Implied BJ on Jesus, atheists support teen.

[Heywood]

In America, corpses are often put on display in a funeral home, not public display. Disturbing a body with a death requiring an inquest is a criminal act, and that includes any death where a physcician was not present. It's a health code violation, handling dead bodies safely requires training.

AND IT"S THE BODY OF AN ACTUAL PERSON YOU ETHICAL IDIOT! It's not 'venerated', it's loved by people in the midst of shock and grief and maybe outrage. I would have no sympathy for a cop shot dead while abusing a corpse, and I think a jury would let the shooter off lightly. That's because juries are mostly composed of people with normal sensibilities.

I'm not kidding when I say this, I intend it as serious advice that I hope you follow: you need to get professional help. There is something seriously wrong with you.

Mister Agenda....you are missing the point.

Others have claimed that prosecuting this teen is un-constitutional because the teen did not damage the property and has a right to free speech. I say they are wrong. The constitution protects free speech but it does not protect speech in which someone else's private property is commandeered and used as prop.

If desecrating a dead body by simulating "tea-bagging" is not protected under the constitution then desecrating a statue belonging to someone else by simulating a blow job is not protected either. You either have a constitutional right to commandeer props for your speech or you do not.

In my opinion, the Ferguson cop who shot and killed Michael Brown has no constitutional right to desecrate Brown's body by tea bagging it because he would be commandeering something that does not belong to him and using it as prop in his speech. If the cop actually did that, I would say his constitutional rights were not being violated if he was prosecuted and jailed for it even if they determined he shot the kid in self defense. In my opinion this teen has no constitutional right to desecrate someone else's statue by simulating a blow job with it under the same principle.

Now if the teen has no constitutional right to desecrate someone else's property(even if doing so causes no physical damage), then such actions can be criminalized.

Do I think this teen should be prosecuted. I do not. Do I think desecration which doesn't result in property damage be criminalized? I do not....and have said that multiple times in this thread. I acknowledge that such acts can be criminalized because the right to desecrate venerated things that do not belong to you does not exist in the constitution.

That is it....that is my position. Where is the flaw that makes me a sick individual who needs help? There are people here who do need help in formulating consistent positions....are you one of them?