Church ordered to pay 10 million for funeral protest

[Gan]

(CNN) -- A federal jury in Baltimore, Maryland, Wednesday awarded $10.9 million to a father of a Marine whose funeral was picketed by members of a fundamentalist church carrying signs blaming soldiers' deaths on America's tolerance of homosexuals.

The family of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder -- who was killed in a vehicle accident in Iraq's Anbar province in 2006 -- sued the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, and its leaders for defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Church members showed up at Snyder's funeral chanting derogatory slogans and holding picket signs with messages including "God Hates Fags."

They've picketed the funerals of dozens of troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that God is punishing the United States because of its tolerance for homosexuality.

Al Snyder, father of the slain Marine, said he considered filing the lawsuit for a long time before going forward and that he hoped the judgment would make it harder for the church to continue such protests.

"It's hard enough burying a 20-year-old son, much less having to deal with something like this," he said, recalling that some of the other signs at the funeral included "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Thank God for IEDs."

"As far as their picketing goes, they want to do it in front of a courthouse, they want to do it in a public park, I could care less. But I couldn't let them get away with doing this to our military," Al Snyder said.

"Every day in court I would just think of Matt and have him on my mind and know that he was watching out for me."

Snyder's attorney told jurors to pick an amount "that says don't do this in Maryland again. Do not bring your circus of hate to Maryland again," according to The Associated Press.

The award includes $2.9 million in compensatory damages and $8 million in punitive damages, a clerk in the judge's chambers said.

Lawyers for the church members argued Matthew Snyder's funeral was public and the First Amendment protects all points of view, even offensive ones, the AP reported.

Church founder Fred Phelps said the church would appeal the decision, adding it would "take about five minutes to reverse that thing."

"This will elevate me to something important," Phelps told reporters. "This was an act of futility."

Later, Phelps said the case was about "putting a preacher on trial for what he preaches."

"All it was, was a protestation by the government of the United States against the word of God. They don't want me preaching that God is punishing the country by killing their servicemen."

The church had made a new sign to carry after the jury's decision, said his daughter, Margie Phelps.

"Our message is 'Thank God for 10.9 [million dollars],' " she said.
"By that mechanism [the award], the entire world will look over and see that America is doomed and that in doomed America there is no such thing as religious liberty."

The judgment would not change the message the group was carrying, said another of Phelps' daughters, church attorney Shirley Phelps-Roper.

"It's going nowhere," she said of the jury's decision. "This is a nothing. God is not going to stop killing your soldiers. He's not going to stop pouring his wrath out on this nation. America is doomed."

Church members were persecuted for their teachings and the court "mocked and scoffed at our religious beliefs," she said.

Phelps-Roper added that protests were planned later this week in Boston and Acton, Massachusetts, and in Norton, Kansas.

The group plans to protest a Veterans Day rally in Washington, she said.
Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church -- which has no connections with any mainstream Baptist organizations -- are longtime anti-gay protesters.

Before launching their protests at the funerals of American troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, they routinely picketed the funerals of gay people and those who died of AIDS.

Phelps and his followers also picketed the February 2006 funeral of Coretta Scott King, widow of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., because of her support for gay rights.

Several states have implemented laws about funeral protests and Congress has passed a law barring protests at federal cemeteries.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/31/funeral.protest/index.html
__________________________________________________ _

CAN I GET AN A-MEN?!?!

:lol:

Looks like its time to pass the plate around a few times, this judgement is going to hurt (once its through the appeals process).

I am so done with all the religious wacko bullshit taking center stage on how people can live their lives (alive or dead). Joyful will be the day when society can function without all the mysticism [of organized religion].

[Drew]

I think they are despicable, but I do think the content of their speech is being judged here. If they had held signs saying "God blesses America because of homosexuals" would they be paying 11 million dollars? I think not.

[Drew2]

If they were holding signs that said "God blesses America because of Homosexuals BY KILLING SOLDIERS" that would be one thing. But you're comparing apples to oranges. If they were holding signs that simply said "God blesses America because of Homosexuals" people would just think they were fucking weird, rather than desecrating a funeral.

But as it stands, they could say "Haha @ ur dead son" and I'd still hope they got sued for being stupid fucks.

[Drew]

I don't disagree that what they are saying is awful. I just don't see how this award jives with the first amendment or slander at all.

[Tea & Strumpets]

I don't disagree that what they are saying is awful. I just don't see how this award jives with the first amendment or slander at all.

The one downside of free speech is that you have to listen to all kinds of imbeciles with their heads up their asses, but it has it's perks.

Those people are despicable. I can't imagine the mind-set of people that see a family grieving for their son's death and decide to use it as a springboard for their "message". I'd guess they are thinking "If we act like morally bankrupt shitfaces, we should get a lot of press."

[Daniel]

I wonder if there is a precedence for being sentenced to getting a brick in the face. If so, I feel that it is a miscarriage of justice if the judge does not allow the plaintiff to scope the defendents in the face with a brick, twice.

[Sthrockmorton]

I wonder if there is a precedence for being sentenced to getting a brick in the face. If so, I feel that it is a miscarriage of justice if the judge does not allow the plaintiff to scope the defendents in the face with a brick, twice.

A brick in the face is a decent start, but people like this should really be forced to lose a loved one and have their funeral protested for polluting our gene pool.



The group plans to protest a Veterans Day rally in Washington, she said.

That's just not smart...

[Skeeter]

I guess the main point comes down to is a funeral a public or private event?

That said when I saw this on the news this morning it brought a HUGE smile to my face. Wacko crazy fucks FTL.

To touch on Gan's point a bit. I get tired of the religious right telling me what I can and can't do. There's a state amendment up for Tuesday that will make it illegal for strip clubs to be open after 12a and institute a 6' no touching rule. I expect it will pass easily as well as there are much more people who don't go to strip clubs than do. I don't need the state to tell me if I'm moral or not.

[Parkbandit]

I think they are despicable, but I do think the content of their speech is being judged here. If they had held signs saying "God blesses America because of homosexuals" would they be paying 11 million dollars? I think not.


Why do people believe that Freedom of Speech means you can say anything you want wherever you want with no consequences?

Is it a violation of Freedom of Speech to yell "I have a bomb" when on an airplane?

Is it a violation of Freedom of Speech to have sexual talk with a minor?

Is it a violation of Freedom of Speech to heckle a speaker ( and not get tasered)

These 'people' got off light imo. 10 million for being fucking douche bags is a far lighter sentence than what they would have gotten had that been my kid.

[StrayRogue]

Is this that dumbass church who runs pickets with signs like GOD HATES FAGs and shit? Man we've even heard about those nobheads over here. This is why I fucking hate religion. Nothing like utter intolerance (and utter stupidity) to make ones day...

[Parkbandit]

Is this that dumbass church who runs pickets with signs like GOD HATES FAGs and shit? Man we've even heard about those nobheads over here. This is why I fucking hate religion. Nothing like utter intolerance (and utter stupidity) to make ones day...


Yup. They blame our tolerance of homosexuality on all the ills of the world. A brick to the face may just wake them up.

[Some Rogue]

I love all the people on here who jump on every chance they can get to say "See! Religion r bad!!!1111"

This has nothing to do with them being religious, because they're not, and everything to do with them being fucking wackjobs who use religion as an excuse.

There are millions upon millions of religious people around the world who are good people and don't do this kind of shit but all it takes is for .001% of them to be bad and people can't wait to jump on it and generalize everyone off of that. Pretty hypocritical of you so called tolerant people imo.

[Sthrockmorton]

I love all the people on here who jump on every chance they can get to say "See! Religion r bad!!!1111"

This has nothing to do with them being religious, because they're not, and everything to do with them being fucking wackjobs who use religion as an excuse.

There are millions upon millions of religious people around the world who are good people and don't do this kind of shit but all it takes is for .001% of them to be bad and people can't wait to jump on it and generalize everyone off of that. Pretty hypocritical of you so called tolerant people imo.

PC forums FTW. It's mildly entertaining to see someone start an argument in a thread with a topic that NO ONE has disagreed on.

Regardless of whether or not relgions are good/bad, these people are idiots, and that's what's being addressed.

