Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Pennsylvania Judge Rules Assault Justified by Islamic Law

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,539

    Pennsylvania Judge Rules Assault Justified by Islamic Law

    "COMMENTARY | Jonathon Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, reports on a disturbing case in which a state judge in Pennsylvania threw out an assault case involving a Muslim attacking an atheist for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.

    "Judge Mark Martin, an Iraq war veteran and a convert to Islam, threw the case out in what appears to be an invocation of Sharia law."
    Penn Judge: Muslims Allowed to Attack People for Insulting Mohammad - Yahoo! News

    So is it okay for courts to base their decisions on the Koran rather than relevant state/federal law? This isn't the first time the issue has come up.
    "Indeed, not a word in the constitutional text even arguably supports the Court’s overwrought and novel description of the Second Amendment as 'elevat[ing] above all other interests' 'the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.' Ante,at 63."
    -Justice Stevens on the Heller ruling

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,718
    All I can say is Judge Mark Martin is too stupid to be a judge no matter what religion he belongs to.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    There is little reason to believe the matter will not be overturned when appealed to the next higher level of court for review. One muslim choosing to base their decisions on a case involving another muslim and the exercise of sharia law cannot be viewed as an unbiased application of the law.

    Sharia law is not an excuse for breaking the laws of the United States, nor does it trump the laws of the nations. Assault is not acceptable simply because of religious differences.

    The logic of the judge Mark Martin is also in question as the Supreme Court has stated previously that inflammatory speech is protected by the first amendment in at least two high profile matters, regarding Nazi demonstrations in jewish neighborhoods, and anti-homosexual protests at funerals.

    It should also be noted that the decision is a violation of the first amendment as the judge in the matter is endorsing the religion of sharia law.
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Left Coast
    Posts
    7,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
    "COMMENTARY | Jonathon Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, reports on a disturbing case in which a state judge in Pennsylvania threw out an assault case involving a Muslim attacking an atheist for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.

    "Judge Mark Martin, an Iraq war veteran and a convert to Islam, threw the case out in what appears to be an invocation of Sharia law."
    Penn Judge: Muslims Allowed to Attack People for Insulting Mohammad - Yahoo! News

    So is it okay for courts to base their decisions on the Koran rather than relevant state/federal law? This isn't the first time the issue has come up.
    A troubling case:
    Martin’s comments also heighten concerns over the growing trend toward criminalizing anti-religious speech in the use of such standards as the Brandenburg test, a position supported by the Obama Administration.

    There are legitimate uses of the culture defense. However, when it comes to free speech, that is not just our controlling constitutional right but the touchstone of our culture.
    Pennsylvania Judge Throws Out Charge For Harassing Atheist While Calling The Victim A Doofus JONATHAN TURLEY

    Muslims -- and Catholics and other Christians -- need to get a grip on themselves in defending their religious beliefs. They have a right to their beliefs and to verbally defend those beliefs but others have a right not to share their their beliefs, indeed, under the First Amendment, the right to make fun of their beliefs if they so choose.

    In fact, if people kept their faith in the closet as Christ recommended, we would be spared a great deal of grief. If there is a god, I cannot respect a god who is impressed with a showy public expression of faith.
    Brother, you can believe in stones as long as you do not hurl them at me. Wafa Sultan

    “War is an American way to teach geography,” British soldier

    War is sweet to those who have not tasted it, but the experienced man trembles exceedingly at heart on its approach. – Pindar

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    12,657
    Quote Originally Posted by simone View Post

    In fact, if people kept their faith in the closet as Christ recommended, we would be spared a great deal of grief.
    If people kept their faith in the closet hardly anyone else would be saved.

    And this is what Jesus said about sharing one's faith:

    “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” - Matthew 28:18-19

    If anyone needs to get into the closet it's the brain dead liberals and their gay sex brethren.
    “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” - Robert Jastrow

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,718
    Quote Originally Posted by Easyrider View Post
    If people kept their faith in the closet hardly anyone else would be saved.

    And this is what Jesus said about sharing one's faith:

    “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” - Matthew 28:18-19

    If anyone needs to get into the closet it's the brain dead liberals and their gay sex brethren.
    Shouldn’t you be out walking around wearing a sandwich board that says THE END IS NEAR?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    12,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Accipiter View Post
    Shouldn’t you be out walking around wearing a sandwich board that says THE END IS NEAR?
    I think everyone can already smell you coming. I don't have to announce it.
    “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” - Robert Jastrow

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo View Post
    "COMMENTARY | Jonathon Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, reports on a disturbing case in which a state judge in Pennsylvania threw out an assault case involving a Muslim attacking an atheist for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.

    "Judge Mark Martin, an Iraq war veteran and a convert to Islam, threw the case out in what appears to be an invocation of Sharia law."
    Penn Judge: Muslims Allowed to Attack People for Insulting Mohammad - Yahoo! News

    So is it okay for courts to base their decisions on the Koran rather than relevant state/federal law? This isn't the first time the issue has come up.
    Sounds to me more like a case known in the law as "fighting words" rather than anything esle you're trying to make up about sharia law.
    He Lived in the Perfect Midfield Time

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    284
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    Sounds to me more like a case known in the law as "fighting words" rather than anything esle you're trying to make up about sharia law.
    I don't think it flies Jetsy sweetie. The atheist wasn't charged with any crime even if his Zombie Mohammed getup did constitute "fighting words" under the law and thus not constitutionally protected. His getup wasn't punished and neither was he, he just got the snot beat out of him in retaliation for mocking a hostile religion.

    What it is though is a matter of a judge choosing to violate first amendment protections that deal with separation of church and state, and the forbidding of government endorsing one religion over another. A proper judge would've determined that the muslim in the case wasn't within his rights to attack anyone regardless of what offensive message was said.

    There's nothing in the constitution that says a person can't mock religion however they please. And I don't know of any cases ruled by the supreme court that would suggest otherwise. If the WBC can protest funerals with gay hating messages and the nazi party can hold public demonstrations then religion is open for mockery as well.
    Last edited by Tabbi; 04-16-2012 at 09:36 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by Tabbi View Post
    I don't think it flies Jetsy sweetie. The atheist wasn't charged with any crime even if his Zombie Mohammed getup did constitute "fighting words" under the law and thus not constitutionally protected. His getup wasn't punished and neither was he, he just got the snot beat out of him in retaliation for mocking a hostile religion.

    What it is though is a matter of a judge choosing to violate first amendment protections that deal with separation of church and state, and the forbidding of government endorsing one religion over another. A proper judge would've determined that the muslim in the case wasn't within his rights to attack anyone regardless of what offensive message was said.

    There's nothing in the constitution that says a person can't mock religion however they please. And I don't know of any cases ruled by the supreme court that would suggest otherwise. If the WBC can protest funerals with gay hating messages and the nazi party can hold public demonstrations then religion is open for mockery as well.

    Penn Judge Tosses Case in Which Muslim Was Accused of Attacking Atheist - Yahoo! News
    UPDATE: This commentary has been corrected to reflect the judge's official reason for throwing the case out. Also, even though -- in the recording of the proceeding -- the judge seemed to say he is a Muslim convert, Judge Martin is in fact a Lutheran.
    Of course the story was a bit wrong to begin with and I maintain that the judge ruled (or threw out the case) based really on the “fighting words” provocation. It’s misdemeanor assault no matter how you slice it, and has nothing to do with sharia law. The judge may have acted out improperly, but in the lower courts these thing aren’t unusual.
    He Lived in the Perfect Midfield Time

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •