The Criminal Mind of King David
mrahdert at VM.TEMPLE.EDU
Thu Dec 18 11:00:15 PST 1997
In my view, neither speaker qualifies as having "incited" the crowd
under relevant free speech prindciples, and it would violate the Free Speech
clause criminally to punish either one.
If we assume that both speakers engaged in criminally punishable
incitement, my view would be that the poresence or absence of religion in
their speech/conduct ought to make no difference.
Temple Law School.
At 10:50 AM 12/18/97 -0600, Sandy Levinson wrote:
>Recall some of the problems raised by J.S. Mill. One has a right to
>denounce the corn-merchant and, perhaps, even to call, in a general manner,
>for "retribution" by those who "love justice." But what if one gather in
>front of the merchant's house and whips up a crowd to exact retribution.
>Assume that just such a crowd gather, and it is addressed by two speakers.
>One, a secularist, says that the corn merchant is evil and should suffer
>just punishment from the people. The other says that the corn merchant has
>violated God's injunction to help the poor and then quotes the various
>psalms set out by Rick Duncan. The crowd moves on the merchant's house,
>burning it down (as the two speakers, whether for reasons of prudence or
>dismay at what is happening, head in the other direction). The police
>arrest both of the speakers and charge them with inciting the event. What
More information about the Religionlaw