Wizard's First Rule: people are stupid.

[Tsa`ah]

I think they are despicable, but I do think the content of their speech is being judged here. If they had held signs saying "God blesses America because of homosexuals" would they be paying 11 million dollars? I think not.

As was mentioned, this is/was not a case of your run of mill protests. These people protest funerals.

There's a fine line between free speech (and your right to practice it) and infringing upon the rights of others.

The award by the court was actually 10.8 mill and I expect that the appeal will be heard and that number will either be stricken or reduced. In the event that it isn't ... well the Snyder family will never see a dime of it.

The Phelps family, specifically the father Fred, has a long history of fraud and scams. Fred Phelps was a practicing lawyer at one time until he was disbarred on all levels. He pushed his children, well one daughter that I can think of, into law.

These people are crooks who have a long history of manipulating the system. They won't be stopped until the state of Kansas or the federal government seize every asset and liquidate it. This won't happen, and even if it did ... they'd be back in a year doing the same shit.

Their first amendment right will always be protected, as well as every right described by law. However, they don't have the right to infringe upon the rights of other citizens ... and this is exactly what the court demonstrated to the Phelps family and their flock of inbred morons.

[Some Rogue]

PC forums FTW. It's mildly entertaining to see someone start an argument in a thread with a topic that NO ONE has disagreed on.

Regardless of whether or not relgions are good/bad, these people are idiots, and that's what's being addressed.

Wizard's First Rule: people are stupid.


And I don't disagree either, but if you've been here very long you see the same people doing the same things I was talking about over and over. It gets really old. I wasn't the one who brought up how much religion sucks, they did and like I said, these wackjobs have nothing to do with religion other than they claim to be one.

[Tsa`ah]

It's unfortunate that religion will play a roll in this debate and ultimately in the legal proceedings of this case.

I expect that it's not only their freedom of speech that will be argued, but their freedom of religion and how they chose to express it.

At the very least I expect them to attempt to use their standing as a religious entity as a shelter against paying the awarded judgement against them. And before anyone tries to point out pedo priests in the Catholic church ... that was a settlement.

[Sweets]

Where's their church? I think these people need some protestors on some grand occasion of theirs.

"God Hates Intolerance!"
"God Hates protestors at a Funeral!"

[Tsa`ah]

Topeka Kansas. I'm surprised you haven't heard of the Phelps family or the Westboro Baptist Church.

[Kembal]

Their chruch is a 78 person congregation, that mainly consists of the Phelps family.

The 1st Amendment implications are interesting. This judgement might cause a bunch of lawsuits against protesters unless the funeral is marked as a private event. How an appeals court makes the distinction if it chooses to uphold the judgement will be very important.

The case might also turn on the fact that beyond the protest, the Phelps family/church also posted a message on their Web site that purported to examine the son's marital history. I have no idea what it actually said though.

[StrayRogue]

Yeah, there's been about three documentries played out over here on them. Pretty hilarious actually.

[Skeeter]

I love all the people on here who jump on every chance they can get to say "See! Religion r bad!!!1111"

This has nothing to do with them being religious, because they're not, and everything to do with them being fucking wackjobs who use religion as an excuse.

There are millions upon millions of religious people around the world who are good people and don't do this kind of shit but all it takes is for .001% of them to be bad and people can't wait to jump on it and generalize everyone off of that. Pretty hypocritical of you so called tolerant people imo.

I love God. It's his fan club I can't stand.

[Latrinsorm]

church attorney Shirley Phelps-Roper.No wonder they lost!
Joyful will be the day when society can function without all the mysticism.I think you should probably look up what the word "mysticism" means (and how it doesn't have anything to do with this situation). :D
I just don't see how this award jives with the first amendment or slander at all.They were found liable for "defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress.", though, not slander. Defamation seems to more or less be slander, but the last two can't really be arguable. Speech is a communicative act, trying to hurt people doesn't communicate anything.
Regardless of whether or not relgions are good/bad, these people are idiots, and that's what's being addressed.You're right, nobody in this thread said anything like "This is why I fucking hate religion." :)

[Danical]

Yeah, there's been about three documentries played out over here on them. Pretty hilarious actually.

