1. Comment #390837 by benrinnes on June 24, 2009 at 11:01 am

Yup, voodoo, witchdoctors, southern baptists, not a lot of difference.

Other Comments by benrinnes

2. Comment #390839 by Sean on June 24, 2009 at 11:12 am

I posted this comment on the linked site, but I'm curious to get some opinions on the basic idea:

I would wonder that if people honestly believe in the power of imprecator prayer, why can’t they be charged with a crime if they admit to asking for the death or injury of another person?

It’s one thing to wish that someone would have an unfortunate end, but quite another to ask God to take action. If you truly believe in God, this is like pointing a gun at someone. It doesn’t matter if the gun is subsequently found to be unloaded, the intent was there, and the person wanted to do harm. Either you believe in God and you accept responsibility for asking him to do terrible things on your behalf, or you admit that these prayers are nothing more than an outlet for impotent rage.

Drake’s gun may or may not be loaded but he’s still waving it at people.

Other Comments by Sean

3. Comment #390841 by DoctorE on June 24, 2009 at 11:16 am

For more than 2 years I have been the victim of prayer assult... I felt nothing :)

Other Comments by DoctorE

4. Comment #390843 by zengardener on June 24, 2009 at 11:20 am

Either you believe in God and you accept responsibility for asking him to do terrible things on your behalf, or you admit that these prayers are nothing more than an outlet for impotent rage.

When have they ever accepted responsibility for god's actions? They will say, "god works in mysterious ways" and "god's will be done"

I don't think that you will convert many on this argument, but it is an interesting question.

Hey, all you prayers. Why don't you form a Corps of Divine Interventionist?

The CDI could go around the world, curing disease, ending droughts, and smiting evildoers.

Other Comments by zengardener

5. Comment #390848 by liberalartist on June 24, 2009 at 11:25 am

His confession to praying against Obama came after Kansas abortionist George Tiller was gunned down in church. That killing, Drake said, was an answer to his prayers.

yes, and the collapse of the World Trade Center was the answer to Bin Laden's prayers, so "god" must really work in mysterious ways...

Other Comments by liberalartist

6. Comment #390852 by zeroangel on June 24, 2009 at 11:32 am

Sean:

No way. Sounds like thought-crime to me. Just because someone wishes a person were dead, if they don't act on it, it shouldn't be prosecuted.

If I believe I have the powers of telekinesis and I attempt to choke someone Darth Vader style, I should not be charged with attempted murder.

Other Comments by zeroangel

7. Comment #390856 by black wolf on June 24, 2009 at 11:36 am

I commented thusly:
"It’s just a tiny - terrifyingly tiny - step from ‘I asked God to send someone to pull the trigger’ to ‘I was asked by God to pull the trigger’.
If you really believe the former is received by an entity who is inclined to fulfill your wish, then it is no moral difference at all to following through when the voices start speaking your inner frustrations.
Terrorism starts long before the first shot. "

Other Comments by black wolf

8. Comment #390858 by Sean on June 24, 2009 at 11:38 am

I wouldn't classify this as thought crime. It's one thing to wish someone dead, but quite another to try to invoke a force that you believe may actually do what you ask it to.

I may not believe that you are capable of murder, but wouldn't I have some kind of responsibility for even asking you to do such a thing? Perhaps not attempted murder in mine or Drake's case, but certainly there's a criminal intent there. People like him shouldn't be let off the hook simply because their celestial revolver isn't loaded.

Other Comments by Sean

9. Comment #390859 by zeroangel on June 24, 2009 at 11:42 am

Sean:

Well, as I said, do you think people should go to jail for trying to use telekinesis to choke someone?

How will you know for certain that the person really believes for certain it will work?

You can't, hence it's a thought crime. You are making it criminal to do something and believe it will work. The thought crime portion involves the believing it part. Are we going to give out lesser sentences if a judge deems they only believe it a little bit?

