Comments on: Acts 17 Apologetics exonerated

By: Ryft

Ryft — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 06:00:27 +0000

Flyer,

Apparently you have not stayed informed on this issue; e.g., Acts 17 Apologetics certainly has provided video footage of the incident in question (and a great deal more). Moreover, a court of law heard the case, reviewed the evidence, and acquitted all four of disturbing the peace.

By: Flyer

Flyer — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 19:32:08 +0000

Begin Part 2 of 2. Go to the Dearborn MI website, read the police report and then take a Qualified US History Class, reconstruction forward. Only the names have changed, the perpetrators are still the same and the motivators are still fear and of course the power is found in money and religion. Remember the cliché, "learn our history or we are destined to repeat it", well I guess we still have a lot to learn. Didn’t Christ say something about Love your enemy for how easy is it to Love a friend? I never liked that saying because it would mean one would need to be compassionate and that would be way too liberal. There is now way I would ever be associated with a liberal, or for that matter a homosexual. It’s just so much easier to hate, especially when you’re scared and it’s a hell of a lot of fun too. (Apologetics: Scripture Twister) I think Jesus might have been a liberal – naw couldn’t be.

By: Flyer

Flyer — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 19:31:05 +0000

This website furthers the distortion of facts. May I suggest the reading of the actual police report on the Dearborn MI Website or an account by the Mayor. The videos supplied by Acts 17 Apologetics are not the videos of the incident in question. Then again, it’s probably OK to lie as long as it’s in the name of GOD, I think Acts 17 Apologetics can probably twist some scripture on this. Our quick media website/blog world we live in is a largely incapable source of truth. The oversaturated media is just as bad as the lack of it in the 18th and 19th century, thus the necessity of courts such that the facts could be rationally determined. – end part 1 of 2

By: fr0d0

fr0d0 — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:01:27 +0000

This reminds me of the protestant catholic tensions in Northern Ireland. People's freedom was restricted in the interest of peace. Orangemen marching through a catholic area would inflame those people and both sides were well aware of this. In the situation at this festival we see a similar situation. People put themselves in the middle of a situation that could be easily construed as incitement to cause disturbance, BY THEIR VERY PRESENCE.

It depends on what you think applies here. Are you defending freedom or causing others to fail. I think those at the festival calling in police backup to eliminate a potentially explosive situation were acting responsibly. If their aim was to purely silence an opinion then of course this would be wrong. You could see how it would inflame the more passionate with the enemy in the camp seemingly doing very well at conversing with the younger and perhaps impressionable members. Christianity, even with it's tolerant stance, you may think would be justified in protecting it's young in the same way.

I see a lot of people on high horses. I don't see the accompanying justification. Sorry.

By: Ryft

Ryft — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 02:32:47 +0000

They may have had their rights read to them after the cameras were shut off. At any rate, the police can arrest someone without reading them their rights, for the Miranda warning is not what makes an arrest legitimate. Probable cause does that. Rather, it's what makes the suspect's statements admissible in court. If the police question a person in custody without informing him of his rights, then any self-incriminating statements he makes are inadmissible.

By: RayFalling

RayFalling — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:24:33 +0000

Hmm, there was no reading of the rights either, isn't that a problem as well?