Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Judge rules against atheist attacked in costume [View all]humblebum
(5,881 posts)94. No, the fact is that no one was hurt. End of story.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
114 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
and here the jewish community were all upset at the idea of neo-nazis marching in skokie
unblock
Feb 2012
#5
According to the statute, it appears they might have both been guilty of harassment.
humblebum
Feb 2012
#6
Going out as Zombie Mohammed in a Halloween parade is harassment? Explain how.
2ndAmForComputers
Feb 2012
#17
Of course not. There wouldn't be religious wars or religious-inspired terrorism if you were.
2ndAmForComputers
Feb 2012
#84
And, of course, there has never been any atheist-inspired terrorism or war making.
humblebum
Feb 2012
#86
CH was right, you are incoherent. That didn't even make sense at all in context.
darkstar3
Feb 2012
#103
You are right, in that your responses are irrational and illogical, and do not align with reality.
cleanhippie
Feb 2012
#59
It wasn't a draw, a believer ATTACKED an non-believer, and a judge let him go.
cleanhippie
Feb 2012
#60
Your characterization of my "blind hatred of non-believers" I find offensive. Criticism is
humblebum
Feb 2012
#62
You keep telling yourself that, rug. You will convince yourself eventually.
cleanhippie
Feb 2012
#45
Considering your visceral rejection for anything religious is now seeping onto your view of DU,
rug
Feb 2012
#49
AND? How does that change the fact that the shit was posted and allowed to stand?
darkstar3
Feb 2012
#66
FReedom of speech, freedom of expression. I see no problem. As long as you don't yell "fire" in
demosincebirth
Feb 2012
#11
terrorist act in the name of his religion, typical bullying from a person insecure in his beliefs nt
msongs
Feb 2012
#14
It appears that the judge was far from unbiased in this case and should have recused himself.
cbayer
Feb 2012
#25
If only it were that simple. The judge BLAMED the victim, and called him names.
cleanhippie
Feb 2012
#26
Are you objecting to name-calling or the fact that a magistrate did the name-calling?
rug
Feb 2012
#38
If you read this as my defending this decision you should reacquaint yourself with the word obtuse.
rug
Feb 2012
#88
A man assaulted another man because he was violently intolerant of "blasphemy",
darkstar3
Feb 2012
#67
I hide behind no one. I simply don't mind mentioning it when I find parallels
darkstar3
Feb 2012
#102
Now I'm beginning to think you have an overly glossy screen and a brightness problem.
darkstar3
Feb 2012
#114