Human Events Blog

US Judge rules Muslims have a right to assault people who offend them

 

Update: Some of the facts adduced in early reports of this case have proven to be incorrect.  Please refer to a subsequent post here, and Cathy Taylor’s report at RealClearPolitics here.

People who are concerned about the spread of Muslim sharia law into American jurisprudence used to be dismissed as alarmists.  That won’t happen again for a while, thanks to a Pennsylvania judge who just dismissed assault charges against a Muslim who was videotaped attacking a man dressed as “Zombie Muhammad” during a Halloween parade. 

The judge, who is a Muslim, didn’t even care to see the videotape, because the assault was entirely justified under sharia law, so the First Amendment doesn’t apply.  In fact, the beaten Zombie Muhammad should just be thankful he wasn’t killed, because that’s what would have happened in a Muslim country.

The astonishing details, from Opposing Views:

The Pennsylvania State Director of American Atheists, Inc., Mr. Ernest Perce V., was assaulted by a Muslim while participating in a Halloween parade. Along with a Zombie Pope, Ernest was costumed as Zombie Muhammad. The assault was caught on video, the Muslim man admitted to his crime and charges were filed in what should have been an open-and-shut case. That’s not what happened, though.

The defendant is an immigrant and claims he did not know his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form. To add insult to injury, he also testified that his 9 year old son was present, and the man said he felt he needed to show his young son that he was willing to fight for his Prophet. 

Muslim judge Mark Martin ruled in favor of the assailant… and insulted the defendant for good measure.

Martin offered the court a little lesson in Islamic theology, which he believes transcends that silly First Amendment free-speech stuff in the U.S. Constitution:

Having had the benefit of having spent over 2 and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. In fact I have a copy of the Koran here and I challenge you sir to show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammad arose and walked among the dead. I think you misinterpreted things. Before you start mocking someone else’s religion you may want to find out a little bit more about it it makes you look like a dufus and Mr. (Defendant) is correct. In many Arabic speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society. 

Islam is not just a religion, it’s their culture, their culture. It’s their very essence their very being. They pray five times a day towards Mecca to be a good Muslim, before you die you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca unless you are otherwise told you can not because you are too ill too elderly, whatever but you must make the attempt. Their greetings wa-laikum as-Salâm (is answered by voice) may god be with you. Whenever, it’s very common when speaking to each other it’s very common for them to say uh this will happen it’s it they are so immersed in it. 

Since Islam is, therefore, at the very center of a Muslim’s being, speech they find objectionable – such as depicting the Prophet in any form, much less as an extra from The Walking Dead – “trashes their essence, their being,” and violence is justified, especially from a recent immigrant accustomed to living in countries properly governed by sharia law. 

As Al Stefanelli notes at Opposing Views, the judge didn’t even pretend to understand what the First Amendment means, never mind pondering the laws against physical harassment:

The Judge neglected to address the fact that the ignorance of the law does not justify an assault and that it was the responsibility of the defendant to familiarize himself with our laws.  This is to say nothing of the judge counseling the defendant that it is also not acceptable for him to teach his children that it is acceptable to use violence in the defense of religious beliefs.  Instead, the judge gives Mr. Perce a lesson in Sharia law and drones on about the Muslim faith, inform everyone in the court room how strongly he embraces Islam, that the first amendment does not allow anyone ”to piss off other people and other cultures” and he was also insulted by Mr. Perce’s portrayal of Mohammed and the sign he carried.

Martin went on to call the plaintiff a “doofus.” 

In other news, enraged Catholics reacted to the sight of an atheist parading around as the Zombie Pope by stifling yawns.


Sign Up