I saw one of the documentaries; The Most Hated Family in America with Louis Theroux (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4413388146858417528). It was simply the best.

You could see the eldest daughter that was a freshmen in college thinking . . . "What a load of shit. I yearn to be like the girls in Skeeter's avatar."

EDIT: The video is shitty quality but in its entirety.

[Gan]

I think you should probably look up what the word "mysticism" means (and how it doesn't have anything to do with this situation).


mysticism

One entry found.

mysticism
Main Entry: mys·ti·cismPronunciation: \ˈmis-tə-ˌsi-zəm\ Function: noun Date: 1735 1: the experience of mystical (http://www.webster.com/dictionary/mystical) union or direct communion with ultimate reality reported by mystics (http://www.webster.com/dictionary/mystics)

2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate reality can be attained through subjective experience (as intuition or insight)

3 a: vague speculation : a belief without sound basisb: a theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive acquisition of ineffable knowledge or power

I think the use of mysticism as used in my post is quite accurate in describing the basis for the protest by the defendants in this story.

[Kainen]

I like the brick to the face idea myself.. just tack it onto that 10 mill they owe. I don't like it when people use religion to disguise hateful actions. I hope they DO pass something to stop protests at funerals. The only reason douches like this do this sort of crap is because they are a bunch of attention whores that want to cloak their hate speech in religion. Too bad they get away with it so often.

[StrayRogue]

I saw one of the documentaries; The Most Hated Family in America with Louis Theroux (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4413388146858417528). It was simply the best.

You could see the eldest daughter that was a freshmen in college thinking . . . "What a load of shit. I yearn to be like the girls in Skeeter's avatar."

EDIT: The video is shitty quality but in its entirety.

It was pretty impressive as Theroux never really gets...well angry or emotional about anything. He has that impassive, childlike curiosity that allows him to ask very daring questions. In this documentry though, you can see it wearing thin on even him.

[Danical]

I'm a fan of Theroux after just one episode.

I really REALLY really like Richard Dawkins though.

[StrayRogue]

Theroux did a few good ones in America. The ones about wrestling and the porn industry stick in my mind. And Dawkins is great too. Seen him on Question Time a number of times now and he always rips these stupid fundamentalists a new one.

[Drew]

They were found liable for "defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress.", though, not slander. Defamation seems to more or less be slander, but the last two can't really be arguable.


Right, I read the article, but what they were really found guilty of is having terrible ideas and speaking them at inopportune times. I don't even know what invasion of privacy is if you are outside of someone's home, that seems completely bogus. Intentional infliction of emotional distress is hilarity in a can, if you can't inflict emotional distress than you literally can't do almost anything, I mean that truly has to be one of the dumbest laws I've heard of.

I hate that I have to defend these particular people but you have to defend the worst kinds of speech if you truly want free speech. If we don't want that, we should amend our constitution, not make an end-run at it with other laws. All that being said, if my best friend in the Army died and these guys showed up I would be in jail right now for beating the shit out of them, I think what they do is terrible.

[StrayRogue]

They have children holding the signs and chanting the hate speeches. Fucking terrible.

[Drew]

I don't disagree that it's terrible, just that the other side of the coin is a lot worse. Giving government the right to suppress speech never ends well.

[Tsa`ah]

I don't disagree that it's terrible, just that the other side of the coin is a lot worse. Giving government the right to suppress speech never ends well.

You are free to express yourself in public. You are free to express yourself in the privacy of your own home, church, or property in general.

Cemeteries are not public property. One could argue that a person or family placing a loved one to rest on such a property have the right to privacy. Thus the invasion of privacy.

This was not suppressing their right to free speech in any form. This was penalizing them for infringing upon the rights of other people.

[Jorddyn]

I don't disagree that it's terrible, just that the other side of the coin is a lot worse. Giving government the right to suppress speech never ends well.

Where does free speech and and harrassment begin?

I don't know the answer, just pointing out that if some jackass followed me around yelling "GOD HATES YOU" for even a few minutes, I'd hope I'd have some sort of recourse.