Other Comments by zeroangel

10. Comment #390863 by Sean on June 24, 2009 at 11:50 am

How will you know for certain that the person really believes for certain it will work?

In which case one could argue that the man with the unloaded gun isn't guilty of anything unless he confesses to believing that there were bullets in the gun.

How will you know for certain that the person really believes for certain it will work?

Ask them. If they express a belief in it working then some action can be taken. That may well include psychiatric help, but it's going to depend on circumstances and severity of what they're trying to do. Law already makes distinctions based on intent.

Edit: Sorry, I forgot the telekinesis question. I wouldn't say jail, but yes, I believe action can be taken. In that case it's probably psychiatric help, since telekinesis isn't one of the more commonly accepted delusions.

There is a big difference between wishing someone was dead and actually trying to make them dead, regardless of how ineffective their method.

Other Comments by Sean

11. Comment #390864 by black wolf on June 24, 2009 at 11:52 am

Sean,
Yes. It is the intent that counts, just as it counts for the purpose of determining a criminal conspiracy (which afaIk isn't illegal everywhere).

I'll try an analogy that I believe is very close to home:
A soldier sees an enemy coming towards him across a field. He fires, but the enemy isn't hit. The other soldiers also fire, seeing that their comrade has missed. It seems that none of them hit their target at all.
Then one of the soldiers notices that they've been firing blanks, and the enemy is still there and coming closer. He exchanges the magazine for primed bullets and removes the enemy.
People who try imprecatory prayer fancy themselves soldiers, just like irl murderers do.

We can't prevent it, but we can do our best to contribute to a society where such is not tolerated and not morally excused.

Other Comments by black wolf

12. Comment #390869 by mordacious1 on June 24, 2009 at 11:58 am

This is great. I pray that something bad happens to person X, when something bad eventually happens, I can prove to myself that god listens to prayers.

"Dear lord please smite Joe Smith". Ten years later poor Joe dies in a car crash. "Thank you lord".

Other Comments by mordacious1

13. Comment #390873 by earlted on June 24, 2009 at 12:39 pm

Imagine that mr.A prays to God to have mr.B killed. And mr.B prays to have mr.A killed. What will happen? Probably God, always happy to fulfill peoples prayers, will have them both killed. So, both A and B got what they wanted.

If all of us believed in such bullshit there wouldn´t be many people left alive.

Other Comments by earlted

14. Comment #390878 by Cartomancer on June 24, 2009 at 1:09 pm

Derided by some as a bad Judeo-Christian imitation of voodoo

A return to form then, basically. Haitian "voodoo" and related Caribbean magical practices are largely derived from the European witchcraft of the later middle ages, which colonists brought over from their mother countries. It is a myth that voodoo has its origins in African tribal magic, most of which is highly local in character and focussed on propitiating the spirits that govern the seasons and the cycles of nature. European witchcraft of the curses and cantrips variety owes a tremendous amount to the judaeo-christian tradition, which was itself heavily influenced by hellenistic, post-roman and early medieval magical culture. It's all nonsense from the same fountainhead, which is why there are indeed all those maledictions and hexes in the old testament (and not a few mentions of them in the new).

Other Comments by Cartomancer

15. Comment #390881 by zeroangel on June 24, 2009 at 1:11 pm

Blackwolf / Sean:

The difference is that any reasonable person will understand that those soldiers clearly intended to kill their enemy since loaded guns demonstrably cause death. The religious folks in question can easily say (when faced with jail time) that they don't really expect that god will certainly answer their prayers (whether they believe it's possible or not).

A more accurate analogy would be soldiers who point their fingers at bad guys and go "bang, bang." There might be wackos among them that honestly believe it's possible that it might work, but anyone possessed of evidence can plainly see it doesn't work.

Psychiatric help is reasonable, depending on the severity, but not jail time. I suspect you are going to have 1st Amendment issues though.

