"US Teenager Faces Two Years In Jail For 'Oral Sex' with Jesus Statue" - Religion, God, and Theology

A teenage boy in Pennsylvania, United States, was arrested for allegedly mimicking oral sex with a statue of Jesus Christ.

The 14-year-old boy from Everett climbed on a kneeling statue of Jesus, in front of a building containing by Christian organisation Love INC, and posed as if the statue was performing oral sex on him, Motherjones reported.

The boy posted the picture on Facebook, which prompted an investigation by the local district attorney.

The Pennsylvanian state police arrested the boy and charged him with desecration of a venerated object, The Smoking Gun reported.

A 1972 Pennsylvanian statute criminalises "defacing, damaging, polluting or otherwise physically mistreating in a way that the actor knows will outrage the sensibilities of persons likely to observe or discover the action".

This case will be handled in the juvenile court. If convicted, the 14-year-old boy can face a two-year jail term.

more,

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/us-teenager...statue-1465299

I for one feel that this kid made a mistake, I also question the parents/guardians of the kid and how they brought him up.

I feel this young man should be sentenced to community service, specifically to work with a Christian organization to help the poor and disabled people. I think community service with a Christian organization will maybe help to show the kid that what he did was wrong as many Christians are good people.

Do folks feel that any type of punishment should be handed out irt the above case?

Quote

09-29-2014 , 08:07 PM

Robin Agrees

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 2,310

I think this is awesome. Was he filled with the holy spirit?

Quote

09-29-2014 , 08:14 PM

WereBeer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 10,700

Yeah, he's not going to get 2 years in jail, that's just the maximum allowed by the relevant law. Typical journalist tactic designed to maximise attention and outrage.

Any punishment should be minor, as befits this non-crime. I don't care if he gets nothing more than a stern talking-to or if he ends up having to pick up litter or something for a couple of weekends, that's fine too. Anything more than that would be excessive. But I doubt any judge would seriously think about putting the kid in jail for this anyway.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 04:49 AM

Mightyboosh

mmm mmm good

Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 5,560

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin Agrees

I think this is awesome. Was he filled with the holy spirit?

Actually, Jesus was doing all the work. There's a photo if you google it. Not wanting to offend anyone's sensibilities, I'm not going to post it.

As much as the religious tendency (sweeping generalisation) to cry 'offensive offensive' is as annoying as hell, it doesn't change that this is actually quite offensive regardless of the subject of the statue, if it had been Mickey Mouse, it would still be crude and offensive, I'd be disappointed with one my kids if they did something like this.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 07:44 AM

neeeel

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,731

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mightyboosh

Regardless of the subject of the statue? Are you saying this is offensive to everyone?

Quote

09-30-2014 , 08:13 AM

tame_deuces

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 17,817

Could we also press charges against people who clutter venerable and beautiful places with religious statues?

Quote

09-30-2014 , 08:38 AM

Mightyboosh

mmm mmm good

Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 5,560

Quote:

Originally Posted by neeeel

Regardless of the subject of the statue? Are you saying this is offensive to everyone?

Are you saying that simulating oral sex in a public place, with a statue that has meaning and importance to some, and then posting the photo online isn't in any way offensive?

I think that the tourists who kissed a statue of Buddha in Sri Lanka were acting in an offensive way too, although I think 6 months in jail for doing it was a bit harsh.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 09:26 AM

Robin Agrees

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 2,310

It's one of the worst statues I have ever seen. It's horrible!

Quote

09-30-2014 , 10:08 AM

neeeel

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,731

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mightyboosh

So the subject of the statue DOES matter then?
If no one thought the statue had any meaning and importance, would this be a big deal?

Quote

09-30-2014 , 10:42 AM

#10

Naked_Rectitude

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 2,312

The fact that he brazenly posted it online doesn't help his cause, that likely infuriates people more than anything else. Still trying to figure out why kids do stupid stuff and incriminate themselves by posting it.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 12:11 PM

#11

Lestat

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 10,998

The key word I didn't like is "venerated", as if that's supposed to apply to everyone.

If it was private property, maybe charge him with trespassing. Perhaps lewd or lascivious behavior.

Otherwise, it's ridiculous. The subject of the statue itself is irrelevant. Teens do stupid stuff. Move on.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 12:22 PM

#12

Naked_Rectitude

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 2,312

I suspect that this is simply about respect. Not so much for the statue, or religion, but when you post stuff online that is questionable in nature, you're rubbing people's noses in the fact that you can do it, flaunt it, and get away with it, and people tend not to like that.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 12:24 PM

#13

Mightyboosh

mmm mmm good

Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 5,560

Quote:

Originally Posted by neeeel

So the subject of the statue DOES matter then?

Are you saying that it doesn't?

Quote:

Originally Posted by neeeel

If no one thought the statue had any meaning and importance, would this be a big deal?

Depends on whether or not you think a teenager performing lewd acts in public is a big deal or not?

