Fallen Marine's father says anti-gay pickets will draw gunfire

reply to post by muzzleflash


Technically, harrasment is a crime, and punishable by law.

Originally posted by SMR
If I go out and call someone a 'faggot' I would be arrested and charged for a hate crime. Yet when these guys do it, it is protected under "Freedom of Speech" ? REALLY !?

Not to mention you can also get arrested for making racist slurs in public. Look at that kid in New Jersey who managed to get on the PA system at a Wal-Mart and say for "All black people to leave the store." Police took it very seriously and hooked him up eventually. Yet all these church-bimbos get is just a slap on the wrist? What's wrong with this picture?

Originally posted by SMR
Then perhaps the laws should be changed. Made more clear. Hate is hate no matter how you display it. In a march. On a sign. Hate should not be protected by any Constitution, period. If you allow it to be protected, then when will we change as human beings.
Just to be clear - "I Hate Monday's" is different from "I Hate Gays"

Where do we draw the line? How should the government draw the line? So far there's been no threat of violence just a bunch of loons cuckling.

Let me give a crappy example:

Let's say Person X hates the government (or to make this a bit more lighthearted switch the word government w/ fat people--they also have no discriminatory rights yet). He makes crazy signs and walks in front of government buildings all over the country, yet seems to be harmless nutter. Then one day he makes a sign that says "BLAST the Government!"(Blast the Fat people) ...when he meant damn. The next day he amps it up to get even more attention...near Arlington National Cemetary--> "Your Children are Gone because of YOUR Government! (Fat people!) Learn the TRUTH! PUT BLAME WHERE IT BELONGS!"... then he goes to Quantico to protest the mistreatment of Bradley Manning (the unhealthy choices on the menu at the base) "THE GOVERNMENT IS THE REASON PEOPLE DIE!" "NOW IT IS TIME TO BRING AN END TO THIS!" (Obesity)

Whoooooops. Sorry. Your Constitutional Freedom of Speech doesn't apply now becase of a Supreme Court Ruling based on the WBC. "You can't speak of the federal government (obese people) like that... We didn't cause death and it sounds like you are getting a little too crazy...you're talking to service members,you're talking to their families...you could be a threat to our national security (you're angrily demanding they diet)... and even though it's public land because of our ruling that does not matter, this is a special case..."

Oh by the way, Habeus Corpus is nonexistent too (remember? y'all let us sneak that one in, ahahahaha). Goodluck defending yourself against us in court...oh wait...

Love,

Your BigBrother. (Jenny Craig)

reply to post by JonoEnglish




Yes, I meant veterns of war. Others who are supportive of the soldiers and their families show up too. I think their next stop is a soldier's funeral in Kentucky.

As far as being named a terrorist if you support the following issues of groups, Jan the man who heads of Homeland Security has named you a suspect domestic terrorist: If you belong to a second amendment group, a third party, a pro constitution group, pro-life group, if you believe in the end times of the Bible and/or are an evangelical Christian or if you are a vetern of the Iraq war. There are many more "domestic terrorist" groups Obama's crack team of leftists has identified, too.

Given this list of enemies, I am one and proud of it.

I would say that true freedom is anarchy. Yet no one wants true freedom because it comes with fear and uncertainty. So what everyone want actually wants is something that feels free but not truly free. This is why the government could take away our rights slowly without most noticing, because we don't really want to be free. As long as we can have our three meals and watch tv and buy things we would not care if most of our money and resources are funneled from third world nations while we starve it's people.

This brings me to the whole freedom of speech thing. The constitution pretty much only guarantees that the government does nothing when people protest, it simply keeps out the government from speech of people. What it does not do is prevent people from taking action for or against those who spoke freely. This is because while anyone can say what they want, others can act how they want. We might say some things are not moral or right or legal or what not, but we can say these things because we KNOW for FACT that we cannot control the actions of others, so we feel the need to CONVINCE them with our language. At the end of the day, none of this really matters, the only way to truly stop someone from doing something is to remove them from our plane of existence, and thats why people have been killing each other for eons, because while it might not be moral or right, it always takes care of the problem.

