Not asking that as an insult, but because Muslims don’t, with exceptions, have such black and white views of the world.
Beyond that, I just noticed the join date.
Congrats on having such strong opinions so soon after joining.
No, such a comment shows rather extreme ignorance of Islam so I’ll help you out. Muslims have no problems with pork itself or even the eating of pork. They believe that Muslims shouldn’t eat pork, but lots of Christians in Egypt, Iran and other countries regularly eat pork.
The type of people who call the cops when they see swastikas. They do so because they believe the people who left the bacon did so as a threat just as people who see swastikas on the ground do so not because they think the people who painted the swastikas are fans of “the people” but because they’re deliberately trying to insult Jews.
I have seen extremely stupid analogies, but this may take the cake.
Obviously, while Muslims are generally smarter, have much larger penises and are vastly better when it comes to pleasuring our lovers, then non-Muslims we’re hardly perfect. Some of us are so pathetic that we’d get upset at some blind people with seeing eye dogs, but that’s hardly the majority, particularly since seeing eye dogs are used in predominantly Muslim countries.
If intended as an insult, most of us are going to react as the person trying to provoke us is intending, but for the most part we don’t react like that.
Anyway, as far as dogs are concerned, most of us don’t get freaked out about dogs because of some idiotic hadiths but because in most Muslim countries the only dogs are wild dogs which are extremely dangerous and we’re unused to dogs so we’d be as nervous around pet dogs as most non-Muslim Americans are around pet wolves or pet tigers.
My father, who doesn’t even believe in God had issues with dogs until my American mother made it clear to him, in her own subtle way that if he wanted to lover her he was going to have to love dogs as well and that he might not be happy with the result to the statement “It’s either me or dogs”.
Perhaps the OP should understand what hate crimes really are. A hate crime in New York states that hate crimes are basically aggravating circumstances to a finite list of crimes, which are generally serious and most likely violent in nature (including threats of violence).
If he accidentally sends a rainbow flag to an evangelical church, that isn’t a hate crime, because there isn’t an underlying crime. However, in the case of the bacon in the park, the bacon seems to be connected with “derogatory comments” posted on the Muslim group’s website, which may or may not be a crime under the aggravated harassment statute you can find on my link. (See Commissioner Kelly’s quote on the degrading comments in the news story you linked to.)
So, stevenova, if you are not illegally harassing someone (to say nothing of assaulting, robbing, or threatening someone), you have no fear of being charged with a hate crime. If you are harassing someone, the crime is heightened if you do so because of racist or other bigoted motivations. Just having bigoted notions on their own, absent any crime of harassment, is not a crime in itself.
Your complaint is dismissed as unripe. I don’t care what a police spokesperson characterizes an investigation as. Get back to us if the DA actually prefers hate crime charges.
So if my culture thought putting bacon on the ground is an act of love, would that mean no hate crimes against muslims? Kinda like how Jews find swastikas offensive, but there are other swastikas than the German hakenkreuz? Should I as a Jew be able to have a Bhuddist arrested for having some swastika symbol?
Do you understand how laws against harassment and hate crimes work?
It’s only considered harassment or a hate crime if the person doing the crime intends for their to be an offense.
So no, a Bhuddist walking around wearing a swastika on his T-shirt is not going to be arrested, but if he vandalized a Synagogue and makes it clear he intends for the Synagogue members to be offended then that’s a different story.
You keep on bringing up vandalizing someone’s property though. This bacon incident was outside, on public property, in a park. There was no vanadalism, no damaging of someone else’s property.
If it had been a jewish group there and a bunch of bhuddists were there with swastikas, or had left some, do you think the police would have been involved?
I think being offended can’t be the right standard, because if offense is the standard, then christians and muslims and orthodox jews could have liberals arrested for having pro same sex marriage things. That is offensive to them.
Remember, there was no property damage, no vandalism in this story. There was no underlying crime either. There was bacon on the ground of a public park.
“Offended” isn’t the standard. I stated the standard in general terms more than once already and you have ignored it. I don’t think you’re participating in this discussion in good faith.
Is this a serious question?
The answer is that if some people spray-painted a bunch of swastikas near a Synagogue and it was clearly done to intimidate or threaten the Synagogues Jews then, yes, the NYPD probably would get involved.
However, if the evidence indicated that anti-Semitism wasn’t a motivating factor then no, they wouldn’t get involved.
Similarly, if you accidentally drop some bacon near a Mosque or a Synagogue nobody is going to care, but if you’re doing it with malicious intent then that’s a different story.
I’m also a bit surprised by the question because it’s been repeatedly answered in this thread.
Harrassment is a crime. Telling someone that you are going to harrass them via the internet, then scattering a prayer site with a prohibited food is harrassment.
If someone posted their intent to litter a place where a religious celebration was to be held with tref and such food was found scattered on the ground when they met, I would consider that harrassment and it would be eligible to be elevated to a hate crime.
I like that they are investigating whether this is an actual hate crime or attempt to intimidate, or just an case of someone accidentally dropping breakfast meats in a public park. Unfortunately, we live in a time where the authorities cannot presume an innocent reason for unattended bacon, and are obligated to probe deeper. Truly we live in degenerate days.
Fred Phelp’s church announces it is going to picket events, and then it goes and pickets those events. I have no doubt the people at those events feel harassed by the Phelps people, but is Phelps guilty of a crime when he does it?
The place is a public place. Are you saying that places where Jews/muslims are, even if public, must become pork free zones?
Not only that–I suspect that if someone made a mistake (they scattered bacon, but it turns out it was beef bacon or something), there would still be a hate crime. If they put up backwards swastikas, or pictures of Charlie Chaplin in the Great Dictator, or made some other dumbass mistake, if they were attempting to intimidate and harass, they’d have committed the crime, right?