Quote

09-30-2014 , 12:37 PM

#14

dereds

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 16,782

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mightyboosh

it doesn't change that this is actually quite offensive regardless of the subject of the statue, if it had been Mickey Mouse, it would still be crude and offensive, I'd be disappointed with one my kids if they did something like this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by neeeel

Regardless of the subject of the statue? Are you saying this is offensive to everyone?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mightyboosh

Are you saying that simulating oral sex in a public place, with a statue that has meaning and importance to some, and then posting the photo online isn't in any way offensive?

Quote:

Originally Posted by neeeel

So the subject of the statue DOES matter then?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mightyboosh

Are you saying that it doesn't?

I can see neeeel's point here

Quote

09-30-2014 , 12:37 PM

#15

POW

banned

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 942

Am I missing something here, what is the crime? Nothing is damaged. Let alone that its a kid on trial ffs! If you have beliefs, they are YOUR beliefs and other people have the right to let you know how ridiculous they are, that's life and freedom of speech.

Aside from the legal aspect, what was the kids intention? To challenge a religious institute? or to give his mates a laugh.

wwjd

Quote

09-30-2014 , 01:08 PM

#16

Naked_Rectitude

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 2,312

Quote:

Originally Posted by POW

It does seem kinda of silly to charge the kid, but there is also the other side of the coin where you wouldn't want to live in a society where people are dry humping landmarks all over the city, and where this is deemed acceptable behaviour, either.

This is a tough call for me, I won't lie, and it has absolutely nothing to do with me being a Christian, the statue is just a piece of stone.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 01:25 PM

#17

Lestat

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 10,998

Quote:

Originally Posted by Naked_Rectitude

I suspect that this is simply about respect. Not so much for the statue, or religion, but when you post stuff online that is questionable in nature, you're rubbing people's noses in the fact that you can do it, flaunt it, and get away with it, and people tend not to like that.

So where's the crime in that? If it were his own Jesus statue, he could post pics of him performing any sexual act he wanted. It doesn't matter if it offends your sensibilities.

Respect is overrated. You can't incarcerate someone just because they offend someone's sensibilities, lest you walk that slippery slope that justifies Muslims issuing fatwas and killing people who draw offensive cartoons that they find offensive.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 01:27 PM

#18

Lestat

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 10,998

Quote:

Originally Posted by Naked_Rectitude

He probably posted it because he didn't think what he did was illegal. Infuriating people is not a crime.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 01:31 PM

#19

Naked_Rectitude

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 2,312

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lestat

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lestat

He probably posted it because he didn't think what he did was illegal. Infuriating people is not a crime.

FWIW I'm not personally offended at some random kid humping a statue in Philly. I'm only trying to reason as to why they are making a statement out of him.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 01:32 PM

#20

neeeel

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,731

Quote:

Originally Posted by dereds

I can see neeeel's point here

thanks dereds for saving me having to dig out all the relevant posts

Quote

09-30-2014 , 01:49 PM

#21

tame_deuces

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 17,817

Quote:

Originally Posted by POW

Yep.

Putting a 14-year on trial for a silly picture is beyond idiocy. Might I suggest pepperspraying elderly for walking slowly next time.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 02:04 PM

#22

POW

banned

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 942

Quote:

Originally Posted by Naked_Rectitude

In this particular situation, only a cameraman was present (wasn't in front of a congregation or kids) and clothes were kept on so don't really understand the law getting involved here.

Should be treated the same as loitering, just be told to move on, mb a talking to about respecting property and people would go further.

Being punished for disrespecting someones beliefs seems counterproductive and creates more distance between people rather than addressing a problem by communicating.

Quote

09-30-2014 , 02:16 PM

#23

Naked_Rectitude

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 2,312

Quote:

Originally Posted by POW

Well, take loitering since you bring it up, or jaywalking, or some rarely enforced law. If a cop sees you jay-walking, they usually don't say anything, depending on the situation, of course. But if that same person posts the same jaywalking video on the internet to flaunt his jaywalking, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he got a ticket for it.

I really don't know if there is a charge here, like some obscene misdemeanor or something, but that's what I suspect. If there is no such charge, then I agree it's completely bogus, to now, where it's only moderately bogus.

Quote

10-01-2014 , 01:35 AM

#24

uke_master

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 16,013

While I'm fairly confident he won't spend a day in jail, pretty ****ty of the DA and cops for going after him for this after the fact. The briefest sanity check would reveal that OF COURSE a 14 year old kid made a sexual gesture, this is absolutely no big deal that requires being charged. If mimicking sex gestures was a crime my entire middle school friend group ought to be locked up. If the statute is correctly interpreted to apply to trivialities like this, then it should be rejected.

Quote

10-01-2014 , 01:45 AM

#25

Aaron W.

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 30,132

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2014...-statue-prison

Quote:

Truth Wins Out, a LGBT advocacy nonprofit, has argued that the law is unconstitutional because it violates the establishment clause—"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"—and free speech rights—"Congress shall make no law abridging the right to hump a statue of Jesus."

I'm not quite sure I agree with this interpretation of "free speech."

Quote

Page 1 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 1 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last