If they win, I expect an apology will be owed?
interesting!So Christians now will go to the law courts of the worldly system we stand against to be judged! Apparent to the video in Hemet California you are not given the option to cease and desist unlawful civil disobedience.Hmmmmm! I wonder why that officer acted so aggressively against the street oratory preacher of the Bible reading that morning in Hemet?A couple of verse ideas come to mind and I hope I am not arrested for posting them in here? Full disclosure, I live in California and CHP and County Sheriff officers attend my Church. :)Rev 18:1 After this I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was made bright with his glory. ...Rev 18:20 Rejoice over her, O heaven, and you saints and apostles and prophets, for God has given judgment for you against her!" ...Rev 18:24 And in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of all who have been slain on earth." At least in the United States we still have somewhat of a foothold to do this in remedy:Ecc 5:8 If you see in a province the oppression of the poor and the violation of justice and righteousness, do not be amazed at the matter, for the high official is watched by a higher, and there are yet higher ones over them. It would be nice if you would keep your readers abreast of the disposition of this case.The outcome might incite more civil disobedience or it might not; especially in California, parenthetically after the majority of the voters passed Prop. 8 and it was then put into a political judicial spin after one ruling of a District Court Judge!"...On August 12, Walker announced his decision to lift the stay (which would have allowed same-sex marriages to be performed) as of August 18, 2010. However, on August 16, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit indefinitely extended the District Court's stay, stopping new same-sex marriages in the state of California pending appeal. It also scheduled an accelerated time table for hearing an appeal of Walker's ruling."The latest legal tact is that the Judge, an active public homosexual should have recused himself seeing his ruling would benefit him and his same sex partner if his ruling prevails.
The Supreme Court decided in favor of Westboro Baptist's outrageous and very public pickets. Why picketing and taunting the families of the dead with Bible verses is permitted and this is not seems curious, which leads me to wonder whether we're getting all the facts in the case. Why are they in front of a DMV anyhow? Why there and not just some generic street corner? Natamllc writes: "The latest legal tact is that the Judge, an active public homosexual should have recused himself seeing his ruling would benefit him and his same sex partner if his ruling prevails."So if he were heterosexual, I assume he would also be obligated to recuse himself from the case since outlawing same-sex marriage is (supposedly) beneficial for heterosexual couples and heterosexual society as a whole, yes? (At least, that is the argument made.)
James,You got it. I think you are now beginning to see the dilemma the darkness that is covering the whole world puts us in being Saints of the Most High God, His sons known from before the foundation of the world!I am standing with Isaiah and John holding to the Faith once Delivered to the Saints!Here's Isaiah: Isa 25:1 O LORD, you are my God; I will exalt you; I will praise your name, for you have done wonderful things, plans formed of old, faithful and sure. Isa 25:2 For you have made the city a heap, the fortified city a ruin; the foreigners' palace is a city no more; it will never be rebuilt. Isa 25:3 Therefore strong peoples will glorify you; cities of ruthless nations will fear you. Isa 25:4 For you have been a stronghold to the poor, a stronghold to the needy in his distress, a shelter from the storm and a shade from the heat; for the breath of the ruthless is like a storm against a wall, Isa 25:5 like heat in a dry place. You subdue the noise of the foreigners; as heat by the shade of a cloud, so the song of the ruthless is put down. Isa 25:6 On this mountain the LORD of hosts will make for all peoples a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wine, of rich food full of marrow, of aged wine well refined. Isa 25:7 And he will swallow up on this mountain the covering that is cast over all peoples, the veil that is spread over all nations. Isa 25:8 He will swallow up death forever; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth, for the LORD has spoken. Isa 25:9 It will be said on that day, "Behold, this is our God; we have waited for him, that he might save us. This is the LORD; we have waited for him; let us be glad and rejoice in his salvation."Here's some instructions we both should come into:Rev 18:4 Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, "Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues; Rev 18:5 for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities. Rev 18:6 Pay her back as she herself has paid back others, and repay her double for her deeds; mix a double portion for her in the cup she mixed. Rev 18:7 As she glorified herself and lived in luxury, so give her a like measure of torment and mourning, since in her heart she says, 'I sit as a queen, I am no widow, and mourning I shall never see.' Rev 18:8 For this reason her plagues will come in a single day, death and mourning and famine, and she will be burned up with fire; for mighty is the Lord God who has judged her."
