It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by marg6043
Back to the issue of the law sue again,
I have read the entire link to the case and it seems that the Christian publisher Zondervan indeed targeted the word homosexual as derogatory when they started to publish their version of the scripts back in 1982 and 87.
From the link,
Fowler says Zondervan Bibles published in 1982 and 1987 use the word homosexuals among a list of those who are "wicked" or "unrighteous" and won't inherit the kingdom of heaven..
Now this was indeed an alteration of the original text, But, the publisher did this during the 80s and later bibles do not contain such change and the added homosexual word, this will make a an issue that it was targeting a part of the population the homosexual population.
Now, Fowler claims pain and suffering for the last 20 years as his pastor used the modified bible in his congregation causing stress to him.
This is kind of too late to bring a law sue and a complain, while he can have a court case on the issue of charging words in published bible for the intention of targeting a specific group of people and cause hate crimes, he waited too long
Either way after waiting 20 years the court can take it or just dismiss it depending how good Fowler's lawyer present the case.
[edit on 9-7-2008 by marg6043]
Originally posted by johnsky
This is the problem with keeping archaic attempts at understanding the world around, such as religion.
The more we learn, the less the religious texts make any sense at all to us... and hence, the problems that arise don't make sense either.
The bible has been re-written so many times in the past to suit the changes in science, customs, and sociology... through these re-writes, it barely even resembles the original.
So why are the religious so touchy about re-writing the bible once again? Why not just simply omit the negative parts about homosexuality? I mean, it's not like the current bible has any credibility any more... the original might have, but the current one has been re-written too many times to be recognizable any more.
Originally posted by marg6043
Originally posted by Conspiriology
Oh hell why not just take out the part about not commiting murder to because people that wanna to kill other people guilt free can because of your "reasoned rational logical idea"
sheesh
- Con
Originally posted by johnsky
Originally posted by Conspiriology
Oh hell why not just take out the part about not commiting murder to because people that wanna to kill other people guilt free can because of your "reasoned rational logical idea"
sheesh
- Con
Um... Did you just compare homosexuals to murderers?!
You're SICK!
The core of the ADL legal approach is a "penalty-enhancement" concept. In a landmark decision issued in June 1993, the United States Supreme Court unanimously upheld the constitutionality of Wisconsin's penalty-enhancement hate crimes statute, which was based on the ADL model. Expressions of hate protected by the First Amendment's free speech clause are not criminalized
Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Conspiriology
Actually I agree, because then people could be able to research on anything that has been published 10,20, 30 and so years ago to make a case upon pain and suffering.
That is why Fowler will probably get a case against the publisher if he can bring the hate crime issue, but hate crime have a problem they protect freedom of speech.
The core of the ADL legal approach is a "penalty-enhancement" concept. In a landmark decision issued in June 1993, the United States Supreme Court unanimously upheld the constitutionality of Wisconsin's penalty-enhancement hate crimes statute, which was based on the ADL model. Expressions of hate protected by the First Amendment's free speech clause are not criminalized
www.adl.org...
Originally posted by johnsky
reply to post by Conspiriology
Oh, you're a laugh riot you are.
I point out that you just posted homosexuals and murderers in the same light, and I get called a child.
Meh, suits me, I wouldn't mind losing a few years off this aging carcass.
The point remains though, that you just placed homosexuals and murderers in the same light.
Do you believe homosexuals should be locked up, tried, and sentenced for homosexuality in the same manor that murderers are locked up and tried for murder?
Originally posted by johnsky
This is the problem with keeping archaic attempts at understanding the world around, such as religion.
The more we learn, the less the religious texts make any sense at all to us... and hence, the problems that arise don't make sense either.
The bible has been re-written so many times in the past to suit the changes in science, customs, and sociology... through these re-writes, it barely even resembles the original.
So why are the religious so touchy about re-writing the bible once again? Why not just simply omit the negative parts about homosexuality? I mean, it's not like the current bible has any credibility any more... the original might have, but the current one has been re-written too many times to be recognizable any more.
Oh hell why not just take out the part about not commiting murder to because people that wanna to kill other people guilt free can because of your "reasoned rational logical idea"
Oh hell why not just take out the part about not commiting murder too because homosexuals that wanna to kill other people guilt free can because of your "reasoned rational logical idea"
[Originally posted by Conspiriology
Nope. You are nothing but a manipulative instigator a child with a temper
If you have a question as to what I may have wanted my post to convey, trust me I would have NO problem saying it just like this "All Gays are murderes" So rather than ask which you did (why Ill never know) you don't wait for an answer you just go ahead an hallucinate a post making a statment with a meaning I never made.
Grow up amateur
- Con
Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by blueorder
Back to the basis, the word homosexual is not part of the original scripts and to use it in a manner that is offensive and possible to cause hate crimes is a valid issue for a law sue.
Taking into consideration that this is done to the bible.
It merit a law sue to the company involved in what can be call a hate crime.
Hate Crimes Laws
www.adl.org...
[edit on 9-7-2008 by marg6043]
Originally posted by johnsky
Let me tell you something about my growing up, son.
Talk like yours, declaring Homosexuals in the same topic as Murderers is an obvious and deliberate attempt to raise anger toward Homosexuals.
Those boys used that mode of speech all the time when trying to tell people about "the faggot down the road".
Talk like yours, declaring Homosexuals in the same topic as Murderers
Originally posted by sc2099
reply to post by johnsky
johnsky, I think you're personalizing this issue too much. The people who murdered your friend were idiots regardless of their religion. People with that sort of mentality will find reasons to subjugate others no matter the circumstances. What I'm saying is that even if they lived in an environment totally free of bibles, they would still be bullies and still be hurting someone.
There have been lots of psychos who claim to be following the parts of different religious texts that suit them. That doesn't mean that the texts themselves have zero merit whatsoever. Just because some idiot starts a war citing the Constitution as validation, should we throw the baby out with the bathwater and ditch the Constitution? Of course not.
As for the lawsuit, of course it will get thrown out. It's totally frivolous and groundless. People translate and retranslate texts constantly. The plaintiff should be mad at his family and not some publisher.