Posted on 05/30/2012 9:51:48 AM PDT by JohnKinAK
Perhaps, but it still seems if he wasn't beating the children himself, he was basically convicted of a "thought crime" (as stupid as his thoughts happened to be). I always believed in this country your were free to advocate sacrificing newborn babies to Satan if that was your thing as long as you never actually acted on it (heck you even got the NAMBLA crowd that openly advocates sex between men and boys. What is the difference?) Whatever happened to personal responsibility, punish the parents that committed the act, I assume they were adults who made a conscious choice to listen to the idiot preacher.
He has the right to preach Sharia law if he desires. Now, with that said, where is the line? Would he be allowed to preach that people should commit murder? What if a private citizen told his neighbor that the neighbor should spank his child? Can he be sent to prison? Very slippery slope here.
Gotta take this one with a grain of salt.
Nowhere does the poster list the actual criminal charge that the pastor was sentenced for.
As for forbidding the pastor to ever have a leadership role in a church? I would want to read the transcript. Would seem on the face to be unconstitutional.
Or what if the preacher in the course of his weekly bible readings happens to recite that chapter in Leviticus where it says Homosexuals should be put to death. Then a while later someone in the congregation with a few screws loose kills a homosexual. Under this precedent, the preacher could be locked up for doing nothing but reading a verse as it is written in the Bible. A very slippery slope indeed...
This isn’t a free-speech/free-religion case. It is a true child-abuse issue. He was instructing church members to abuse their children, some as young as 2 months. It is not that he merely advocates spanking with a wooden spoon. He directs parents to beat babies. Do we really wish for “freedom of religion” to serve as a cover for true child abuse? I don’t think so.
Hard to read. What was the charge?
The judicial branch is empowered to keep those convicted of conspiracy to commit child sex offenses from positions in which they might come into contact with kids, I have no problem having the same done to those who conspire to commit child abuse.
Reading some of the other articles out there on the interweb about this case provides an entirely different perspective than does the article at the top of this thread.
Convicted on 8 counts of conspiracy to commit child abuse.
There’s a reason that the article at the top of this thread is hard to read. It wants to obfuscate the actual issue with phony freedom of speech/religion discussions.
Or what if the preacher in the course of his weekly bible readings happens to recite that chapter in Leviticus where it says Homosexuals should be put to death. Then a while later someone in the congregation with a few screws loose kills a homosexual. Under this precedent, the preacher could be locked up for doing nothing but reading a verse as it is written in the Bible. A very slippery slope indeed...
<><><><><
Not even a close comparison. I suggest you read some of the other articles on this case that are readily googled.
The “pastor” was not reading Proverbs to the congregation, he was instructing them on the use of wooden dowels on the naked bottoms of 2 month old children.
With the last name sumi am I far off in thinking this is a Muslim liberal and perhaps one in the same giving Scott Walker a hard time in Wisconsin?
You call it "instructing," he called it "preaching," but however you characterize it, it is speech.
This IS a free speech case, and this jury verdict is very troublesome.
How do we get the Judge out from the bench? Seems like a typical liberal looking to destroy what is good and just.
Hmmm. Think about that.
So what? Where the members of the congregation not responsible adults who could ignore him? I still believe that unless he was personally beating peoples children with a wooden dowels then he's free to advocate any stupid, idiotic thing he wants. Heck, we have neo-nazi's who advocate killing Jews, the KKK who advocate killing blacks, the Black Panther who advocate killing whites. I don't see them being arrested simply for advocating stupid, illegal acts.
The first 2 paragraphs of your MSM article confirms what the original article contention.
“A Black Earth pastor was found guilty Wednesday of eight counts of conspiracy to commit child abuse for advocating the use of wooden rods to spank children as young as two months.
A Dane County jury took only about two hours to find Philip Caminiti, 54, pastor of the Aleitheia Bible Church, guilty of having instructed members of his flock to punish children as young as infants and toddlers by striking them on the bare buttocks with wood dowels in order to teach them to behave correctly, fitting the church’s literal interpretation of the Bible.”
The great part now is that the children will become wards of the State and CPS, where statisically nation wide they are something like 10 times more likely to be the victims of child sexual abuse.
Please make sure you’re sitting down before reading this!
Jeepers... thanks for the ping.
So what? The constitution says:
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.It doesn't say "except where one advocates beating children."
The Wisconsin constitution says:
SECTION 3. [Free speech; libel.] Every person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right, and no laws shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions or indictments for libel, the truth may be given in evidence, and if it appears to the jury that the matter charged as libelous be true, and was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the party shall be acquited; and the jury shall have the right to determine the law and fact.Again it doesn't restrict itself based on the topic of the speech, but only if the speech is libelous or not. This is a gross miscarriage of justice.
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.