the land

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someoneShare on TumblrShare on Google+

The story about a Pennsylvania atheist activist who dressed up like a “Muhammad Zombie” has been covered mostly by atheist activists and conservative publications. What seems to have happened is that the victim was dressed up as “Muhammad Zombie” during a Halloween parade, and seems to have been assaulted by an enraged Muslim. The video of the incident went viral:

The main issue people have been focusing on is that the judge seems to have had more sympathy for the attacker than the victim, going so far as to lecture the victim on his insensitivity and the consequences which might have ensued in a Muslim country. But for me this is the most important point: “According to ABC 27, Elbayomy thought it was a crime to depict Muhammad and had joined Perce in calling police.” How is it that we allow immigrants into this country who don’t even understand the importance of free speech in American society? Secondarily, how is it that, even if the judge did not have enough evidence to support the allegations of assault, did not lecture the alleged attacker that in his adopted nation free speech is close to inviolable?

10 comments

  • Karl · February 25, 2012 at 6:39 pm

    I guess ignorance of the law is now an excuse.

  • Eric · February 26, 2012 at 2:20 am

    If we have the liberty to make fun of atheists in air planes crashing (reference to a tasteless joke I’ve heard innumerable times) then what exactly makes any religious group exempt from that hard-earned liberty?

  • John · February 26, 2012 at 2:50 am

    “Having had the benefit of having spent over 2 and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam,” Martin said. “In fact I have a copy of the Koran here”

    Boy, talk about the bad luck of the draw. I really, really hope that the other 99% of judges would have acted differently. Maybe not.

  • Jeeves · February 26, 2012 at 5:26 pm

    Not allow “immigrants” who don’t get the First Amendment? How does one test for this?

    We should instead follow Andrew McCarthy’s advice and refuse visas to persons from Muslim-majority countries that discriminate against non-Muslims. Simple reciprocity, in other words. In any event, such a policy stands a better chance of changing behavior than our stupid and bloody nation-building.

    Razib may call McCarthy a retard for proposing this. But it’s an objective and effective way of keeping out those who “don’t even understand the importance of free speech.”

  • Angie Van De Merwe · February 26, 2012 at 11:14 pm

    Jeeves, GREAT point!! I agree with you! Why haven’t more come to see the importance of protecting individual (civil) liberties and not religious ideology? The Constitution was America’s “ulitmate value”, not the Koran (or the Bible, for that matter…)

  • Author comment by David Hume · February 26, 2012 at 11:19 pm

    Razib may call McCarthy a retard for proposing this.

    the most retarded part of it is that this fucks copts, chaldeans, etc. up.

  • Angie Van De Merwe · February 26, 2012 at 11:19 pm

    Or is this a matter of civility against crass attack against religious liberty?

  • Bob Arctor · February 27, 2012 at 11:17 am

    “Or is this a matter of civility against crass attack against religious liberty?”

    Because nothing screams “civility” like violently assaulting a random man on the street, and because “religious liberty” includes an absolute entitlement to never, ever be offended by anyone else.

  • Polichinello · February 27, 2012 at 4:15 pm

    the most retarded part of it is that this fucks copts, chaldeans, etc. up.

    You can make exceptions for religious minorities and prominent dissidents. But even if you couldn’t, why should American security be held hostage for the sake for the sake of foreign minorities? I feel bad for them, but shouldn’t we take some measure to avoid being in their spot?

    On another front, we always mock fey atheists spergs who attack Christianity, saying, “Real brave, try that with Mohammed!” Well, Perce did it, so don’t fault him for a lack of balls. That he’ll soon share Molly Norris fate, though, is probably cold comfort at best.

  • Ron Strong · February 28, 2012 at 7:50 pm

    That one can find judges who are complete idiots is not surprising. The most notable aspect of this story is the lack of coverage in MSM.

    Can anyone imagine this story not making network news or the NYTimes had a christian attacked the zombie pope and been freed by the judge?

<<

>>

Theme Design by devolux.nh2.me