Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Christian Stones Gay Man To Death in Pennsylvania


From the New York Daily News:
A 28-year-old Pennsylvania man has been charged with murder after telling police he stoned to death a 70-year-old man after the senior citizen allegedly made unwanted sexual advances toward him, authorities said Friday.

John Joe Thomas of Upper Darby told police he beat Murray Seidman using a sock that was stuffed with rocks because he read in the Old Testament that homosexuals should be stoned to death.

The relationship between the two is not known, but police said Thomas was the sole beneficiary of Seidman's will.

When Seidman, a worker in the laundry department at an area hospital, allegedly hit on the young man Thomas said he received a message in his prayers that he must kill Seidman.

The elderly man was hit in the head about 10 times, police said.

Thomas left Seidman dead in his Lansdowne apartment but later returned days later, calling police on Jan. 12 to make it appear like he just found the body, authorities said.

Delaware County medical Examiner Fredric Hellman ruled that Seidman had been dead for five to 10 days before police found him.

Cops found Thomas crying in the hallway saying "I'm not going down there again, there is too much blood,' according to court documents.
The New York Daily News does not make it clear whether the young man declares himself to be a Christian, or not. But, that's what it looks like to me. He seems to believe gays are terribly guilty of some grave offense. He got the idea from the Bible. He thought about it, prayed, and then decided to follow what he had read in the Bible.

If he had known the Bible better, he would not have done what he did. He would have read the account of the woman caught in Adultery (also declared to be an abominable sin), and he would have seen that Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Had he looked into the issue more deeply, he would have found there is no consensus, anywhere in the world (except Nigeria) for his interpretation of the Scriptures.

I have a feeling that that would not have stopped the young man, however. One gets the impression from the facts of the story (Thomas was the sole inheritor of Seidner's estate) that when he stoned the old man to death, he was really stoning himself.

If you catch my drift.

8 comments:

Damien said...

Pastorius,

Just what we need, another hate filled religious nut job.

cjk said...

Sounds like he was also filled with greed.
Nothing new using religion as a cover for greed.
That is EXACTLY what Mo' (piss be upon him) did.

Anonymous said...

A great example of an idiot who thought he knew better and acted on it.

Hope he gets the punishment he deserves.

Pastorius said...

I don't think he will. Here's how I think the trial will play out. I believe it will be revealed the young man is gay. His attorney will argue that the repressive atmosphere created by Christians caused the man to have a terrible guilt complex, which caused him to go crazy and think he had no choice but to kill the old man.

Anonymous said...

What the hell! But I think you are spot on with that Pastorius.

My question is, why the hell can't Christians follow Christ at least as efficiently as Muslims follow Mohammed?

Anonymous said...

active christians, not christians becuase they were born into nominally christian homes do, more or less, otherwise we would see a very different world.

this guy is such an outlier that it is virtually an anomoly.

if you had to wonder through a village filled with very religious jews, or christians, who were just about to come pouring out the doors of the church would you think you might be attacked or killed?

no.

now make that village filled with very religious muslims pouring out the doors of a mosque,.......

Pastorius said...

rumcrook said: this guy is such an outlier that it is virtually an anomoly.


I respond: Absolutely. I agree. Still, when something like this happens, I feel the necessity to report on it for the sake of clarity.

cjk said...

And that feeling of necessity is absolutely correct and good IMO.