Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Westboro Baptist Church Hate Group Petition Reaches 85,983 Signatures

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by beezzer
 



Yes.

I don't agree with them, but I'll fight to defend their right to spew their hatred.

I don't agree with OWS.
I don't agree with progressive platforms.

But I will NEVER shut them up!


So it's my right to stand in front of the White House and praise the name of Lucifer?


Rock on, pumpkin!


I may not agree, but I'll punch anyone in the face who tries to deny your right to say it!


I agree that free speech should be allowed. But that do not mean at any specific moment or time. Going to places when people mourn for attention is just wrong. There is nothing morally ok with what they are doing. If they where allowed by any amendment to touch other people then they would put their finger in a open wound to make as much hurt as possible. This is people who find joy in torturing other people for attention and financial gains. Typical ego demonic behaviour from bullying soul trash.




posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Agarta
 


For one thing, WB is not a church and the Phelps' are not christians. As much as being able to classify them as a hategroup would be great, they still can excersice freedom of speech. The Phelps' are just a family of lawyers looking to provoke people who will lose their sh** and come punch them in the face, so they can turn around and sue them for money. They are parasites. I'm concerned about the morality of the man/woman who allowed them to declare as a church.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 



For one thing, WB is not a church and the Phelps' are not christians


They are "attending" the funeral, as a registered organization, on behalf of the Christian god...in their own minds at least. But they are legally registered as a church, still. I believe that makes you incorrect on both counts.


As much as being able to classify them as a hategroup would be great, they still can excersice freedom of speech. The Phelps' are just a family of lawyers looking to provoke people who will lose their sh** and come punch them in the face, so they can turn around and sue them for money.


And this doesn't justify a petition?


They are parasites. I'm concerned about the morality of the man/woman who allowed them to declare as a church.


They paid the money to register. No one cares about anything else. For all we know, the person who filed their papers was an atheist, or a Muslim. Either way, action must be taken, or everyone is going to say, "Hey, look, they can protest homosexuality and praise God for killing those children! I'm going to stand outside the local high school and protest their drug policies!"



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   




So you're okay with free speech, but with "conditions"?



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Free speech and ignorant jackasses don't go very well together, and our leaders know that. There's a point in every freedom where you draw a line. You think freedom of speech doesn't have a line? A boundary?

That's a laugh.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by beezzer
 


Free speech and ignorant jackasses don't go very well together, and our leaders know that. There's a point in every freedom where you draw a line. You think freedom of speech doesn't have a line? A boundary?

That's a laugh.


If free speech was based soley on IQ, the world would be a very quiet place.

Draw the line where ever you wish.

I wonder why the New Black Panthers haven't been censured. The KKK. OWS. The Tea Party.

Why not them as well.

Let's just shut everyone up so no-ones feelings get hurt.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
The logical extreme of free speech is that you can do as much harm to people as you want, as long as you only use psychological terror.
Am I right in assuming that it's a choice between that and a society where no views whatsoever are allowed to be stated even if the method of delivery isn't an attack?
edit on 17-12-2012 by EllaMarina because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   




Funerals should be off limits to all political and counter-religious views speech. The right for the people to practise their religion in peace when mourning is higher than any other peoples right to use their mourning for own selfish reasons. They can speak their minds at any other place at that time or at that place at another time.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 


So you believe in conditional speech.

Not free speech.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 

Having read the article and often payed attention to the news and what all is stated, and in particular the WBC, and they do like to be in the thick of things, and the posts, the following can be stated:

The Freedom of Speech, it is a freedom that the founding fathers wanted to have protected. Even they knew from first hand experience that to deny such would cause problems for citizens, having themselves been under the order to be executed for comitting treason all for speaking out against the King of England.

We all can agree with speech and expression that we agree with, there is never a problem, however, when it comes to that which we find offensive, well then many people would find hard to defend and tend to shy away. The truest test of this one freedom, the freedom of speech, is not defending what we agree with, but what we find disagreeable. Without defending that, while we may have speech that seem agreeable, it would also ultimately lead to areas of censorship and prohibition of works. Think about it, if we ban one group from speaking or expressing their ideas, what is to stop another group from doing the exact same thing? Could you live in a world where it was forbidden to speak your mind, or how about some of the great works of litrature, how about we ban them from the libraries and forbid them from being read or even discussed?

No, if anything, we should allow the WBC to exercise their rights and freedoms, protecting them along the way. But for the record, my general feeling, is that while we should follow the laws, there is nothing that would prohibit businesses from refusing that group services, say gas or food or even hotel accomidations.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 

Having read the article and often payed attention to the news and what all is stated, and in particular the WBC, and they do like to be in the thick of things, and the posts, the following can be stated:

The Freedom of Speech, it is a freedom that the founding fathers wanted to have protected. Even they knew from first hand experience that to deny such would cause problems for citizens, having themselves been under the order to be executed for comitting treason all for speaking out against the King of England.

