Congress Passes Restrictions On Military Funeral Protests, Delivers Blow To Westboro Baptist Church

page: 1
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Congress Passes Restrictions On Military Funeral Protests, Delivers Blow To Westboro Baptist Church


www.huffingtonpost.com

Westboro Baptist Church protesters will soon be severely limited in their ability to disrupt military funerals, after Congress passed a sweeping veterans bill this week that includes restrictions on such demonstrations.

According to "The Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012," which is now headed to President Barack Obama's desk, demonstrators will no longer be allowed to picket military funerals two hours before or after a service. The bill also requires protestors to be at least 300 feet away from grieving family members.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Good! Personally I think this is a great thing. I can understand the right for people to protest for what they believe in, but what these protesters are doing at military funerals is just flat out wrong and should not be allowed to take place.

I am glad that congress finally came together and agreed that something need to be done on this issue. Now I am sure there will be people saying this is a infringement on their rights. Which, in a sense it is. But what they do is wrong. Saying it was "God's will" to kill the soldiers and that it is part of "God's plan". Imagine how the families of these soldiers feel?


The bill also contains a variety of measures meant to address veterans health, benefits, housing and education. Obama is expected to sign to the legislation later this month.


So what do you think ATS?

www.huffingtonpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


+2 more 
posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I wonder... Why didn't they extend this to the other funerals WBC protests?



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
This was absolutely the wrong time to pick another free speech fight and I can hear Westboro's lawyers laughing hysterically as we sit here reading the story. I almost can, given where they are based. lol....

I hate what these people do and frankly, I hate THEM. Miserable people. Every last sorry one of them. I've made clear at one point in the past that the National Cemetary my father lay in can call me for obstructive counter-protest if they ever show up here. I'd be happy to help form a human wall to block these little haters from making a Military family miserable.



Having said that. Their right of free speech is no less valuable or critical to our overall freedom than mine. If I demand my right, as I did, to stand with Occupy in what I thought to be worth it back then, they have the right to do their thing. .....and people have the right to generally obstruct them in any way that doesn't commit a criminal offense against them personally or their property.

Government has NO place in this. It's an issue among the population, torn in protest over several issues....and this Government did more to CREATE this situation of protest and hate than ANY of the issues ever could have. They can butt out...and let it all settle down over time, is my thinking.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by SloAnPainful


Good! Personally I think this is a great thing. I can understand the right for people to protest for what they believe in, but what these protesters are doing at military funerals is just flat out wrong and should not be allowed to take place.

I am glad that congress finally came together and agreed that something need to be done on this issue. Now I am sure there will be people saying this is a infringement on their rights. Which, in a sense it is. But what they do is wrong. Saying it was "God's will" to kill the soldiers and that it is part of "God's plan". Imagine how the families of these soldiers feel?


The bill also contains a variety of measures meant to address veterans health, benefits, housing and education. Obama is expected to sign to the legislation later this month.


So what do you think ATS?

www.huffingtonpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


I agree %100, some years a go a friend of mine lost his son(2004) At his funeral were these protesters, my friend had to restrain himself from blowing these people away. His wife and other kids were so upset they needed months of consoling as my friend did not have a great welcome back from Nam. (he served 3 tours0 His dad and uncle were in WW2 and one uncle in Korea that was killed. His Grandfather was in WW1 and was crippled by a gas attack! Just show some respect whether you agree with what is going on or not, people should just show some class to these families.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   
You mean the congress actually did something right for once?
I guess I will have to give them props on this one!

I really think that one of these days someone is gonna get real mad at them protesting and open fire on the lot of them.


+14 more 
posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
So 1st amendment only applies if you agree with the message? That's not very american.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


I agree completely. I find the message and practices of WBC to be despicable. But I stand up for their rights, just like anyone else.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
(removed)
(wrote in response to wrong thread)
edit on 3-8-2012 by TXRabbit because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SloAnPainful
 


Just Picket WBC's sleep...

There aren't a ton of them so just stand outside their houses and yell and make sure they never get a good nights sleep.

Have people take turns doing this until they get fed up and try to complain.....but they can't because they do much worse...



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
- They still have their constitutional right to protest .... good.
- They don't have a right to disrupt the religious practices (funerals) of others ... good.
Seems to be a good call by Congress.
(
did I just say that? Saying Congress did something good doesn't happen often!!)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
It makes it worse that these soldiers died protecting rights, and yet they (the protesters) are abusing a right that soldiers protected and died for.

-SAP-
edit on 3-8-2012 by SloAnPainful because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-8-2012 by SloAnPainful because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


I agree completely. I find the message and practices of WBC to be despicable. But I stand up for their rights, just like anyone else.


I have to disagree.


Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Definition of PEACEABLE
1 a : disposed to peace : not contentious or quarrelsome
b : quietly behaved
2 : free from strife or disorder

There is nothing in the constitution that protects protesters that want to cause nothing but trouble. It is not a right.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 
Good point you have. They are welcome to exercise their free speech rights, however protesting funerals in close proximity is arguably not a peaceful assembly... Therefore I can see banning it justifiable, constitutionally.

There has already been in place a law that bans protests at national cemeteries. From a CNN article,

The new restrictions expand on provisions in a federal law passed in 2006 that banned protests within 300 feet of national cemeteries from an hour before a funeral to an hour after it, with violators facing fines and up to a year in prison.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SloAnPainful
 


Good.

What they have been doing was never under the umbrella of the 1st A anyway as they are bothering private citizens mourning the death of a loved one and not addressing their grievances before the government. I don't know why it took the idiots in Congress that long to finally put an end to it.

On second thought, yes I do.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by skepticconwatcher
 


I agree 100%, and also making it about religion made the situation worse in my opinion...Many soldiers are religious and to say it's "God's way" and "God's plan" just adds more fuel to the flames.

-SAP-


+3 more 
posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SloAnPainful
 


Wrong. WrongWrongWrong.

Once you start limiting free speech, even with assclowns like Westboro, then who is next?

I STRONGLY disagree with this.

And yes, I'm active duty Army.
edit on 3-8-2012 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   
This will be struck down by the Supreme Court in a red-hot minute if signed into law. Clearly, it's a violation of the First Amendment. Like it or not the WBC has a right to picket a funeral and say all the hurtful things they want as that is within their rights recognized by the First Amendment.

Now, maybe Congress should focus on more pressing matters like the economy.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I understand it's a free speech issue, but the issue about protesting at funerals, I am against. Everyone can have their free speech, but making a public display in front of sad and upset family members, is just flat out wrong imo.

-SAP-



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
I don't agree with the Congress making this law. The First Amendment starts out with " Congress shall make no law...". Freedom of speech is a fundimental civil right.

OTOH, the Constitution restricts action of the government and I can't see anywhere in the First Amendment that gives the right of one citizen to harass and disrupt the life of another. The WBC scumbags should be dealt with in the civil courts, not by passing unConstitutional laws, IMHO.





new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join