- Joined
- Aug 27, 2005
- Messages
- 43,602
- Reaction score
- 26,256
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court is getting involved in the legal fight over the anti-gay protesters who show up at military funerals with inflammatory messages like "Thank God for dead soldiers."
The court agreed Monday to consider whether the protesters' message, no matter how provocative and upsetting, is protected by the First Amendment. Members of a Kansas-based church have picketed military funerals to spread their belief that U.S. deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq are punishment for the nation's tolerance of homosexuality.
The justices will hear an appeal from the father of a Marine killed in Iraq to reinstate a $5 million verdict against the protesters, after they picketed outside his son's funeral in Maryland.
It's disgusting to me.
But it is also free speech.
The question, I would think, is: "Did they, in performing this protest, violate another person's rights or a law?"
Not knowing the particulars, I can't answer that question.
And no one ever said you had to be sane to freely speak.
Protesting a funeral is a great way to generate hatred against your cause.
That's their goal. Phelps and his group aren't a church, they're a roving group of scam artists. They say inflammatory **** to provoke responses from individuals and states, then file lawsuits and seek legal fees. Their legal fees just so happen to be paid to Phelps's law firm.
That being said, I'd be surprised if this is anything other than a 9-0 affirm.
So it's another example of why Lawyers should be strangled at graduation?
OK, so this is going to be about free speech. No problem, except that some people don't seem to get it that, with rights, come responsibilities. You must be familiar with the notion that free speech does not grant one to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. What the Supremes will be deciding will be the extent of limitations involved in free speech. Does it give Fred Phelps the right to invade the privacy of others, and disrupt the grieving of families during funerals with this.................?
Here is the deal, folks. God gives us the right of freedom of speech, but that does not mean that we can trample the rights of others in the process. Phelps and his klan can rant all day about whether or not "God hates fags". However, when they disrupt the funerals of soldiers, they have crossed the line, and I hope that the family of the dead soldier these punks protested gets every dime from them.
Finally, in the picture, Mrs. Phelps is right about one thing, although I am sure she didn't intend it. Yes, I thank God every day for dead soldiers, because without those who spilled their blood to defend us, there would be no United States of America. However, unlike Mrs. Phelps, I thank those soldiers, both straight and gay, who made the ultimate sacrifice, and gave their last measure, to keep America a free nation. We all die, eventually, and I believe that our rewards in the afterlife are commensurate with how we lived our lives. In that context, I truly believe that it sucks to be part of the Phelps klan, who (IMHO) will be enshrined in everlasting shame, once they leave this world.
Article is here.
EDIT: Check out the picture, and see how patriotic Mrs. Phelps is, with her desecration of the flag. She is a disgusting excuse for a human being, and a waste of good oxygen.
So...if someone stands across the street from NAACP headquarters with a "Thank God for dead black people"...that's free speech?
Certainly a grieving mother or father is just as outraged at a Thank God for dead soldiers sign.
Should a "Thank God your daughter has been murdered" sign be tolerated as any grieving father who has had say...his daughter raped and killed and being led out of court after a guilty verdict?
I've been to Arlington for funerals, should any in my group have seen these folk...we would have fed the lil kiddie with the target sign to the Washington DC Zoo animals and taken the parents for a hunting expedition with Dick Cheney.
I disagree. If they are standing across the street with their picket signs, they are well within their rights. If they are barging in on a privately owned cemetery plot, then they are trespassing, which isn't a free speech issue.
Yes, they have the right to protest. But do they have a right to disrupt a person's grieving with their protest?
The damage would be of a personal injury type. Personal injuries generally involve money being given as compensation for injuries received. It's a civil matter, not a criminal one. If the court believes that such protesting can actually cause mental harm to someone, even if the protests is taking place on public property, then why shouldn't the person/people harmed receive compensation?
Considering other things people have gotten compensation for, I can easily see how the bereaved should get their compensation. Technically, I pretty sure this wouldn't even make the protests illegal. It should actually just set a precedence for such lawsuits.
I see it as someone suing a rag magazine for saying something that isn't true about a celebrity.
Yep.
For the same reason that the rest of the sue-happy whiners shouldn't.
Funny. I see it as someone suing Starbucks when they spill hot coffee on themselves.:roll:
Yes, they have the right to protest. But do they have a right to disrupt a person's grieving with their protest? The damage would be of a personal injury type. Personal injuries generally involve money being given as compensation for injuries received. It's a civil matter, not a criminal one. If the court believes that such protesting can actually cause mental harm to someone, even if the protests is taking place on public property, then why shouldn't the person/people harmed receive compensation?
