‘Paul Crawford’. a Catholic without conviction. UnF’n believable.< /s>
What’s to discuss? It’s prejudicial. The only way it wouldn’t be is if everyone in the court had ash on their foreheads.
He could have wiped it off himself without any prompting but this is a matter of religion and the judge had no authority to ask him to take it off.
However, Ali Baba can do as he pleases!
But burkhas are ok.
Matthew 6:1 - “Beware of practicing your righteousness before men to be noticed by them; otherwise you have no reward with your Father who is in heaven.”
Prior to the jury returning, an attorney for the defense objected to the marking, and indicated that it could influence the jury in the case. ... Judge Michael Moon agreed and requested the Crawford remove the smudge before the case proceeded*** For discussion. ***
Nah. I don't think I'll 'discuss' this. As if I follow the (cough) 'logical' progression of thought where this could (blank) lead, it just may get me banned.
And Saturdays are never a good day to get the zot. Plus it's Lent so I'm tryin' real hard to be nice.
Matthew 16-18 - "Whenever you fast, do not put on a gloomy face as the hypocrites do, for they neglect their appearance so that they will be noticed by men when they are fasting. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. But you, when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face so that your fasting will not be noticed by men, but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you."
Can we expect objections to burkas, hijabs and scarves?
I am not a Roman Catholic.
I do not believe the RC Church represents true Christianity.
That said, I find it disgusting that people are objecting to the wearing of ashes, by this lawyer, by Joe Bidet or anyone else.
That is a traditional observance in their faith and should be respected as such.
This is bald anti-Catholicism. The judge would never have tried this if it involved a Muslim custom or practice.
Sounds like the defense attorney was shopping for a reason to appeal.
No, your honor-less.
LLS
Judge Michael Moon agreed and requested the Crawford remove the smudge before the case proceeded. The attorney did so and the case moved forward without further discussion or incident.
The person ,Crawford that could have objected did not do so. He showed his respect to the authority of the court.
There is no problem for non-fanatics.
This is stupid. If the attorney had gone out and played in dirt and come back with a smudge of dirt on his forehead, nothing would have happened.
However, it happened on Ash Wednesday, so the smudge was recognized as a Catholic symbol, and someone realized that he could make a case out of the ash smudge and make everybody focus on the fact that the attorney was Catholic, and hopefully change some of the jurors’ perception of him.
“Reject me in front of men and I will reject you in front of my Father.”
The judge is wrong and the attorney is right.
I’m an Atheist and I wouldn’t have said anything. Last time I checked that’s covered under “Freedom of Speech”. The only plausible argument is the timing, why didn’t he show up with the mark in the morning?