[Drew]

You are free to express yourself in public. You are free to express yourself in the privacy of your own home, church, or property in general.

Cemeteries are not public property. One could argue that a person or family placing a loved one to rest on such a property have the right to privacy. Thus the invasion of privacy.

This was not suppressing their right to free speech in any form. This was penalizing them for infringing upon the rights of other people.


My understanding is that they were on the sidewalk next to the cemetery, which is certainly public property. If they were on private property and told to leave you could certainly get them for trespass.

[Tsa`ah]

If I stood outside of your house yelling and screaming for hours ... chances are I'd be arrested and prone to all sorts of charges.

To me this is no different.

It's just unfortunate that the local PD didn't do anything about it and the guy had to make a case of it himself.

[Daniel]

Free speech or not, if this anyone close to me he'd be catching a brick straight to the face.

That's been my stance since day one and it won't change.

[Celephais]

I guess the main point comes down to is a funeral a public or private event?

That said when I saw this on the news this morning it brought a HUGE smile to my face. Wacko crazy fucks FTL.

To touch on Gan's point a bit. I get tired of the religious right telling me what I can and can't do. There's a state amendment up for Tuesday that will make it illegal for strip clubs to be open after 12a and institute a 6' no touching rule. I expect it will pass easily as well as there are much more people who don't go to strip clubs than do. I don't need the state to tell me if I'm moral or not.

If strip clubs were smart they'd have a "Free lapdance per customer if this amendment fails!" rally. You could get people to bother going out and voting if there was the possibility of a free lapdance out of it

[Gan]

Free speech or not, if this anyone close to me he'd be catching a brick straight to the face.

That's been my stance since day one and it won't change.

x2

[DeV]

I don't know the answer, just pointing out that if some jackass followed me around yelling "GOD HATES YOU" for even a few minutes, I'd hope I'd have some sort of recourse.The brick to the face defense sounds about accurate.

[TheEschaton]

I hate to agree with Drew, but I concur. Freedom of speech is an explicit, fundamental right, whereas the right to privacy is an implicit fundamental-as-decided-by-the-SCOTUS (but still argued about) right. If they were on the sidewalk, they had the right to do it. Of course, there's permit violations etc which they could have been cited on, I imagine.

That's not to say that they shouldn't be able to be arrested for a dc, or perhaps a disturbing the peace. But they have a right to hate speech, as long as it doesn't incite others to act in violence in their name. Much like the KKK.

-TheE-

[Daniel]

Well, I'd say its pretty safe to assume that if this happened around me than it would definitely "Incite Violence".

[TheEschaton]

The standard is them saying "God hates homosexuals....therefore KILL THEM ALL!" IE, their speech encouraging violence, and that specific violence being highly likely of occuring.

[Daniel]

I'd say it's highly likely.

[Hulkein]

Is this that dumbass church who runs pickets with signs like GOD HATES FAGs and shit? Man we've even heard about those nobheads over here. This is why I fucking hate religion. Nothing like utter intolerance (and utter stupidity) to make ones day...

This guy would hate fags with or without religion.

[StrayRogue]

Then you're a small minded idiot. With or without religion.

[Parkbandit]

I hate to agree with Drew, but I concur. Freedom of speech is an explicit, fundamental right, whereas the right to privacy is an implicit fundamental-as-decided-by-the-SCOTUS (but still argued about) right. If they were on the sidewalk, they had the right to do it. Of course, there's permit violations etc which they could have been cited on, I imagine.

That's not to say that they shouldn't be able to be arrested for a dc, or perhaps a disturbing the peace. But they have a right to hate speech, as long as it doesn't incite others to act in violence in their name. Much like the KKK.

-TheE-

Free speech does not mean you have the freedom to say whatever you want whenever you want without consequences.

[TheEschaton]

Yes it does, as long as it doesn't incite violence/riots, and it isn't slander/libel. At least from a legal stand point. You can call these people idiots as much as you want, and they are, but it doesn't change their right to say what they want.

But hell, slander and libel only apply to public, well known figures.

[Alfster]

It appears they lost their lawsuit.

So, no. It doesn't.