We all can agree with speech and expression that we agree with, there is never a problem, however, when it comes to that which we find offensive, well then many people would find hard to defend and tend to shy away. The truest test of this one freedom, the freedom of speech, is not defending what we agree with, but what we find disagreeable. Without defending that, while we may have speech that seem agreeable, it would also ultimately lead to areas of censorship and prohibition of works. Think about it, if we ban one group from speaking or expressing their ideas, what is to stop another group from doing the exact same thing? Could you live in a world where it was forbidden to speak your mind, or how about some of the great works of litrature, how about we ban them from the libraries and forbid them from being read or even discussed?

No, if anything, we should allow the WBC to exercise their rights and freedoms, protecting them along the way. But for the record, my general feeling, is that while we should follow the laws, there is nothing that would prohibit businesses from refusing that group services, say gas or food or even hotel accomidations.


A persons right to not have to listen to bullies is higher than the bullies right to create missary/harm. This is clearly a bullying thing and has nothing to do with getting their views/message across.

And this thread proves it. Almost everybody that have ever heard of christian fundamentalists knows what they stand for already so their so called free speech is not about the right to make sure everybody knows their view.

Sooner or later these people will face what they have done.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by LittleByLittle


A persons right to not have to listen to bullies is higher than the bullies right to create missary/harm.


Where does it state that in the Constitution?

Where does it state that anywhere?



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
A "right" is something you are born with.

It is not something given to you by the government.
It is not something allowed by the government.

Once you have conditions placed on any right, then it stops being a right and instead, it becomes an allowance granted to you by the government.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 


Indeed. It's called psychological abuse. If it cannot be said to a child, then it cannot be said at that child's funeral. And honestly, anything that instigates at such an event is likely to go very badly. And even if it doesn't happen immediately, there's no guarantee that something won't happen later. The worst thing to happen at the funeral of a bunch of massacred children, is to have a crowd of people desecrating the death of those children. Memories can last a very long time, and leave scars that last just as long. This is fair to no one, free speech or not. So either those WBC nutjobs are controlled for their own sake, or they may end up in a very bad way.

Sometimes, freedom itself can cause pain and suffering for those too stupid to know how to use it. That's why you have your buddy to hold you back when you're itching to pound someone into the ground. And so with this, the WBC needs to be stomped, just for a little while. They are gas on the flames at this point. To NOT do anything about them, is to be extremely blind and foolish. There's a lot of political and social disadvantages to disrespecting one freedom in favor of another, especially when comparing them.

I would have thought ATS would understand this. Maybe I was wrong. But I have explained it, so hopefully, now you do.
edit on 17-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 


Oh, let's face it, bullying is freely condoned as long as the sacred loophole of a religious view is inserted.
Complaints will result in a virtual spanking of the victim with a rolled up copy of the Constitution.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Regardless of the disagreements with the necessity of the petition, it is almost at 135,000 signatures. There's a lot of people who don't like this church.
edit on 17-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by beezzer
 



I believe in the right to free speech. If people want to face the consequences of that speech (a pop to the nose) then so be it.


Free speech, eh? Then why am I not allowed to insult your mother, your heritage, your intelligence, and your weight on this forum? Not that I would even if I could. I'm just saying...freedom of speech is very much an illusion, because freedom of speech would cause more problems than it solves.

Case in point.


This tired old, ignorant argument again... Because the 1st amendment applies TO THE GOVERNMENT. ATS is a PRIVATE COMAPNY and can limit whatever speech they so choose, and if you don't like it then find another forum that will not limit your speech. The 1st amendment does not aplly to a person or private entity... it ONLY APPLIES TO THE GOVERNMENT.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Regardless of the disagreements with the necessity of the petition, it is almost at 135,000 signatures. There's a lot of people who don't like this church.
edit on 17-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


That's a lot of ignorant people that do not understand what rights are and where they come from



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by Agarta
 


Regardless of what they say or who they say it to, they have the right to say it. I hate what they say and what they stand for, but they have the right. If their speech can be shut down, what is to stop the government from stopping YOURS?? If enough people sign some BS petition to silence your speech then I guess the precedent will have been set.


They have the right to speak, and they often get more back. But there is a line to cross, i dare say that one day they will evoke the American law of incitement, it would only take a couple of rednecks to cause trouble as an immediate result of their rants, to put them in the brown stuff. Or perhaps a civil lawsuit, to test the veracity of what they come out with. I mean they play on the law, so it would be poetic if the law could bring them down.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I understand the points being made here, but I still think it's incredible that the right to state your opinion with impunity also gives you the right to keep being wrong at the expense of those around you, especially when they are struggling to cope with their own problems.

The freedom of speech was intended to allow people to speak up about problems, not to allow people to make those problems worse.
edit on 17-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join