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
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Judge orders accused Fort Hood shooter to have his beard shaved [View all]4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)91. People who are not legal experts and have no knowledge of the military say one thing
people who are legal experts and do have a knowledge of the military say another thing.
I'll go with the later.
Hint: treating people "the same" is not the same as treating people fairly/equitably.
So the law shouldn't be blind? It should make exceptions for people based on their religion?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
122 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
Between his trial and his execution, he'll have plenty of time to re-grow the beard
slackmaster
Sep 2012
#12
That all sounds great in theory, but in reality all rights are subject to restriction
slackmaster
Sep 2012
#39
Defending one's rights against infringement takes more resources than most can muster
slackmaster
Sep 2012
#104
It's actually not, enlisted service members VOLUNTARILY GIVE UP SOME RIGHTS, whether YOU
LaydeeBug
Sep 2012
#119
First, strict scutiny analysis doesn't apply to the UCMJ. Read Parker v. Levy and Quarles.
msanthrope
Sep 2012
#88
Except he didnt ask for a waiver when he signed up and instead agreed to abide by the military rules
cstanleytech
Sep 2012
#50
Then try looking at it as a contract. When he signed up he agreed with the contract
cstanleytech
Sep 2012
#65
If he were really serious about practicing his religion, he wouldn't have shot 42 people
Freddie Stubbs
Sep 2012
#100
US constitution does not govern miltary trials. try and wrap your head around that.
pasto76
Sep 2012
#75
Since logic. Has to be tried before can be found guilty of a crime worthy of punishment & discharge.
Bernardo de La Paz
Sep 2012
#30
He is still military and subject to its rules and regulations. His protestations of faith are a sham
Bernardo de La Paz
Sep 2012
#40
A sham. He shaved before he went psycho. He can shave now without religious exemption. nt.
Bernardo de La Paz
Sep 2012
#56
Exercise of authority (military discipline) is how it protects and defends. Now just let it rest.
Bernardo de La Paz
Sep 2012
#68
Endless repitition does not make your point clearer or stronger. It makes it less convincing.
Bernardo de La Paz
Sep 2012
#31
Could it be argued his "conscience" led to him shooting and killing?(n/m)
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
Sep 2012
#17
If people were tried only based on what they did and not what they thought, the term "hate crime"...
slackmaster
Sep 2012
#35
WADR to his choice of religion, he's using the beard issue to delay the administration of justice
slackmaster
Sep 2012
#29
I don't care much about what happens to Hassan as long as he's kept out of circulation
slackmaster
Sep 2012
#69
Not that it matters to me, but the Xian bible has prohibitions against shaving...one
spayneuter
Sep 2012
#115
If only his conscience were as staunchly against murdering innocents in cold blood
4th law of robotics
Sep 2012
#47
Yes and it says that to US it doesn't matter what sky fairies you worship
4th law of robotics
Sep 2012
#93
People who are not legal experts and have no knowledge of the military say one thing
4th law of robotics
Sep 2012
#91
I wonder why he didn't use the defense that his "religion" requires him to kill infidels?
spayneuter
Sep 2012
#42
Having the beard will prejudice his trial. The military is going to be scrupulous in this case
riderinthestorm
Sep 2012
#45
Why? Because you have used pretty much the same argument with everyone in this thread who
cstanleytech
Sep 2012
#92