[TheEschaton]

Funny, because that hasn't been appealed to the SCOTUS yet, so for now, it's merely unsettled.

[Alfster]

Church ordered to pay 10 million for funeral protest

[875000]

Funny, because that hasn't been appealed to the SCOTUS yet, so for now, it's merely unsettled.

It has been settled. The case stands until an appealant court rules otherwise. That is an important legal distinction from what you are asserting.

Moreover, SCOTUS is an appealant court. So, until SCOTUS decides to A) hear the appeal and B) overturn the verdict, the ruling stands.

As for when people can collect the money, that is a different issue. But, we weren't really discussing that.

[Methais]

I think they are despicable, but I do think the content of their speech is being judged here. If they had held signs saying "God blesses America because of homosexuals" would they be paying 11 million dollars? I think not.

Bad Dudes was awesome.

[Tsa`ah]

I hate to agree with Drew, but I concur. Freedom of speech is an explicit, fundamental right, whereas the right to privacy is an implicit fundamental-as-decided-by-the-SCOTUS (but still argued about) right. If they were on the sidewalk, they had the right to do it. Of course, there's permit violations etc which they could have been cited on, I imagine.

That's not to say that they shouldn't be able to be arrested for a dc, or perhaps a disturbing the peace. But they have a right to hate speech, as long as it doesn't incite others to act in violence in their name. Much like the KKK.

-TheE-

Free speech rhetoric aside ... the father sued them "defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress."

These people were not charged with criminal activity on any level. It went to civil court and the jury decided (and the judge agreed) that freedom of speech wasn't exactly free. If your free speech defames, invades privacy and has the intent to inflict emotional distress ... it's going to cost you about 10.8 mil.

Likewise ... going back to my yelling outside of your house for hours while standing on the sidewalk. My intent is obvious, and depending on the language I'm using, well lawyers could get pretty creative.

If the police decided to recognize my right to free speech ... it becomes a civil matter.

[Parkbandit]

Yes it does, as long as it doesn't incite violence/riots, and it isn't slander/libel. At least from a legal stand point. You can call these people idiots as much as you want, and they are, but it doesn't change their right to say what they want.

But hell, slander and libel only apply to public, well known figures.

"Yes it is, as long as it..."


Like I said, freedom of speech does not give everyone the right to say whatever they want, wherever they want without consequence. If it did, you couldn't put the 'as long as' label on it.

But hey.. keep pretending.

[Clove]

"Yes it is, as long as it..."


Like I said, freedom of speech does not give everyone the right to say whatever they want, wherever they want without consequence. If it did, you couldn't put the 'as long as' label on it.

But hey.. keep pretending.

Having participated in several public protests I can speak from experience that people love the idea of free speech until a line of protesters disturb their day to day life. And unfortunately every protester believes their cause is just, and the people they're disturbing generally don't. So as a society we are obligated to tolerate ignorant people spreading ignorant, loud messages.


That being said, I don't think it would damage free speech at all if we were to decide that funerals were off-limit to public protest. It would simply be civilized and respectful of each other. Sure that would mean you wouldn't be able to form a picket in front of the funeral of some "Hitler-like" monster, but we have so many opportunities to express ourselves publicly that picketing funerals for any reason is unnecessary. I know it sets a precedent and some could argue that it's a slippery slope; but frankly I think we can handle it.

As for this group of yahoos... they're in the minority. Even though they'd get the attention they crave- I'm all of picketing THEM. Wouldn't it be amusing if a few hundred protesters made noise throughout their services, meals, family time etc. seven days a week?

[Hulkein]

Then you're a small minded idiot. With or without religion.

Yes, they are small minded idiots, with or without religion. That's the point, genius.

[Celephais]

That being said, I don't think it would damage free speech at all if we were to decide that funerals were off-limit to public protest.
We're not going to protest?
http://www.pajiba.com/images/pcu.jpg
We're NOT going to protest!

[Drew2]

Someone go sit outside Eschaton's house with a sign that says "God hates ragheads and by the way you're obviously in the Taliban" and see how long he tolerates free speech then.

