USA: The Westboro idiots can now yell 'fire' and it's OK

YourValentine wrote: Really interesting. I cannot quite understand why the judges found that the "church" did exercise their right to speak in public about a public issue when in fact they do travel far to abuse funerals for their hate speech. These funerals are private, aren't they? A dead soldier is not public property only because he died in public service.

How about the "funeral protection bill"  that Arizona issued after the recent shooting? Would that be unconstitutional, as well? Isn't there protected area around government buildings where people cannot demonstrate for security reasons and if yes  -  can't there be protected space for decency reasons at funerals?
======

Well, there are a number of legal dilemma's. A soldier, dead or alive, is not public property. However, a graveyard is. Therefore, the Westboro-approach is legally a demonstration held in a public area. It *would* be a crime if they were to disrupt the service in a church or funeral home, for instance, but seeing how the Phelps-family is composed almost exclusively of lawyers, they are unlikely to make such a mistake.

The Arizona-bill you refer to is problematic. State laws that contradict federal laws are automatically unconstitutional (this was one of the legal issues finally decided by the outcome of the American Civil War), however, it is debatable whether this funeral protection bill is in violation of federal law. If this hasn't already happened, I am quite sure it will be challenged by the Westboro-bunch or other fanatics, which means it'll probably go to the federal supreme court eventually. The interesting thing there is that the U.S. supreme court itself decides which cases it will hear. Theoretically, this means they could uphold a lower-court's ruling by simply not hearing the case. This is relevant because such a lower court is not allowed to rule on the strict constitutionality of a law, they can only decide whether it contradicts other federal laws.

As far as I'm aware (but I'm no expert here) only government buildings can be made into zones protesters can be barred from.

The additional problem with soldiers is that everyone who has ever served in the U.S. army is entitled to burial on Arlington National Cemetary (which, incidentally, used to be Robert E. Lee's plantation), or, I think, local military cemetaries, and they are subject to a separate set of regulations I am only very vaguely familiar with, entitled the Code of Federal Regulations.

Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.

Rick Mercer once said, "it may be legal to go up to a veteran, give him a quarter, and take all the poppies from the box - but it doesn't make it right."

legal =/= ethical.

If it did, most of the best-paid lawyers in the world would be unemployed. It's probably a good thing, too, because if the unethical was automatically illegal, we'd essentially be back under absolute rule by the Catholic church as was the case for most of the middle ages. I find what the Westboro-cult does repulsive, but I just can't think of any way to beat them legally without doing more bad than good.

Technically, though, it is quite legal for citizens to hinder the Westboro protests. So I'd recommend all Americans who live near a site these swines are going to be protesting at to get their friends together and do whatever they can (short of actual physical contact) to hinder these 'people' in their repulsive protests. It's your moral and legal right.

[QUOTE] ThomasQuinn wrote:Technically, though, it is quite legal for citizens to hinder the Westboro protests. So I'd recommend all Americans who live near a site these swines are going to be protesting at to get their friends together and do whatever they can (short of actual physical contact) to hinder these 'people' in their repulsive protests. It's your moral and legal right. [/QUOTE]

Agreed.

There have been silent counter-protests in the past. People have arrived with huge angel wings attached to their backs and when the Westboro family started holding up their signs and shouting, the 'angels' turned their backs to them wing-to-wing effectively blocking them out. Since cars pulling into the cemetery had windows closed, there's a good chance the sound was blocked out as well. Groups with 'butterfly' wings have shown up for other funerals and the Hell's Angels arrived with leather, steel and rumbling engines. The most interesting, I think, was Elizabeth Edward's funeral because the Westboro's announced they'd picket and then were outnumbered by a huge gathering of people with signs of peace, love, and hope. The Westboro family retreated without incident.

If they're not approached, they don't get as fired up and ready to sue. Peaceful counter-protests do seem to work but I wonder if funeral homes/cemeteries can put buffers of some sort (like office cubicle panels. lol) in the road between the protesters and the mourners so one group can't see the other. As it is, the Westboro group has to stay 500 feet (yards?) away, so there's plenty of room to block them.

Also, they shouldn't be getting all the publicity the media so eagerly affords them.

Holly2003 wrote: jpf wrote: Sir GH wrote: As long as it's in the name of religion, bar killing someone, it's allowed.

But in my opinion, this is not free speech.  There must be a limit.  Hijacking a soldier's funeral because the military is permissive of gays is not free speech.

---

It's not free speech, it's hate speech.

Some day someone who doesn't care about consequences
will put these fucking pieces of shit in their graves.

Inbreed white trash.  Hopefully long, painful fatal diseases are
headed their way.
###############################################################

Wow. You lecturing anyone on hate speech. When did you get your irony bypass operation?

----

You're as white trash as they come.

Holly2003 wrote: jpf wrote: Sir GH wrote: As long as it's in the name of religion, bar killing someone, it's allowed.

But in my opinion, this is not free speech.  There must be a limit.  Hijacking a soldier's funeral because the military is permissive of gays is not free speech.

---

It's not free speech, it's hate speech.

Some day someone who doesn't care about consequences
will put these fucking pieces of shit in their graves.

Inbreed white trash.  Hopefully long, painful fatal diseases are
headed their way.
###############################################################

Wow. You lecturing anyone on hate speech. When did you get your irony bypass operation?
====

Wow. You lecturing anyone on irony. Or decency. Or good taste.