Other Comments by zeroangel

16. Comment #390882 by black wolf on June 24, 2009 at 1:16 pm

14. Comment #390878 by Cartomancer,
yup, and they preserved a lot of the underlying nonsense in the belief that Bible verses in and of themselves carry some transformative power, a bit of the Holy Spirit. I think I read that among many others, preachers like Spurgeon espoused this view. Anyway, it still is a strong current in contemporary apologetic and witnessing methods. And it is the explanation for why so many believers keep lobbing Bible verses at nonbelievers even thought they know perfectly well it is rationally useless. Plain primitive magical thinking.

Other Comments by black wolf

17. Comment #390886 by SASnSA on June 24, 2009 at 1:23 pm

Now, what happens if someone having heard of this preacher's prayer decides to be "God's hands on Earth" and assassinate president Obama? Does the preacher get arrested on conspiracy charges?

Other Comments by SASnSA

18. Comment #390889 by black wolf on June 24, 2009 at 1:27 pm

zeroangel,
of course criminalizing immoral belief that is subjectively indistinguishable from criminal action doesn't work. If they want to play the denial card and out themselves as hypocrites to their fellow believers, it's all their problem. I agree psychiatric help would be most appropriate - but sadly most societies wont pay for it if no actual harm has been done yet. What I fear and what is a recurring problem is that the inaction of the deity leads to a piling up of frustration that sometimes unloads and actually kills people.

There we still face that embarrassing social taboo that it's somehow inappropriate to loudly and clearly tell people that they are not only wrong but somewhat likely have a problem with their mental faculties if they believe that supernatural suspension of the laws of the universe can occur by their personal wishes, and therefore should seek counseling or stronger help soon. Instead we gaze at our toes until someone inevitably receives the physically real bullet from the frustrated and unrequitedly loving godbotherer.

Other Comments by black wolf

19. Comment #390892 by UncleVanya on June 24, 2009 at 1:33 pm

To my mind prayer always seems incompatible with the idea of a truly omnipotent god. What are you actually doing? Calling facts to god's attention that he might not know about? Encouraging him to use his judgement in a particular way? If god is really omnipotent then surely he'll do what's right, even if a thousand prayers ask him to do something else?

If these guys think that god could be encouraged to cause bad things to someone that didn't deserve it, they can't think much of him.

Other Comments by UncleVanya

20. Comment #390893 by zeroangel on June 24, 2009 at 1:34 pm

black wolf:

It seems we more or less agree. In some ways I suppose it is a problem that we can't arrest or in some way deal with potential criminals before they actually commit a crime. On the other hand... well you get the idea.

Other Comments by zeroangel

21. Comment #390898 by Gregg Townsend on June 24, 2009 at 1:38 pm

John Wing's Prayer

[edit] Zero, It's John Wing's song, "I hope ya die."

Other Comments by Gregg Townsend

22. Comment #390902 by zeroangel on June 24, 2009 at 1:40 pm

Gregg:

Heya bud. I can't get youtube here. I am so curious, what is the link?

Other Comments by zeroangel

23. Comment #390903 by robaylesbury on June 24, 2009 at 1:42 pm

They've definitely had a reasonectomy.

Other Comments by robaylesbury

24. Comment #390905 by black wolf on June 24, 2009 at 1:44 pm

zeroangel:
http://www.metrolyrics.com/i-hope-you-die-lyrics-rodney-carrington.html

edit: this of course are the lyrics to the song video Gregg posted, not aimed at you in content lol.

Other Comments by black wolf

25. Comment #390913 by Steven Mading on June 24, 2009 at 2:05 pm

Xeroangel, the point you're not getting is that IF these people believe imprecatory prayer works, and they engage in using it, and yet at the same time think they themselves are blameless for the results, then that proves they have hypocritically inconsistent beliefs. If they don't think they themselves are to blame, then that means that at some level they realize the whole notion of imprecatory prayer being effective is bullshit.