Considering other things people have gotten compensation for, I can easily see how the bereaved should get their compensation. Technically, I pretty sure this wouldn't even make the protests illegal. It should actually just set a precedence for such lawsuits.
I see it as someone suing a rag magazine for saying something that isn't true about a celebrity.
Nope that's hate speech because they are a minority and are immune from protests.So...if someone stands across the street from NAACP headquarters with a "Thank God for dead black people"...that's free speech?
Certainly a grieving mother or father is just as outraged at a Thank God for dead soldiers sign.
Should a "Thank God your daughter has been murdered" sign be tolerated as any grieving father who has had say...his daughter raped and killed and being led out of court after a guilty verdict?
I've been to Arlington for funerals, should any in my group have seen these folk...we would have fed the lil kiddie with the target sign to the Washington DC Zoo animals and taken the parents for a hunting expedition with Dick Cheney.
OK, so this is going to be about free speech. No problem, except that some people don't seem to get it that, with rights, come responsibilities. You must be familiar with the notion that free speech does not grant one to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. What the Supremes will be deciding will be the extent of limitations involved in free speech. Does it give Fred Phelps the right to invade the privacy of others, and disrupt the grieving of families during funerals with this.................?
Here is the deal, folks. God gives us the right of freedom of speech, but that does not mean that we can trample the rights of others in the process. Phelps and his klan can rant all day about whether or not "God hates fags". However, when they disrupt the funerals of soldiers, they have crossed the line, and I hope that the family of the dead soldier these punks protested gets every dime from them.
Finally, in the picture, Mrs. Phelps is right about one thing, although I am sure she didn't intend it. Yes, I thank God every day for dead soldiers, because without those who spilled their blood to defend us, there would be no United States of America. However, unlike Mrs. Phelps, I thank those soldiers, both straight and gay, who made the ultimate sacrifice, and gave their last measure, to keep America a free nation. We all die, eventually, and I believe that our rewards in the afterlife are commensurate with how we lived our lives. In that context, I truly believe that it sucks to be part of the Phelps klan, who (IMHO) will be enshrined in everlasting shame, once they leave this world.
Article is here.
EDIT: Check out the picture, and see how patriotic Mrs. Phelps is, with her desecration of the flag. She is a disgusting excuse for a human being, and a waste of good oxygen.
It's not a violation of Free Speech. The government isn't saying that they can't protest or say what they want. The courts are saying that if what you are saying causes someone to be harmed mentally because they are unable to grieve properly with a hateful protest concerning them going on across the street, then you owe them money for their anguish. Each case should be considered separately as to whether it actually is causing mental harm, but it is legal, and not a violation of anyone's rights.
Parents of dead soldiers are also (thankfully) a minority, and if anything is hate speech, these protests are. Why are they not immune?Nope that's hate speech because they are a minority and are immune from protests.
OK, so this is going to be about free speech. No problem, except that some people don't seem to get it that, with rights, come responsibilities. You must be familiar with the notion that free speech does not grant one to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. What the Supremes will be deciding will be the extent of limitations involved in free speech. Does it give Fred Phelps the right to invade the privacy of others, and disrupt the grieving of families during funerals with this.................?
Here is the deal, folks. God gives us the right of freedom of speech, but that does not mean that we can trample the rights of others in the process. Phelps and his klan can rant all day about whether or not "God hates fags". However, when they disrupt the funerals of soldiers, they have crossed the line, and I hope that the family of the dead soldier these punks protested gets every dime from them.
Finally, in the picture, Mrs. Phelps is right about one thing, although I am sure she didn't intend it. Yes, I thank God every day for dead soldiers, because without those who spilled their blood to defend us, there would be no United States of America. However, unlike Mrs. Phelps, I thank those soldiers, both straight and gay, who made the ultimate sacrifice, and gave their last measure, to keep America a free nation. We all die, eventually, and I believe that our rewards in the afterlife are commensurate with how we lived our lives. In that context, I truly believe that it sucks to be part of the Phelps klan, who (IMHO) will be enshrined in everlasting shame, once they leave this world.
Article is here.
EDIT: Check out the picture, and see how patriotic Mrs. Phelps is, with her desecration of the flag. She is a disgusting excuse for a human being, and a waste of good oxygen.
Ya know... I have to hope the Supremes rule that the Phelps can be sued out of existence for this crap.
I'm sorry, that crap just isn't right. Period. It is just flat wrong to hold a sign saying "thank God for dead soldiers" at a soldier's funeral, where his parents and grandparents and siblings and friends can see it. It is just flat ****ing wrong.
Forty years ago, somebody would have "handled" that situation and the cops would have looked the other way... end of problem.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?