I was reading the headlines this morning and found two articles. The first one was about a man who beat a priest bloody because the priest allegedly abused him in 1975. The second was about a Palestinian who was arrested for creating Facebook pages and posting blog comments claiming to be God and making fun of Islam and religion in general.
I don’t think I’m a conspiracy theorist (who does?) but is it just me or is the first story a bit odd? The end of the article says the guy who beat up a priest has received “hundreds” of offers for financial assistance in defending himself in court and people are coming to trial to support him.
Does anyone else see a problem with cheer on a man for being a vigilante? Do folks really think it’s ok to first accept a $600k + settlement and then send your alleged attacker to the hospital? In most cases we would all say “no” but apparently priests don’t deserve due process. I haven’t got a clue if the priest abused this guy or not—how would I know—but it sends a strong message that so many people are willing to support a 43-year-old man who “beat bloody” a 63-year-old priest.
The second story shook me not because a guy was arrested for bashing Islam; no shock there. What surprised me is the article’s acceptance of the fact as fair. I didn’t sense that the journalist thought this was strange at all. Why wouldn’t a Muslim who blasphemed be arrested for life? It’s common sense, right?
Where’s the outcry for religious tolerance? Where are the human rights activists saying the man has a right to his opinions?
What a world; an accused Catholic priest apparently deserves to be beaten up and those who speak against Islam deserve life behind bars or worse.