Other Comments by Steven Mading

26. Comment #390915 by zeroangel on June 24, 2009 at 2:11 pm

Steven:

Oh I get. They are hypocrits and wackos. I am just not keen on punishing people based on a determination of how strongly they believe something meta-physical. You can't "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" that a person really believes imprecatory prayer works. That's the problem.

EDIT: There is a difference between trying to kill someone using demonstrably effective methods and someone trying to use methods that have never been shown to be effective. The former is criminal and the latter is either stupid / insane. Being stupid or insane isn't criminal and if you are going to try and make religious stupidity criminal you are going to have 1st Amendment issues.

Other Comments by zeroangel

27. Comment #390916 by dloubet on June 24, 2009 at 2:15 pm

If the god exists, then he's guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.

If the god doesn't exist, then we have an interesting situation. People have been caught and charged with conspiracy to commit murder when they contacted what they thought was a hitman, but was instead an officer of the law, and tried to get them to kill someone. In such an instance, it could be argued that since they were still charged even thought the hitman never really existed, it therefore shouldn't really matter if the god doesn't exist either, it's still conspiracy.

Of course, I'm no lawyer, and applying logic to law seldom accomplishes anything, but I just thought I'd throw that in.

Other Comments by dloubet

28. Comment #390918 by Chayanov on June 24, 2009 at 2:21 pm

UncleVanya @ 19: Not only that, but prayer is also incompatible with free will. If you can get God to intercede on your behalf, then people aren't truly free in what they can do.

Also, Christians constantly tell me that the "bad" stuff in the Old Testament doesn't apply because of Jesus and the New Testament. But then we see where they go back to the Old Testament to try and get God to smite their enemies.

Christian hypocrisy. But of course I repeat myself.

Other Comments by Chayanov

29. Comment #390921 by kaiserkriss on June 24, 2009 at 2:49 pm

I'm with Steven Mading on this one. If they don't believe their prayers will work, then they are hypocrites and rabble rousers,and it should be publicly proclaimed as hypocrisy and chest pounding. If they do truly believe in the power of prayer, they should be convicted of, in this case, attempted murder.

Regardless, these whack jobs should be prosecuted and called. Let's see where the chips (belief)falls when push comes to shove. People have been convicted and killed for a lot less. Think of toy guns pointed at Police.. jcw

Other Comments by kaiserkriss

30. Comment #390922 by Border Collie on June 24, 2009 at 2:56 pm

At least he's not in Texas. I opened up the article and looked at his photo ... I knew he'd have one of those idiotic Baptist grins on his face! Maybe the Secret Service should show up on his doorstep and screw with his mind. Retch ...

Surely, Nonstampcollector has something to say about this issue ...

Other Comments by Border Collie

31. Comment #390927 by zeroangel on June 24, 2009 at 3:26 pm

kaiserkriss:

Think of toy guns pointed at Police.. jcw

If you are refering to a police officer reasonably mistaking a toy gun for a real one and then taking action to defend himself against a perceived threat, that is a very different thing.

Imagine this scenario:

Wackjob A goes to jail for praying for Person B's death.

Later, Person C (who dislikes Person D) tells D that he is going to place a spell on D that will result in D's death. D takes this seriously (or at least pretends to take it seriously) and calls the police. The authorities arrest C (being forced to do something because of the precedent) whereupon C claims he doesn't believe it at all and was just trying to scare D. D demands that the authorities "prove" C does, in fact, believe it will work. Thus begins a completely wasteful use of taxpayer's money.

EDIT: If you make certain kinds of religious beliefs (stupidity) illegal you will have 1st Amendment issues. If you make certain types of prayer (speech) illegal, you will have 1st Amendment issues. It's a bad idea.

Other Comments by zeroangel

32. Comment #390931 by rod-the-farmer on June 24, 2009 at 4:15 pm

Imagine person B hearing person A praying to god to kill person B. It is self-defense, he says, and in a pre emptive strike, kills person A. Perhaps (IANAL) his defense could be that he truly believed in god, and thought his life was literally at stake. Seems to me he might have a case. Watch this one hit the court news.

