Posted on 01/14/2005 4:46:36 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March
Sounds like the DA thought she had to include something that pointed to the opposing ideologies of the two groups, but she opened herself up to charges of religious persecution by including it. Looks like overreaching on both sides, but what do I know. I don’t even play a lawyer on television.
I've never been to the beltway and I grew up on the streets. One of the first lessons you learn on the streets is how to tell when someone is trying to sell you a bogus story. Your continued attempts to get people to look at anything but the facts of the story have convinced me that the defendants do not have clean hands.
I've tried to give you good advice on how to minimize the penalties your friends will face but you seem determined to see them get the maximum sentences possible under the law.
So be it. I hope they appreciate your efforts on their behalf but if I were them I wouldn't want your help. They have gotten themselves into a lot of trouble but you seem determined to make it much worse.
Fools never learn, they just blame others for their mistakes.
So you guys would have comitted the crime of assault and battery, but she should have been arrested. Check!
BTTT
[cyber sword briefly lowered in respect]
I agree that people can lose self control.
"Everyone breaks at some point after being pushed. The prosecutor in this case used the phrase “fighting words”."
You do make a good point, and that is our fundamental difference of opinion, I think. I respect the courage of protestors. You are concerned about riots. It's a difficult balancing act. But I see no balance if someone could, in theory, be locked up for 47 years for preaching with a bullhorn, waving a large sign, and even resist police crowd control efforts. That should not be even possible in the law.
I didn't have confidence in quoting the 'fighting words' statement. I noticed Newsmax made a carefully phrased report on 'fighting words'. Do you have any definite ink-paper quotes on that?
FReegards....
Yeah right, do you also have some beach front property you are selling? Apparantly you havent seen the video in question. What part of free speech do you not understand? One can peacably protest in the public area and they were directed to the area where they could peacably protest - while walking there they were arrested. Im sure your all for having our rights delegated to us by unelected judges or homosexual activists or the ACLU. Just so I know who Im dealing with, what part of the constitution specifically states the seperation of church and state?
Ok, maybe I don't agree with what the Christian group did, but Prison time? For preaching? If this is a trend, it may be time for another revolutionary war.
"I've never been to the beltway and I grew up on the streets."
That's the thing. Beltway thinking is creeping in here. People may not even see it in themselves.
You are very knoweldgeable on legal matters. That has its place. I do, in fact, appreciate your advice.
But don't forget, they can be pardoned. And that is one of my trump cards in this fight. If they get locked up, they will, I believe, be pardoned and cleared, although it might take a new and more conservative president.
FReegards....
Your friends were arrested for violating a valid police order and now you're going overthrow the whole judicial system because you don't like their arrest. Sure you are.
You really need a reality check.
I'm even assuming the worst. Assuming if they resisted the instructions of the police, how much time should protesters get for that?
"...you're going overthrow the whole judicial system because you don't like their arrest. Sure you are."
It's been a long time coming. 40 million slaughtered unborn, for starters.
I think it's high time we made an example of certain judges. I'm mainly thinking on the Federal level, actually. No doubt, there will be an effort to appeal.
"Ok, maybe I don't agree with what the Christian group did, but Prison time? For preaching? If this is a trend, it may be time for another revolutionary war."
We meed to keep our fighting spirit alive. Then a revolutionary war would not be necessary. These people committed harmless, civil disobedience, and I was with them in spirit. I am fed up with activist homosexuals.
We vote in police authority to separate opposition protests so that the crime of assault and battery isn’t inevitable. So that little girls like her can have a voice, so that you don't have to be a big guy or carry a weapon to protest.
You’re wrong. Even in the version produced by the protestors, you can hear the head police officer finally walk up past the others and say, “I told you to go to Chestnut Street. You’re under arrest”. That’s inconsistent with “walking there”.
Pride comes before a fall. The homosexuals have been proud while the Christians have been meek. The judiciary has been proud, while the Christians have been humble. This WILL CHANGE. FReegards....
The same part that says you can start riots by marching into opposition protests with bull horns and refuse police orders to move to Chestnut Street. ;^)
Thank you. AFA press release quotes the judge.
http://www.afa.net/clp/ReleaseDetail.asp?id=78
"The federal appeals court in Philadelphia denied emergency relief despite video footage Fahling calls “undisputed evidence” that shows the Christians cooperating with police and continually being harassed by the Pink Angels, a group of homosexuals organized to impede the gospel message. Philadelphia city prosecutor in the case, Charles Ehrlich, attacked the Christians as “hateful” and referred to preaching the Bible as “fighting words,” the judge agreed."
Same, carefully worded quote at Newsmax. 'referred'. I guess I'll steer past it, then. Thank you again, FReegards...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.