Seems to me the brothers got exactly the outcome they were seeking. Looks like they arrived with the intention to get arrested and make a point - not to proclaim the Word of God. That's not heroic in my book, but shows a lack of wisdom. All the onlookers witnessed was a "kook" Bible reader getting arrested.
James said...Why are they in front of a DMV anyhow? Why there and not just some generic street corner?The video explains why, twice.Brian said...Seems to me the brothers got exactly the outcome they were seeking. Looks like they arrived with the intention to get arrested and make a point - not to proclaim the Word of God. That's not heroic in my book, but shows a lack of wisdom. All the onlookers witnessed was a "kook" Bible reader getting arrested.What specifically makes you think they are looking to get arrested? What in the video gives you that impression?What specifically gave you the impression of "kook" too?
I have mixed emotions here. As A Christian I don't see the sense in reading the Bible like that to a crowd. I have seen open air preaching, but it's more relational and blend more into the atmosphere of what's going on.As an American I would love to argue agaisnt this government officer's actions, and the law that they enforced. This is Statism. I like what the pastor said, "Officer, what you are doing is against the law.The law governs our nation, not force.My three cents worth.
@Jonathan: Well, acc. to the video, they were preaching there because people were forced to stand in line and remain a "captive audience" to their preaching. I tend to be a free speech absolutist, which means I'm leaning towards the side of the preacher if they were indeed on public property and the law did not require a permit.Still, it's tacky and rude to push your views on others when they cannot escape your opinions without causing themselves a great inconvenience. The listeners couldn't just walk away. Just my two cents.
James,How is it a violation of anyone's rights for someone to speak words, even if they cannot leave? Because it IS a violation of the First Amendment to arrest someone for speech. The only rational exceptions could be when other people's rights are actually infringed as a result of the speech (like if you spark a panic or cause bodily harm or loss of life and/or property).Rudeness and tackiness aren't against the law.
Peter, as I stated, I'm leaning towards siding with the preacher and that he should have been free to preach as he wished. I believe that the only restrictions on speech are when they are libelous or are directly threatening harm towards another.In both Falwell vs. Flynt and Snyder vs. Phelps, I believe the Supreme Court decided rightly in both instances. At the same time, this guy is no martyr. He was looking for attention and wanted to provoke people. He succeeded. Just because I don't like his approach doesn't mean I think he should have been jailed for it, though.
At the same time, this guy is no martyr. He and his character are really beside the point. This sort of trampling of the Constitution is intolerable. He's called attention to the problem, that's all that's important.This administration has shown a surreptitious tendency to try to undermine such laws, by pushing for the "fairness doctrine", by appointing activist judges and "hate speech" laws... America is religious, but throughout its entire existence, no matter how conservative the phase it was going through, it has never been as oppressive as any communist regime. We've got to stop the drift there. I'm in full agreement on that.
i couldn't discern all the details, but from what i could hear, the officer said he was being arrested for speaking to a "captive audience." i did not hear the officer disallow speech on Government property.also could the officer First not have placed him under arrest, but warned and explained, First? i dont think the preacher would have stopped, but it would seem proper to give him a patient, clear, and detailed warning 1st
Presumably, they would have also been arrested if they were attempting to read the Koran or a chapter from a Harry Potter novel. So what's the point? That they should be allowed to read the Bible while it's ok to prohibit reading the Book of Mormon? Or that everybody should be allowed to read anything to people waiting for their licenses who (I suspect) would prefer to be left alone.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Somehow, I doubt they would have been arrested for reading "Hamlet". And does this mean the next time I'm subjected to some miscreant's obnoxious rap music emanating from his car that I can have the bloke thrown in jail?
Just as is donsands, I too, have mixed emotions here. I don't know whether to laugh or laugh. Some of the few in the waiting line thought he was quite funny. [You can hear the laughter in the backnoise] It's is a difficult decision for the officer to uphold the law, but where do you draw the line with public nuisances?
The man was being a public nuisance, and if there is a law against preaching or speaking to a captive audience against their will, then what was done was right.From a christian perspective, what this man has done was stupid. He probably turned quite a few people in that crowd off of christianity as a publicity stunt (why else would they be filming their actions?).