U.S. District Judge Michael M. Baylson has issued a major decision in favor of free speech and free association. In a 68-page decision, Baylson struck down Pennsylvania’s blasphemy law.
While I have written on the encroachment of blasphemy laws in the West, this is a case of a positive move in the opposite direction.
The case (Kalman v. Cortes) was brought by a filmmaker who was told that he could not name his company “I Choose Hell Productions.” Baylson ruled that he found that “the statute’s plain language makes apparent its predominantly religious purpose.” He found that the law “unequivocally excludes only one religious perspective but not the other, as it permits speech deemed reverent to religious beliefs, yet excludes speech deemed irreverent to religious beliefs.”
Chief Deputy Attorney General Barry N. Kramer argued that the statute should survive the constitutional challenge because it was needed to protect the public from offensive, indecent and profane expression.
Here is the opinion: Kalman Opinion
Night all … time to head out to the parties … raise a glass or two to the foundings and shoot off some fireworks … have a designated driver.
The One that is I AM
Why would AY be a problem. I bet he is as clever with money as he is with words. He or she could make magic with it and have it disappear.
===============================================================
Ay tends to get up in the morning with the sole purpose of being annoying … but then most tent revivals are evening affairs so perhaps he’d mellow out … nah, he’d demand ethical behavior which would reduce the pot dramatically … or else he’d demand 20% bookings fees and he probably wouldn’t let us take advantage of Buddha on a nightly basis without some sort of kickback … trust me, he’d be a problem.
mespo,
I agree with you and think that Fox news needs to be reeled in as well as others and charge them with violation of the laws as well. Using the following exert:
“Chief Deputy Attorney General Barry N. Kramer argued that the statute should survive the constitutional challenge because it was needed to protect the public from offensive, indecent and profane expression.”
And on the list should be Cheney, Rove, The GOP Chair as you see the list could be endless. W should and could be on the list, but if the puppet master is silenced, can the puppet still speak?
Then this brings us to a collaterally issue, when W was in office, was this the first time the US had a puppet for president?
Had to be Wall Street and all of the other markets did it all…..I lost about 400k. That was magic….with a call on top… real magic….want to buy it for what I paid for it and what it worth today? I will show you book value May 08′ it is really a good deal if you look at it that way.
if they are the same does that make it ok to you?
Woosty’s still a Cat,
What would be the difference between that type of magic and wall street?
“He or she could make magic with it and have it disappear.”
that’s not magic, that’s theft, unless it was his/hers to begin with….
Why would AY be a problem. I bet he is as clever with money as he is with words. He or she could make magic with it and have it disappear.
“Words are words and unless they are some form of slander or the equivalent of a death threat, no one but no one needs protection from words.”
Sometimes, it’s not so much the words as how they’re strung together that makes for the problem. And on/off switches work just fine when you know that they are in need of using but words in many forums can have effect whether you hear them or not or whether they are used properly, or not. Words are like cars…they shouldn’t be used while drunk and intelligent, mature and sober practice where no harm can be done should be an essential requirement before use….
Me thinks Jill has the makings of a great Revival tent preacher … perhaps a few of us could dress up in sky-blue robes, learn a few gospel tunes and take this show on the road.
We could stick Buddha in the audience and heal him during every “meetin'”.
All proceeds would be tax-free.
AY might be a problem ……
Let us pray. Lord Jaysus, you have poured out your blessings upon Judge Baylson. Truly, he is one of your anointed and should be honored among men. This evil law, this misbegotten law, was like unto the kiss of Judas upon your cheek. For there were those whom the serpent had whispered to, Oh Lord, and had told them to file against us for blaspheming their non existent Wiccan gods/goddessess. When we, the people of the good book, wished to rightfully blame them for hurricanes and terrorism, these Wiccans mights have used the courts as if it was their own instrument and filed suit against us for blaspheming their false god/desses. We can’t have that. So Lord Jaysus, we pray in your name to uphold this ruling until we can get it clarified that the only God who can be blasphemed is the one true God, Yahweh/Jehovah (whatever!) because he’s the only one who exists. Thank you for staying the secular hand until we can give more money to more Congressional members so they will do the Lord’s work for us. Amen.