So while I'm not at the level of hate to actually kill one of the members of WBC, eventually, someone will. When that happens I'll support them fully. Some may feel hypocritical of me to say this, but, I will support anything that I feel necessary until I don't, it really depends on what side of the bed I wake up on.

now you see why the term christian began as a derogatory term .Only evil and hate is being construed by them wack jobs. they are pagan anyway and dont even know it www.wwyd.org... have a blessed Sabbath ya'all.

I pity these sad souls that spend their entire existence HATING. It's sickening. Seeing their signs like "Thank god for IED's" just makes us want to hate, but we need to pity them. They are lost....

I once attended WBC just to see what it was like.
They kicked me out for not reading from the King James Version of the Bible and for not being "properly dressed".

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by pteridine

You are wrong. Freedom of speech has some limitations, i.e., the old example of a false cry of fire in a crowded venue. For details on a modern case see www.firstamendmentcenter.org...

I have been saying that !

I said 10 times in this thread the only freedom of speech you don't have is to get people killed.

No, you did not. You said

"Wrong. Freedom of speech means that everyone can say whatever they want.

It has little to do with government actually, although speaking out against govt is part of it.

But freedom of speech covers everything. All the way down to protesting a funeral, a brothel, you can go protest against Westboro all day. This is freedom."

As to getting people killed; that is not the only limitation. You should read about this before you post again on the subject.

Fred Phelps is sub-human and should be ignored. The "church" will collapse when the twisted old sob is dead and, at 81, he can't last much longer. I hope no one wastes the time and effort to clip him but he is playing with fire and goading people in times of emotional distress. Fortunately, he is a cowardly sort and lets others do his dirty work while he stays out of harms way.
When you mess with the bull, you eventually get the horns.

reply to post by Garfee


Then they'd be tea partiers.

They're creeps, but the only people they actually hurt are themselves and their own loved ones. I understand the father in this picture, even sympathize - were I in his position, I might entertain similar thoughts. But I'm certain that this man will realize that carrying through would do more harm to the honor of his son than any bunch of yahoos from Oklahoma or Kansas or wherever ever could.

A year ago my brother was arrested in town for using the F word in front of a cop. It was not directed at a cop, but someone else. The officer told him it was considered a "fighting word" and took him to jail. Imagine our surprise when I get a call to come and get him from jail for using the F word.

So let me get this straight; Westboro is now protected constitutionally to go to funerals and call dead soliders in their caskets "Faggot" or any other word, but my brother goes to jail for using the F word? Something sure stinks.

And does this mean we can start doing away with "Free speech zones" at protests?

its the educational system that needs to be fixed. we keep on producing ignorant children.

reply to post by Thunder heart woman


Your brother could have filed charges for wrongful arrest in this case - unless we're talking like, decades ago - "fighting words" are not actually legally recognized anywhere, due to sheer subjectivity.

I do not agree with what WBC does, but freedom of speech is the first law.
Yes even if it is hateful speech, we protect fools as well as real folk.
It is not right what they do but, it is not right to subject a family who already mourns to such a thing.
I like the idea the MC clubs have of flying enough flags high enough that the families do not have to see the hate.
But they must keep the MC clubs so far away from the protesters for the protesters safety.
There seems to be no way around this evil thing that some do.
However, i would wager the patriarch of the family only has a few more years before he naturally punches out.
I would also wager there will be flags and signs at his funeral as well.
Why do people not protest WBC at their homestead? Constantly.

while what they do is not a crime, it is just BAD TACT and tasteless....oh....and disrespectful.

they can't be mad if they eat a few high velocity tomatoes for being douches.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by BobbyTarass

 

Wrong. Freedom of speech means that everyone can say whatever they want.

It has little to do with government actually, although speaking out against govt is part of it.

But freedom of speech covers everything. All the way down to protesting a funeral, a brothel, you can go protest against Westboro all day. This is freedom.