Like DoctorE, I too have been the victim of imprecatory prayer. Someone tried to turn me into a newt.

I got better.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

33. Comment #390932 by Sean on June 24, 2009 at 4:19 pm

I'd consider it a win if Drake were to simply admit that his prayers are ineffective.

Other Comments by Sean

34. Comment #390936 by j.mills on June 24, 2009 at 5:02 pm

Christ, wot a crop of sh*te shibboleths in one article!

Though Scripture says Jesus told his followers to love their enemies and pray for them, the Bible also depicts King David pleading with God to vanquish his adversaries.

Thus, cherry-picking.

“I never wish evil upon my enemies,” Klingenschmitt said, “but the justice of God is not evil.”

Humpty-Dumpty: words mean what I say they mean.

Klingenschmitt asked God “in Jesus’ name” to “cut off their descendents” and “replace them with Godly people.”

No True Scotsman from one side...

Many, including some leaders of Drake’s own Southern Baptist Convention, argue Drake and Klingenschmitt are on the fringe of Christianity.

...and No True Scotsman from the other.

Kansas abortionist George Tiller was gunned down in church. That killing, Drake said, was an answer to his prayers.

Moral cowardice. If Drake was happy to consider murder to be god's will, why didn't the gutless wretch do it himself?

“Of our prayers, 98 percent should be good prayers and 2 percent should be imprecatory.” [said Drake]

Private revelation. I'd be fascinated to know how he arrived at that statistic...

Other Comments by j.mills

35. Comment #390941 by Ignorant Amos on June 24, 2009 at 5:44 pm

The Yorkshire Ripper told police he heard gods voice telling him to kill prostitutes.

Dubbya Bush stated he was personaly told by god that invading Iraq was the right thing to do.

Ones in the looney bin, the other isn't.

Prayers to bring bad stuff upon folk because one thinks they are bad and deserve it. Where will the bollocks end? Whack jobs the whole lot of them. And theres me just finished wading through the scientology articles and thinking "how more ludricous can it get?"

Other Comments by Ignorant Amos

36. Comment #390942 by Ignorant Amos on June 24, 2009 at 5:51 pm

It is no longer a "thought" once it is out of your mouth.....is this not incitement?

Other Comments by Ignorant Amos

37. Comment #390943 by kaiserkriss on June 24, 2009 at 5:55 pm

zeroangel:

You are correct; I used a poor example. I should have written extended index finger pointed at police together with a shooting motion. The cops take real offence to that and will arrest you for threatening violence.jcw

Other Comments by kaiserkriss

38. Comment #390944 by zeroangel on June 24, 2009 at 6:00 pm

kaiserkriss:

Well, I am not a lawyer either and unaware of the relevant laws (are we both from the US?) but I imagine there are good reasons for any overt threat to a police officer to constitute cause for concern. Still, I think there's a distinction between implicitly threatening to shoot someone and praying for an unseen force to do it. Either way, you won't get charged with attempted murder.

Ignorant Amos:

If you consider trying to incite imagery beings to violence as "incitement" I guess so. It seems the law recognizes these imaginary beings can't be treated as real.

Other Comments by zeroangel

39. Comment #390947 by Michael Gray on June 24, 2009 at 6:31 pm

It is a "Conspiracy to murder" engaged in with the know gangster: Yahweh.
It might be a bit difficult to get Yahweh to court, though. He is an expert at hiding.

Other Comments by Michael Gray

40. Comment #390954 by WilliamP on June 24, 2009 at 6:56 pm

Just wait until the subjects of these prayers die at an old age of natural causes. I bet the faithful will take that as evidence of the power of prayer.

Other Comments by WilliamP

41. Comment #390955 by Ignorant Amos on June 24, 2009 at 7:22 pm

38. Comment #390944 by zeroangel

If you consider trying to incite imagery beings to violence as "incitement" I guess so. It seems the law recognizes these imaginary beings can't be treated as real.

