The Obama administration’s Department of Justice official Edward Perez, who is the assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division, refuses to say that his department won’t attempt to criminalize blasphemy in the future. I can’t imagine that the Department of Justice would ever actually try such a thing, and the Supreme Court would break it in half if it did, but that doesn’t make the spineless weaseliness from Perez any less appalling. You can watch the video of the sordid incident here. Link
Heartwarming message from Religion of Peace Ultimatum to US: ‘Criminalise blasphemy or lose consulate’
The question is ridiculous. Speech inciting violence against a specific religious group would already be considered illegal, but could easily fall under the questioner's broad classification of "speech against any religion."
I love the mindframe of people who fall for this kind of crap. Let's ask DOJ officials if they would ever attempt to criminalize abortion, then take non-responses to absurdist questions as proof that the DOJ will start enforcing an alternative regime of "Bible Belt" law with no abortions and vaguely homosexual things around.
Was the man arrested for blasphemy? Were there any laws banning blasphemy put into place? Do you have a problem questioning anyone in order to try and track down and bring justice to those that killed the American ambassador? I'm not ashamed to say I have zero problem questioning anyone that might shed light on going after those who murdered the ambassador. We are better served putting our energy into tracking those people down instead of making up claims of suppressing 1st amendment rights which hasn't been done in the slightest here.
If you think this about piddling alleged probation violations, then you are crazy. It's about intimating people from expressing politically incorrect opinions.
So now you have a weak on crime position and believe that parole violations are no big deal? Again I have to disagree. I guess I'm just tougher on criminals than you are.
Libtards, y'all something else. If this was about probation violations, it would have been handled in a much more low key way. Instead, it's been turned into a media circus. That was done to send a message to anyone else who dares mock Islam.
Do you also buy into the 9/11 was an inside job conspiracy theory? What other kind of conspiracy theories do you buy into? It was turned into a media circus, because the killing of an American ambassador, and the storming of American embassies is media worthy and a big deal. It would be covered whether it was a stupid bigoted film against Asians, Latinos, Inuit people or anything else that might have been related to the murder of an American ambassador, and the storming of American embassies. Meanwhile you are excusing the guy for breaking his parole. And he was initially brought in for questioning in regards to finding and bringing justice to the people who murdered the ambassador. While your energy and anger might be aimed at the Commander-in-Chief of the United States, but I think it's better served aimed at the terrorists that committed the crime.
You are one really dumb person. I am not excusing anything. If he broke the conditions of his probation, so be it. But this dog and pony show was not done to determine that. It was pure and simple an effort to intimidate others who might publicize anti-Muslim views.
please provide a link to the claim you are making. This is laughable. You believe that the death of an American ambassador and the storming of American embassies aren't a big news story and so the guy who made the film, wouldn't have been in the media spotlight. Now he's in the spotlight because somehow the white house managed to get coordinated media effort to cover it in an attempt to discredit any person who'd bad mouth Islam? And I'm the really dumb person in this scenario? LOL
