It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


AZ passes law keeping protesters away from funerals

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 08:29 PM
300 feet? Hmmmmm....

Here's an idea:

How about a bunch of people take out restraining orders on the members of the WBC?

If enough people did it, and by camping out in the right spots, they'd never be able to leave their compound..

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 08:48 PM

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by mishigas
I agree with you up to a point. I'm a little hesitant to get into the how of their choice to express themselves. Remember Piss Christ? And their motives are protected, too. Remember The People vs Larry Flynt?

In either situation people had at least some control over being exposed to the artwork or Flynt’s movies. In this case, the families of the people whose funerals Phelps and his gang decide to picket don’t have any choice really. In fact, in all of these cases (funerals), most likely, people are exposed to Westboro’s views against their will.

Interesting point. I could probably come up with some examples where people did have choice, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a great point.

And since you bring up Flint’s name, I believe that in Hustler v. Falwell, the Court mentioned and made the distinction between speech which could be considered objectionable, and speech with specific intent to inflict emotional harm. I’m not arguing that in regards to Westboro’s actions it’s a very clear, black and white, case. Rarely, in fact, when it comes to the First Amendment, is there any such thing as a black and white case.

This is exactly the passage I was thinking of when I referenced Flynt. But it is a weaker argument; most speech that is objectionable will inflict some degree of emotional distress. However, it might be possible to inflict emotional distress with 'speech' which would normally be considered innocuous. For example, some photographs that elicit some event which can never be completed... a graduation, a marriage, an athletic competition.

I don't think there is a single standard to cover all cases.

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 08:53 PM
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

You can be assured, that many of us have already pledged to travel to the funeral of this little girl and her grieving family. We are going to be there as support for the family but most of all, We are going to be the large Buffer Zone for the family and their friends at the funeral for 9 year old girl. Keeping Fred Phelps' Hate as far from the funeral as possible. From:

How To Help Stop Fred Phelps' Hate.
Late this week, the parents of little 9-yr-old Christina Green will do something that no parents should ever have to do - they'll bury their little girl. The evil Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist "Church" in Kansas has threatened to visit Tucson and bring to this funeral the vileness for which his group has become famous. Numerous groups on both sides of the political aisle have come out with plans to shield the funeral and its attendees from the onslaught of Phelps' group. We at Sharpe In The Morning are touched and moved by the fact that during a time of contentious political speech, the two opposing sides are coming together to oppose true evil.

We invite you to participate, and you can get information about the efforts by e-mailing Jennifer Leslie at, and you can follow the development of these efforts at the Smart Girl Politics Arizona website. Please consider participating . . .

edit on 11-1-2011 by guohua because: Spell check

posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 02:41 AM
Free Speech has nothing to do with this as no one has the right to protest a funeral. Way to go Tuscon! Hopefully this creates and sets a national precedece that will effective shut this group of hatemongerers and agents of Satan down!

No self respecting group of people anywhere on the planet will ever disrespect the dead in the hour of their mourining!

BTW, to protest a funeral is not a right defined in the 1st Amendment.

edit on 12-1-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 02:48 AM
reply to post by Cassius666

Have you been under a rock?

They've been protesting at the funerals of our fallen service men for the last 6 years (or more?).

They've gotten no good press but the keep chugga chugga choo choo'in

posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 07:11 AM
Again, this law that Tucson passed in no way violates their free only states they can protest no closer than 300 ft, which is still too close.

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in