In a very rare occasion, I watched the Fox News channel today. While doing so, I caught the report of the California man who was arrested in February of last year for reading the Bible out loud in public. The arresting officer charged him, as well as two others, for preaching to a "captive audience" -- an audience who is, as they claim, forced to listen because the individuals cannot leave an area.
Robert Tyler, the lawyer defending the man and his church, claims this is absolutely ridiculous. He feels that if the use of the captive audience argument holds ground, who's to say that they won't restrict public reading of the Bible in parks? Also, he mentioned the man was cited for "impeding an open business". However, the DMV was not open at the time.
Mark Mackey, the defendant, is a member of the Calvary Chapel Hemet, a local "evangelical" church which practices the public testimonials and Scripture reading to spread the message of the Gospel.
The prosecuting attorney, Dan Conaway, says the doctrine of "captive audience" does apply because he was "creating an intimidating situation for people who simply want to get their drivers licenses renewed" (Kennedy, 2012). Mr. Conaway believes that it's okay to preach in public, but not when the listeners can't leave.
He commented further: “He does not have the right to intimidate others and force them to listen and impede their ability to do normal business activities such as going to the DMV" (Kennedy).
Tyler argues there is much more than simple intimidation to constitute using the captive audience argument. He says there must be a threat, which in this case, reading the Bible is not threatening.
OK. Now that we have the general summary of story, allow me to put my spin on it.
First off, arguing in favor of the state of California, many may complain that this was "religious bigotry". But let me ask you this. Would any of you be intimidated/uncomfortable if someone had starting reading the Qu'ran out loud and preaching Islam? How about Buddhism? Worse yet, how about Satanism? Would any of you honestly let this person preach their message to you?
OK. I finally have that off of my chest. Now, arguing in favor of Mr. Mackey and his church, he was not harming anyone, and since the DMV was not open and the listeners were most likely waiting OUTSIDE... they were allowed to leave. Mr. Mackey doesn't come across as someone who would hold a gun to your head forcing his religious beliefs down your throat. On the contrary, he was simply reading. No one was coerced to accept, let alone listen, to his message. If people really were offended, they would have kindly asked him to stop. I'm sure he would've been more than happy to oblige.
My final opinion is this: Mark Mackey should not be charged with any sort of a crime. He did nothing wrong. No lives were threatened. On the other hand, I would advise him and others for future reference to carefully choose their spots. Not everyone is going to be nice. Not everyone is going to be peaceful or respectful. It's very likely that violence could erupt. And if there's a possibility of violence, a state, if not the federal government, can make it illegal to read any religious scripture in public, therefore re-categorizing it as "disturbing the peace" rather than preaching to a "captive audience".
Overall, we must be wary of restricting speech. Although it's our right as citizens, we have to make sure that our message will not incite violence against us or others. Let's use our freedom of speech responsibly.
References:
Kennedy, Dougals. Taking liberties: Arrested for reading the Bible? March 29, 2012. Retrieved March 29, 2012 from http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/03/29/taking-liberties-arrested-for-reading-bible/
No comments:
Post a Comment