You don't actually know anything about freedom. You only support your side, and the other side doesn't get any freedom at all. Hypocritical to the max.

Everyone can say whatever they want? You sure you don't want to qualify that statement? I think things like threatening to kill another person and yelling "fire" in a crowded theater are two examples of our inability to say anything we want without legal repercussions.

I do think that counter-protesting the WBC is a great idea, and I would do it myself if I didn't have to make a living. One tactic would be to try to speak directly to the young children the protesters have with them, holding signs that say "YOUR PARENTS ARE WRONG ABOUT GOD" and "GOD LOVES EVERYBODY" and "QUESTION YOUR PARENTS' BELIEFS". These people have young, impressionable kids with them, and if they were bombarded with these messages at every protest, they would at least take notice of them, maybe even think about them.

Another fun idea would be to dress up as though you are part of the family and stand right with them, but have different signs that would make the whole group look even worse than they already do, such as "DEATH TO [N-WORD]S" (note: i will censor myself so as not to incur the wrath of the mods, who for some reason are perfectly okay with the word "faggot" - bunch of touchy homophobes), "INCEST IS GOD'S WILL" or "JESUS WAS A PEDOPHILE". Then you take photos of the protest and post them online so people will think that the Phelpses have gone even crazier. A variation on this would be to have on your sign some kind of blasphemous depiction of the prophet Muhammad. Once that photo made the rounds on the Internet, things might get even more interesting at future protests.

The anti-gay group has crossed the *SNIP* line this time.
I'm all for peaceful solution.....freedom of speech and what not, but this is just too much.


Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

If you who do not want the Westboro Baptist Church to be allowed to protest funerals, then you are really supporting laws which hide the truth. Not the truth of whether God hates soldiers for supporting a country which supports homosexuals (this is something we can never know one way or the other), but the truth of the opinions of the members of the Westboro Baptist Church. They likely really do believe that God does send soldiers to Hell for supporting a country which supports gays. And it seems likely that it is true that they are happy that God does this.

It is likewise true that they believe God will send specific soldiers like the ones whose funerals they protest to Hell, as any specific soldier is included in the group of all soldiers that fights for the US. The more truth the better. If we do not let them say their view point it doesn't mean they still aren't believing these things anyway, so what is the extra harm in us knowing about it? Isn't it better to know the truth always rather than not know it? How many of you would read the minds of those around you if you were suddenly gifted with pyschic powers? Wouldn't you be a little curious to know what people are thinking and atleast be tempted to read the thoughts of others even if you didn't think it was right because of privacy reasons? Well the privacy issue is not a problem in this case because the Westboro Baptist Church members voluntarily give us their opinions.

The right to free speech is so much more important than a person's so called "right" to not be offended. Take for example that fact that I would be happy with the fact that Westboro church were protesting a funeral of one of my family members who had died. It wouldn't cheer me up enough to not be sad about my family member dieing but it would be something which would make me very slightly happier and make me think. "Well, atleast we still have free speech in America." At worst I would be completely nuetral about protestors being at a funeral of a loved one. It would be the least of my problems if a loved one of mine were dead. So here is a case where speech is not offending me, even if it does offend most others. Words cannot not harm people, only our own perceptions about those words can harm us and it is a very bad thing to have laws which make people have to consider how every other person will regard what they say. Offense is in the eye of the beholder. It is a terrible slippery slope when you start to regulate what people can say or how they can express themselves. Because next time expressing the minority view point that you hold dear might be outlawed.

The responses here indicate IMO that many have highly charged opinions. I understand, but to suggest that one should "escallate" the behavior even to gunfire is counter-productive and insightful.

One should "respond in kind" to this type of "free speach" issue. By "responding in kind" one would be covered by the same Freedom of Expression statute that protects the anti-gay pickets.

These people (anti-gay picketers) become your targets. Target them at their home. No doubt they have a home and one could legally picket their homes when they are there. One could target their neighbors and legally leaflet them to advise them of their neighbor's activities. If they have a meeting place of course you could target it for picketing, as well. In other words shame them as they shame others.