I know there are groups that walk around counter-protesting the Phelps clan and their inbred idiot circus, but I've just really always wanted to see a massive group of just-within-the-legal-limit-of-nudity very hairy gay males riding on floats nearby blasting the most fabulous music you could think of just under the legal outdoor volume limit (80 dB?)
I still can't believe no one has run them down or shot a couple.
It is coming.
A wounded veteran of Afghanistan was arrested in Wichita a couple of months ago for 'stalking' the Phelps' while they were here to spread their hate. What do you suppose he was going to do?
As for the decision, it is disgusting. The rights of Americans are guaranteed only to the point where they infringe on the rights of other Americans. I assume all the state laws that prohibited picketing within a certain distance of a funeral are abolished.
__________________ I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
Last edited by Displaced Flames fan; 03-02-2011 at 06:17 PM.
A wounded veteran of Afghanistan was arrested in Wichita a couple of months ago for 'stalking' the Phelps' while they were here to spread their hate. What do you suppose he was going to do?
As for the decision, it is disgusting. The rights of Americans are guaranteed only to the point where they infringe on the rights of other Americans. I assume all the state laws that prohibited picketing within a certain distance of a funeral are abolished.
Wow, I'm actually stunned to see that from someone who typically has such reasoned posts. As I said earlier, freedom isn't something that only exists when we agree with what is being said or done. I for one would rather live in a country where the overarching concern is the upholding of freedom for everyone, not just the people I happen to agree with.
Btw, the opinion does not abolish any state laws, particularly of the type you're talking about. In fact it advocates for them.
Quote:
Chief Justice Roberts suggested that the proper response to hurtful protests are general laws creating buffer zones around funerals and the like, rather than empowering of juries to punish unpopular speech.
Here's the direct quote from the opinion:
Quote:
Westboro’s choice of where and when to conduct its picketing is not beyond the Government’s regulatory reach—it is “subject to reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions” that are consistent with the standards announced in this Court’s precedents. Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence , 468 U. S. 288, 293 (1984) . Maryland now has a law imposing restrictions on funeral picketing, Md. Crim. Law Code Ann. §10–205 (Lexis Supp. 2010), as do 43 other States and the Federal Government. See Brief for American Legion as Amicus Curiae 18–19, n. 2 (listing statutes). To the extent these laws are content neutral, they raise very different questions from the tort verdict at issue in this case. Maryland’s law, however, was not in effect at the time of the events at issue here, so we have no occasion to consider how it might apply to facts such as those before us, or whether it or other similar regulations are constitutional. 5
We have identified a few limited situations where the location of targeted picketing can be regulated under provisions that the Court has determined to be content neutral. In Frisby , for example, we upheld a ban on such picketing “before or about” a particular residence, 487 U. S., at 477. In Madsen v. Women’s Health Center, Inc. , we approved an injunction requiring a buffer zone between protesters and an abortion clinic entrance. 512 U. S. 753, 768 (1994) . The facts here are obviously quite different, both with respect to the activity being regulated and the means of restricting those activities.
Another quote that does a good job of summing up my feelings on the issue:
Quote:
“If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment , it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” Texas v. Johnson , 491 U. S. 397, 414 (1989) . Indeed, “the point of all speech protection … is to shield just those choices of content that in someone’s eyes are misguided, or even hurtful.” Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, Inc. , 515 U. S. 557, 574 (1995) .
I was just thinking.. this decision is going to be hard for some people, especially redneck gay-bashing hillbillies who, will love that their right to continue bashing gays (verbally) is protected under the First Amendment (picturing Billy Bob with a wad of chew in his mouth), yet they will be totally offended that the Phelps gang can picket military funerals which is totally 'Un-Uh-Mare-Kin'
The rights of Americans are guaranteed only to the point where they infringe on the rights of other Americans. I assume all the state laws that prohibited picketing within a certain distance of a funeral are abolished.
What rights were being infringed upon by the picketers though?
I don't think that 'God Hates Fags' should be allowed with the little picture of the stick figures 'doing it' from behind. I think that's inappropriate and falls under the exception of obscenity.
They have the right to assemble peacefully and say what they want, but if they have the right to have a sign like that, I have a right to a sign like this:
NSFW!