[Celephais]

Someone go sit outside Eschaton's house with a sign that says "God hates ragheads and by the way you're obviously in the Taliban" and see how long he tolerates free speech then.
TheE's pretty good about not letting stupid comments actually affect him... I call him a terrorist all the time.

[TheEschaton]

You could do that all you want, I'd just laugh. ;)

-TheE-

[Parkbandit]

Someone go sit outside Eschaton's house with a sign that says "God hates ragheads and by the way you're obviously in the Taliban" and see how long he tolerates free speech then.


I think there's a HUGE difference between that which you propose.. and going to the funeral and saying he deserved to die because we tolerate gays.

One I would laugh at.. and probably turn my sprinkler system on for.. one I would probably choke someone out until their head fell off their shoulders.

[oldanforgotten]

You could do that all you want, I'd just laugh. ;)

-TheE-

True, but if someone in your family just passed away, or you were getting married, etc., and they then stood outside your house picketing that all towelheads need to die and leave the country, I’d bet you’d be singing another tune.

[oldanforgotten]

Free speech is free speech, and should be cherished. In the end, there is common sense, and there is law. Just like conservatives have their uber-religious right wing religious warmongers, the liberals have lawyers who think drawn up child porn should be legal because it wasn't real children, free speech should include the ability to do xxxx and yyyy, etc, the right to bear arms includes the ability to carry cop killer bullets, etc..

Fact is, the lawyers have to start making some shit up to fight for, otherwise they can't get paid. Common sense is their BIGGEST enemy, because then we need less of them.
________
Colorado dispensaries (http://dispensaries.org/)

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

^ What do you call 100,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?


A good start.

[875000]

^ What do you call 100,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?

A class action lawsuit waiting to happen.

[TheEschaton]

True, but if someone in your family just passed away, or you were getting married, etc., and they then stood outside your house picketing that all towelheads need to die and leave the country, I’d bet you’d be singing another tune.

You'd lose that bet. I'd be angry that people are so stupid, but I wouldn't be all like, "You can't say that because it hurts me!!!!"

-TheE-

[oldanforgotten]

You'd lose that bet. I'd be angry that people are so stupid, but I wouldn't be all like, "You can't say that because it hurts me!!!!"

-TheE-

I think that saying that's how you'd react and the actual reaction would be quite different. I'm not saying you'd go out there with a baseball bat and pick a fight, but to simply say you'd stand there, take it no matter how and when it was happening and then argue that they had a right to do so is a bit outlandish.
________
Vaporizors (http://vaporizer.org/)

[Gan]

There's a bigger picture to all of this, and it goes way beyond what is legal and what isnt...

Its about (as mentioned earlier) common sense. For obvious reasons you dont jump in front of a moving vehicle if you are interested in not being hurt and or killed.

Now apply the same logic to human emotion, which can be unpredictable at times. Would the meaning of those doing the picketing have held the same value if one of the distraut funeral attendees taken offense and killed a picketer? Would it have been worth it? Sure the killer would be arrested and face trial... but what good will that do for the picketer who is now dead?

Do you wear a suit of raw steaks while running through a lion's den?

Some things transcend beyond the premise of legality. Its a Darwin concept, there are just some things you dont do.

[Tsa`ah]

Do you wear a suit of raw steaks while running through a lion's den?

Some things transcend beyond the premise of legality. Its a Darwin concept, there are just some things you dont do.

The distinct difference is that the Phelps family and their small congregation have been hiding behind the constitution and the general population's reservations of not being incarcerated.

You could think of it in gaming terms, well a game where you can only attack npcs, or the internet in general. When you remove the bloody nose factor ... well you get the picture.

[Methais]

It probably goes without saying, but why don't these church people realize how hypocritical they're being? Protesting a soldier's funeral because our country tolerates gays, yet they live in the same gay tolerant country they're protesting against.

I can only sum it up in 1000 words:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/DoyleHargraves/8468a5a1-1.gif

[Apathy]

I think these people are what we could now refer to as domestic terrorists.

I think the only reason they were able to get away with this 'protest' is because this happened on the east coast.

They should try this shit in the Midwest or the South; it won't fly, guaranteed.