…”his cupidity may at some point be satiated”
man, his cupid and my cupid are surely not the same cupid!
‘…offensive, indecent and profane expression’
such as :
Walmart CEO Makes Average Workers Annual Salary Every Hour
Egyptian Police Drag Blogger From Internet Cafe and Allegedly Beat Him To Death on Alexandria Street
[Video Shows] Officer Working For BP and Preventing Filming of Headquarters
Officers Tackle Jogging Teenagers in Search of Felons
“Don’t Taze My Granny”: Oklahoma Police Respond to Medical Call And Allegedly Proceed to Repeatedly Taser Bedridden 86-Year-Old Woman
Drunk Chicago Cop Threatens Cabbie at Gunpoint . . . So Colleagues Give Him Back His Gun and Release Him Without Charges
Abercrummy and Filch: One of the Country’s Highest Paid, Worst Performing CEOs Receives Millions for Giving Up Unlimited Use of Corporate Jet
Supreme Court Closes Front Doors To Visitors In The Name of Security
Drill, Baby, Drill: Obama’s Deep-Drilling Moratorium Lifted By Federal Court
Clarence Thomas Defends Recent Ruling on Campaign Finance
Father Loses Job, Seeks Reduction in Child Support So Florida Judge Increases Payments By $300 and Then Recuses Herself for a Conflict
Clarence Thomas Defends Recent Ruling on Campaign Finance
and on and on….
“Chief Deputy Attorney General Barry N. Kramer argued that the statute should survive the constitutional challenge because it was needed to protect the public from offensive, indecent and profane expression.”
*****************
Thanks, Barry, but as long as I have an on-off switch, I ‘ll protect me and mine.
“Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies, The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
~C.S. Lewis, In Freedom
On a more serious note, what I find equally offensive is the idea of protecting the public from “profane speech” as the statute noted. Who exactly defines what constitutes “profane”? And what gives them this magical lexicographic power?
Words are words and unless they are some form of slander or the equivalent of a death threat, no one but no one needs protection from words. If their sensibilities are offended? Fuck ’em. The nature of life is a smörgåsbord of offense as offense is simply a reaction. Reactions are about the only thing one can totally control in life. So instead urging forgiveness or the cultivating the oh so important corollary to the Right to Free Speech – the Right to Ignore, by all means impair the speech and expression of others because some uptight tool can’t control themselves.
Makes zero logical sense.
Well then I guess I’ll have no choice but to name my production company “Uppity Lesbian Satanist Biker Bitches, L.L.C.” and take the 5th Circuit out for a lap.
The Anti-Lesbian Drug
The controversy over using female hormones as part of prenatal care isn’t quite as shocking as the headlines suggest, but it does raise important questions about ethics, gender, and sexuality.
Genetic engineers, move over: the latest scheme for creating children to a parent’s specifications requires no DNA tinkering, but merely giving mom a steroid while she’s pregnant, and presto—no chance that her daughters will be lesbians or (worse?) ‘uppity.’
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/02/the-anti-lesbian-drug.html
It’s a step in the right direction but I believe AY makes a couple of good points:
“It appears to be a rational decision, now let us see how its implemented.”
and
“Bring it on down to the South and let us see how it is treated.”
“This opinion only holds that the Blasphemy Statute has constitutional defects, as it impermissibly entangles Bureau employees with religion by requiring them, in their own discretion, to make standardless determinations as to what constitutes blasphemy, profane cursing or swearing, or what profanes the Lord’s name, based on nothing but their own individual religious beliefs.”
The old Subjective vs Objective Standard. My God is better than your god, does not apply. It appears to be a rational decision, now let us see how its implemented.
If I recall the name of the Courthouse in PA is Nix. It is a great decision regardless of how the Judge got there. But the decision is only binding on that area of the country. Bring it on down to the South and let us see how it is treated.
… “unequivocally excludes only one religious perspective but not the other, as it permits speech deemed reverent to religious beliefs, yet excludes speech deemed irreverent to religious beliefs.”
I don’t agree that “speech deemed irreverent to religious beliefs” is an “other religious perspective”. However, I applaud the ruling.