I've had a think about this.......

If I was to wish that the tooth fairy make all Obamas teeth rot and fall out....and then told people, theyed laugh and call me bonkers.

When a Pastor claims he has prayed to god that some evil befall Obama.....its definitely a different ball game.

No one (adult) believes in the tooth fairy and no one would consider assissting in making my wish come true.

God and religious leaders are a totally different ball game however.

Does it not say "In God we Trust" on the U.S.currency....and what about the seriousness involved in taking an oath on the bible. History is record of nutjobs doing all sorts of crazy shit because they've heard other nutjobs praying for it to happen. Get what I mean?

Then there's the Mullahs on British streets!!!

Other Comments by Ignorant Amos

42. Comment #390956 by Liveliest Crib on June 24, 2009 at 7:30 pm

Sean @ Comment #390839:

I would wonder that if people honestly believe in the power of imprecator prayer, why can’t they be charged with a crime if they admit to asking for the death or injury of another person?

Heh, I am a lawyer in the U.S., and I think I'll chime in here. :)

Actually, Sean, your question is one that law students are forced to confront in first-year criminal law. Believe it or not, the law actually recognizes factual impossibility as a defense in such a case.

Every crime (with the exception of certain "strict liability" crimes") requires an act and a state of mind. Here, as you note, the state of mind is pretty clear: The actor intends someone's death.

In most of the hypothetical fact patterns (at least that I have seen) in which the conundrum is presented to law students, the actor is a practitioner of voodoo. He genuinely acts by, say, lighting fire to a doll, believing that the person the doll represents will also burst into flames, or otherwise suffer harm. Is he guilty of attempting a crime? Technically, yes.

But the sheer impossibility of his intentions' actually manifesting in the real world (that is, the action cannot possibly cause the desired effect) is enough not to prosecute. We'd end up prosecuting a lot of harmless weirdos if we ventured down that path.

In the case of this foolish reverend, I think it's even arguable that he isn't acting at all. For criminal law purposes, acts are voluntary, bodily movements. Praying or wishing wouldn't count.

But you're instincts are correct about actions and intent in general. And indeed, the further one moved from sheer, nonsensical impossibility, the more serious the law would take your concerns.

Consider, for instance, someone who genuinely believes that sugar is lethal poison. If that someone were your roommate, and putting sugar in your morning coffee every morning in a genuine attempt to murder you, you just might have a case.

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

43. Comment #390957 by Liveliest Crib on June 24, 2009 at 7:37 pm

SASnSA @ Comment #390886:

Now, what happens if someone having heard of this preacher's prayer decides to be "God's hands on Earth" and assassinate president Obama? Does the preacher get arrested on conspiracy charges?

This one's easier. :)

No. Conspiracy, by definition, is an agreement to commit a crime. Nobody in your proposed scenario got together and agreed to anything.

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

44. Comment #390959 by Liveliest Crib on June 24, 2009 at 7:48 pm

rod-the-farmer @ Comment #390931

Imagine person B hearing person A praying to god to kill person B. It is self-defense, he says, and in a pre emptive strike, kills person A. Perhaps (IANAL) his defense could be that he truly believed in god, and thought his life was literally at stake. Seems to me he might have a case. Watch this one hit the court news.

Heh, preemptive strikes might have merit in the world of international politics, but not in courtrooms. (At least, not in U.S. courtrooms.) The use of self defense requires not merely an reasonable belief that harm is about to come to you, but a reasonable belief that imminent harm is about to come to you.

But, hey, let's say you genuinely do believe that the answer to an imprecatory prayer will actually happen immediately -- that you really will be struck down right now if the guy next to you is allowed to continue praying. In that case, the question becomes whether the belief in the imminent harm is reasonable. Not likely. (Though I suppose it's possible a jury full of religious morons might buy the argument.)

