Man Who Used Racial Slurs Sentenced To Church

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

MrsSpringsteen

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
29,244
Location
Edge's beanie closet
I wonder if it will make any sort of difference in his life...interesting that the judge gave him that choice.

CINCINNATI -- A judge has sentenced a suburban Cincinnati man to attend services for six weeks at a black church for threatening to punch a black cab driver and using racial slurs.

Judge William Mallory Jr. told 36-year-old Brett Haines, "It seems readily apparent to me that you don't like black people. That's OK with me. But you have to understand that you are at the whim and authority of a black judge."

Mallory let Haines choose between attending the black church for six Sundays or spending 30 days in jail. Haines said he'd try the church, although he doesn't usually worship on Sunday.

Mallory offered Haines the choice Friday after Haines was convicted of disorderly conduct. He was arrested in November after threatening cab driver David Wilson and Wilson's wife.


Mallory said he was concerned about maintaining the separation between church and state, so the judge asked Haines whether the option would offend him.

Haines said he would like to try it.

The cab driver said he wished Haines had been jailed instead because, in his words, "Church don't change everybody."
 
deep said:

and we keep a white man out of jail :up:

Well it was an African American judge's idea

Maybe being in a loving environment with African Americans might teach this ignoramus a thing or two. Doubtful but one never knows.
 
I wonder if the judge arranged this in advance with some particular black minister? And how the congregation feels about it?

I'm trying to imagine what exactly would transpire if some judge sent someone to our synagogue for anti-Semitic slurs. Weird thought. Not bad, just...weird. I'm all for mandatory volunteering at an appropriate community center, but a house of worship...hmm...

I guess you could regard it as a worthy opportunity to practice compassion and forgiveness. But this does place an unsolicited burden on the congregation, no?
 
yolland said:
I wonder if the judge arranged this in advance with some particular black minister? And how the congregation feels about it?

I'm trying to imagine what exactly would transpire if some judge sent someone to our synagogue for anti-Semitic slurs. Weird thought. Not bad, just...weird. I'm all for mandatory volunteering at an appropriate community center, but a house of worship...hmm...

I guess you could regard it as a worthy opportunity to practice compassion and forgiveness. But this does place an unsolicited burden on the congregation, no?

Well, the congregation would likely be open to anyone attending. I just hope the press doesn't go along for the ride and turn it into a circus atmosphere.
 
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Well, the congregation would likely be open to anyone attending. I just hope the press doesn't go along for the ride and turn it into a circus atmosphere.
Ah good point. Synagogues are of course open to the public too, but it's true we tend to not get too many random lost souls dropping in for guidance, unless they're Jewish :wink: . Yeah, it would be pretty loathsome if the media got involved.
 
What, no THEOCRACY WATCH in the title?

This seems more worthy than a Christian group boycotting gay Barbie dolls.
 
yolland said:
I wonder if the judge arranged this in advance with some particular black minister? And how the congregation feels about it?

.......................

I guess you could regard it as a worthy opportunity to practice compassion and forgiveness. But this does place an unsolicited burden on the congregation, no?

Well, if they feel anything but compassion or foregiveness, then that kind of defeats the purpose of being part of a church congregation :shrug:

Going to the services might not help, but I doubt 30 days in the slammer would be a more recuperative alternative.
 
Even though sitting through six weeks worth of services would be a punishment to me, it's still a silly sentence.
 
A_Wanderer said:
What, no THEOCRACY WATCH in the title?

This seems more worthy than a Christian group boycotting gay Barbie dolls.

That is a worthy issue by itself - is it a violation of the Establishment Clause to give a person the option to partake in a religious service to satisfy a government imposed requirement?
 
Back
Top Bottom