You're absolutely right - and I'm surprised more people don't swarm protest his people. If you spot a couple of these clowns - 20 or so people should just surround them with their own signs and drown them out. They'd move on but you could follow them around - it would drive them batty.
You're absolutely right - and I'm surprised more people don't swarm protest his people. If you spot a couple of these clowns - 20 or so people should just surround them with their own signs and drown them out. They'd move on but you could follow them around - it would drive them batty.
Unfortunately, it would also turn whatever they're protesting into a circus, and inadvertantly give them more press. Lose/lose for the family of the dead soldier, and for the people that would rather that the Westboro losers would just evaporate.
You're absolutely right - and I'm surprised more people don't swarm protest his people. If you spot a couple of these clowns - 20 or so people should just surround them with their own signs and drown them out. They'd move on but you could follow them around - it would drive them batty.
Well part of the reason that they're allowed to stage their protests is that they do so quietly and within the applicable laws. A counter protest of the type you're describing might well fall outside of that realm.
IMO the best approach is to ignore them. Stop giving them attention, stop giving them press, and let them stand there like the jokes that they are. It's the same approach I use to avoid all things Nancy Grace.
The Following User Says Thank You to valo403 For This Useful Post:
However, it's only a matter of time before someone with nothing to lose, or even an otherwise-reasonable relative of a dead military service man or victim of an anti-gay hate-crime murder mows down the Westboro protesters with a semi-automatic. I'm surprised someone with an inoperable brain tumor hasn't jumped in a pick up truck and veered into the Phelps clan at full speed.
Not that I'm condoning that either, but I think such a thing is only inevitable.
The sad thing is that there are innocent children involved in the protests. I was watching that documentary where the British journalist spent some time with the Phelps family and at one of the protests someone chucked a drink at the group and it hit one of the younger Phelps kids, 5 or 6 years old maybe, in the head.
Valo... I'm guilty of not reading the decision. You know what they say about assuming.
I assumed they had abolished the laws restricting the protests. Glad to see they didn't.
__________________ I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
The Following User Says Thank You to Displaced Flames fan For This Useful Post:
I'm all for free speech and agree with the decion but think that there should also be some sort of limit on how close one can protest/show free speech at a funeral. The deceased and their family have rights as well.
The Following User Says Thank You to pepper24 For This Useful Post:
They have the right to assemble peacefully and say what they want, but if they have the right to have a sign like that, I have a right to a sign like this:
I know there are groups that walk around counter-protesting the Phelps clan and their inbred idiot circus, but I've just really always wanted to see a massive group of just-within-the-legal-limit-of-nudity very hairy gay males riding on floats nearby blasting the most fabulous music you could think of just under the legal outdoor volume limit (80 dB?)
Not quite what you were asking for, but along the same lines....
I just cant belive Westboro and Phelps are still around. You would think people this moronic would have bred them selves out of existence by now.
Cant argue against free speech. But I dont see why free speech should trump the rights of familes to bury their family members in peace, with out having to be subjected to Westboros garbage.
I wonder if any groups have lowered them selves to Phelps' level and gone and protested at the funerals of any of the members of Westboro? It would be interesting to see Westboros reaction then.
I'm all for free speech and agree with the decion but think that there should also be some sort of limit on how close one can protest/show free speech at a funeral. The deceased and their family have rights as well.
Many states have laws that impose limits on location of these protests, this decision doesn't impact those. This was a very narrow case, focused largely on the ability to collect damages for infliction of emotional distress caused by these protests. The ability to impose time, place and manner restrictions on protests wasn't addressed.
The Following User Says Thank You to valo403 For This Useful Post:
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilsonFourTwo
The soldiers die to protect the very freedom that allows the picketers.
I dunno.....I'd almost be kind of proud to have people picket my arrival in a coffin. It's a living, breathing example of what I died for and is therefore something I'd be proud of and OK with (Even if I find it distasteful).
EDIT: Someone should show this news story to Alanis Morissette. It's an actual example of irony.
Actually it's the exact opposite of irony.
People protesting something stupid at the funeral of someone who died for those peoples right to protest something stupid isn't ironic at all, it's actually the exact outcome that someone could expect.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