On an interesting note, there are some jurisdictions that recognize "Imperfect Self Defense," in which the belief in the imminent harm need not be reasonable, just genuine. If our hypothetical person were tried in such a jurisdiction, he might have a case, but only to mitigate murder to manslaughter, not for an acquittal.

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

45. Comment #390971 by zeroangel on June 24, 2009 at 9:16 pm

Awesome. Glad to have a lawyer here to set us straight.

So, it seems that the law does not take these folks seriously and for good reason. Like Liveliest Crib said:

We'd end up prosecuting a lot of harmless weirdos if we ventured down that path.

...and no doubt clog up already clogged courts.

Ignorant Amos:

Oh I get what you mean, and believe me, I wish there were a way to weed out the real crazies. I just fear the slippery slope. What makes the tooth fairy believer the harmless wacko and the "mainstream" believer worthy of jail? Which religions get "dangerous" status and which get "bonkers" status? Is the law going to set precedents about some irrational beliefs being less irrational then others? It's worrisome to me. As you point out, it's bad enough with it on the money.

Other Comments by zeroangel

46. Comment #391005 by Ignorant Amos on June 25, 2009 at 12:43 am

45. Comment #390971 by zeroangel

I agree that these edgits and their imprecator prayers are no different than all the rest of the woo woo folk. What concerns me more and its interesting that this article has raised the issue, is that the defining lines about what is acceptable are getting more and more blurred.

For instance, those Phelps losers fall into the "dangerous" category and I believe should be in jail for all sorts of reasons and I'm guess there is a law being broke somewhere as to what they are doing.

But look at the situation in general, especially in the States. The religious get away with "murder" and moral misconduct, right, left and centre. The laws and the government give the lunatic religious so much succour. Everything from the distasteful tax relief of the L.Ron brigade to the cover up of the catholic paedophile rings to the nutty Jehovahs Witness malarky that costs lives. Now we have a fruit bat pastor declaring that the president be struck done by the hand of god, which is his right I suppose until he says it from the pulpit where one of his minions wanting to make a name, just might have a crack at the challenge. Unlikely to succeed I grant you, but the colateral damge of such an insane notion is too much of a risk. Now I'm all for free speech and that, but isn't there something that claims that when it becomes dangerous the law can step in....at the very least a commital order should be the order of the day.

As you say, at what stage is the tipping point between "out to lunch" and "psychotically dangerous"?

Other Comments by Ignorant Amos

47. Comment #391018 by DragonOfColour on June 25, 2009 at 2:06 am

Can't help thinking of Shakespeare:

'Double double, toil and trouble...
Fire burn and caultron bubble...!'

That pastor may look innocent but he has a hooked nose with a wart on it!

Other Comments by DragonOfColour

48. Comment #391031 by Flapjack on June 25, 2009 at 2:46 am

Pastor Wiley Drake brought to mind the Gypsy crone in Sam Raimi's horror flick "Drag me to hell". At least the gypsy had the vague excuse that the person she cursed with eternal damnation was a bank clerk prepared to repossess her home for defaulting on the mortgage.
Wiley Drake seems to treat it as a game of "invoke god to consign to eternal damnation anyone I don't particularly agree with"!
Gypsys in cheesy horror films are therefore mildly less vindictive than Pastor Wiley Drake.

Other Comments by Flapjack

49. Comment #391035 by PERSON on June 25, 2009 at 3:02 am

"If I believe I have the powers of telekinesis and I attempt to choke someone Darth Vader style, I should not be charged with attempted murder."
Perhaps not, but your desire to murder people should certainly be taken into account, for example if you are a murder suspect.

Other Comments by PERSON

50. Comment #391074 by jpgj on June 25, 2009 at 5:58 am

Sean

You don't have to BELIEVE in guns they're real.

The God this whatever is praying isn't real. He may be guilty of some kind of seditious witchcraft by medieval standards, but do we punish witches?

Other Comments by jpgj