You must also believe that discriminating against bigots is bigotry. No wonder you're further to the right than Glenn Beck.

ThomasQuinn wrote: Holly2003 wrote: jpf wrote: Sir GH wrote: As long as it's in the name of religion, bar killing someone, it's allowed.

But in my opinion, this is not free speech.  There must be a limit.  Hijacking a soldier's funeral because the military is permissive of gays is not free speech.

---

It's not free speech, it's hate speech.

Some day someone who doesn't care about consequences
will put these fucking pieces of shit in their graves.

Inbreed white trash.  Hopefully long, painful fatal diseases are
headed their way.
###############################################################

Wow. You lecturing anyone on hate speech. When did you get your irony bypass operation?
====

Wow. You lecturing anyone on irony. Or decency. Or good taste.

You must also believe that discriminating against bigots is bigotry. No wonder you're further to the right than Glenn Beck.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What the hell are you talking about?

jpf wrote: Holly2003 wrote: jpf wrote: Sir GH wrote: As long as it's in the name of religion, bar killing someone, it's allowed.

But in my opinion, this is not free speech.  There must be a limit.  Hijacking a soldier's funeral because the military is permissive of gays is not free speech.

---

It's not free speech, it's hate speech.

Some day someone who doesn't care about consequences
will put these fucking pieces of shit in their graves.

Inbreed white trash.  Hopefully long, painful fatal diseases are
headed their way.
###############################################################

Wow. You lecturing anyone on hate speech. When did you get your irony bypass operation?

----

You're as white trash as they come. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No homophobic remarks or Aids insults this time jpf?

Before this gets out of hand, you should know that jpf is wearing better make-up this time, so it's highly unlikely that his tears are going to ruin his Starchild look this time.

jpf wrote:

Some day someone who doesn't care about consequences
will put these fucking pieces of shit in their graves.

Inbreed white trash.  Hopefully long, painful fatal diseases are
headed their way.
==============================

Honestly, what is it with you?  Why does EVERY thread have to turn into a *KISS* thread?!

magicalfreddiemercury wrote:

Agreed.

There have been silent counter-protests in the past. People have arrived with huge angel wings attached to their backs and when the Westboro family started holding up their signs and shouting, the 'angels' turned their backs to them wing-to-wing effectively blocking them out. Since cars pulling into the cemetery had windows closed, there's a good chance the sound was blocked out as well. Groups with 'butterfly' wings have shown up for other funerals and the Hell's Angels arrived with leather, steel and rumbling engines. The most interesting, I think, was Elizabeth Edward's funeral because the Westboro's announced they'd picket and then were outnumbered by a huge gathering of people with signs of peace, love, and hope. The Westboro family retreated without incident.

If they're not approached, they don't get as fired up and ready to sue. Peaceful counter-protests do seem to work but I wonder if funeral homes/cemeteries can put buffers of some sort (like office cubicle panels. lol) in the road between the protesters and the mourners so one group can't see the other. As it is, the Westboro group has to stay 500 feet (yards?) away, so there's plenty of room to block them.

Also, they shouldn't be getting all the publicity the media so eagerly affords them

 ==============================

These kind of public responses (the angel wings and such) have always interested me.  From an emotional standpoint, they feel very satisfying to those of us reading about them.  But from a purely intellectual standpoint, I struggle with them a little.  When the counter protests rise to what is essentially interference rather than a just a counter message,  I'm not entirely sure if it's better to leave in the hands of the people rather than the courts. If the higher value really is free speech, removing the right  with angel wings is still removing the right, no less so because it's organic and grassroots and it feels like karma.   It's still tyranny of a minority by a majority, the very thing many foundational American principles were designed to prevent.  It's a bit of an end run around freedom of speech, using freedom of speech, revealing perhaps the sometimes dogmatic nature of the concept in the US.

Holly2003 wrote: jpf wrote: Holly2003 wrote: jpf wrote: Sir GH wrote: As long as it's in the name of religion, bar killing someone, it's allowed.

But in my opinion, this is not free speech.  There must be a limit.  Hijacking a soldier's funeral because the military is permissive of gays is not free speech.

---

It's not free speech, it's hate speech.

Some day someone who doesn't care about consequences
will put these fucking pieces of shit in their graves.

Inbreed white trash.  Hopefully long, painful fatal diseases are
headed their way.
###############################################################

Wow. You lecturing anyone on hate speech. When did you get your irony bypass operation?

----

You're as white trash as they come. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No homophobic remarks or Aids insults this time jpf?

----

I'll leave those to you, white trash cunt.

Zebonka12 wrote: Before this gets out of hand, you should know that jpf is wearing better make-up this time, so it's highly unlikely that his tears are going to ruin his Starchild look this time.
---

Your stuff is better in the Queen movie thread.

GratefulFan wrote: jpf wrote:

Some day someone who doesn't care about consequences
will put these fucking pieces of shit in their graves.

Inbreed white trash.  Hopefully long, painful fatal diseases are
headed their way.
==============================

Honestly, what is it with you?  Why does EVERY thread have to turn into a *KISS* thread?!
-----

It pisses you off.

You fail keyboard warrior 101.