God Hates Fags?

You`ll always have people like this. The much bigger problem imo, is all the airtime they are getting. If modern "journalism" wouldnt be so addicted to producing high outrage, blood, guts and conflict in every paper they sell, these idiots would remain in obscurity. Of course seeing that these types of threads get thousands of replies, its also the sensationlist-tabloidish crowds keeping these subjects alive. Hatred juices people up, is seen as entertainment.

The solution is to pull back the TV-Cameras. Thats the last thing they want.

reply to post by Secularist

its completely ridiculous that the U.S. gov would allow the 1st amendment right to trump somebodys feelings

Sorry to say, that the Constitution was not based off of emotion when it was implemented. No one has the right, to not be offended.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Secularist

 

its completely ridiculous that the U.S. gov would allow the 1st amendment right to trump somebodys feelings

Sorry to say, that the Constitution was not based off of emotion when it was implemented. No one has the right, to not be offended.

Thanks I know the constitution. Laws are changed all the time, and yes, nobody should be allowed to picket a funeral. Funerals are not for your garbage hate speech.

reply to post by Secularist


If you knew the Constitution as you claim?, You would know that no one has the right, to not be offended...period.

I don't agree with the " protesting ' anymore than you do, but the fact still remains, that atleast in my life, and my view, the Bill of Rights reigns supreme. With that, though I don't agree with these religious zealots, I do agree that they are exercising their Rights. No matter how this topic makes you " feel ", the Constitution is not based off of emotion.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Secularist

 

If you knew the Constitution as you claim?, You would know that no one has the right, to not be offended...period.

I don't agree with the " protesting ' anymore than you do, but the fact still remains, that atleast in my life, and my view, the Bill of Rights reigns supreme. With that, though I don't agree with these religious zealots, I do agree that they are exercising their Rights. No matter how this topic makes you " feel ", the Constitution is not based off of emotion.

Yeah, Pat Condell is real smart by saying that nobody has the right to not be offended, but yes people do have the right to not be offended when it comes to somebodys funeral. I dont care who you are or what you think your beliefs are nobody has the right to go to somebodys funeral where the poor kids mother and father are there and in their face you have assholes calling their son a fa.ggot and that hes burning in Hell. I dont care what the constitution says about it, it doesnt mention that, and that wasnt taken into consideration when it was written. It should, and will someday be revised.

reply to post by Secularist

but yes people do have the right to not be offended

Once again, your solidifying your arrogance in believing that the above quote you made holds value.. The First Amendment Right grants the freedom of speech, regardless if you like it or not. If you firmly believe in the above statement, then the whole premise of the 1st Amendment wouldn't have merit.

and will someday be revised.

Do you mean to say amended? Surely someone who claims they know the Constitution would know that the Rights do not get " revised " but amended? You're only promoting your ignorance by making inept comments.

How could God hate something he created? That wouldn't make any sense. If anything God loves fags because he loves all things (but he probably wouldn't call them "fags").

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Secularist

 

but yes people do have the right to not be offended

Once again, your solidifying your arrogance in believing that the above quote you made holds value.. The First Amendment Right grants the freedom of speech, regardless if you like it or not. If you firmly believe in the above statement, then the whole premise of the 1st Amendment wouldn't have merit.

and will someday be revised.

Do you mean to say amended? Surely someone who claims they know the Constitution would know that the Rights do not get " revised " but amended? You're only promoting your ignorance by making inept comments.

Youre really stupid if you think im a politician that needs to use the word amended on an internet forums. You know what it means so dont be stupid, which is apparently asking too much of you.

reply to post by Secularist


I'm simply pointing out your ignorance for all to see! Your alleged knowledge in the Constitution, was short lived, only to display your arrogance...with simpleton responses as your previous.

You base your comments off of emotion, knowingly and willingly ignoring what the Constitution states. Which further suggests that none of your comments have merit.

I think re-runs of sesame street are in order for ya~

Why is a thread titled "God Hates Fags" with no news article or headline that matches allowed to exist on ATS? All it is is a bashing thread. No conspiracy, no news, just people wasting posts and lots of hatred. This should be deleted ASAP.

reply to post by jjkenobi


I didn't intend for this to turn into a bash fest. I just wanted to bring this ruling to light. I don't see why you think it should be deleted. The title is "God Hates Fags?" implying a question. I was just hoping to get other ATSers points of view. Sorry to offend you.

The title alone made me think of cigarettes first before going to Homosexual . In any event would this not take away from the omnibenevolent aspect of God? In any event as to the question you proposed back in the OP I don't think I would contain myself if a friend or loved one was homosexual and their funeral was being protested. I may be hated for this but I'd turn to anger first and foremost and probably lash it. Not the best or perhaps wisest thing, but in the situation it'd be the truest thing to my heart. I seriously think something is wrong if one is to Pickett a funeral.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Secularist

 

I'm simply pointing out your ignorance for all to see! Your alleged knowledge in the Constitution, was short lived, only to display your arrogance...with simpleton responses as your previous.

You base your comments off of emotion, knowingly and willingly ignoring what the Constitution states. Which further suggests that none of your comments have merit.

I think re-runs of sesame street are in order for ya~

I think you need to stop reading out of a thesaurus and get real with yourself. Thanks.

Originally posted by Secularist
Thanks I know the constitution. Laws are changed all the time, and yes, nobody should be allowed to picket a funeral. Funerals are not for your garbage hate speech.

You guys need to be careful. As disgusting as it might be if we ask the government to handle it for us it will impact the freedom of assembly and association. The law will be too broad and I'm sure many in the government are all too eager to see such a law passed to protect themselves.

If they are not on private property (not in the cemetery) and a reasonable distance then it is lawful for them to protest. They should not even need a "license" to protest (which is unconstitutional).

They of course, should have to deal with the consequences of their actions.

Originally posted by ararisq

Originally posted by Secularist
Thanks I know the constitution. Laws are changed all the time, and yes, nobody should be allowed to picket a funeral. Funerals are not for your garbage hate speech.

You guys need to be careful. As disgusting as it might be if we ask the government to handle it for us it will impact the freedom of assembly and association. The law will be too broad and I'm sure many in the government are all too eager to see such a law passed to protect themselves.

If they are not on private property (not in the cemetery) and a reasonable distance then it is lawful for them to protest. They should not even need a "license" to protest (which is unconstitutional).

They of course, should have to deal with the consequences of their actions.

I know what you are saying and yes I agree that closing the door on one thing opens up doors to closing others but nobody is saying that you cant picket, you just wouldnt be allowed to picket funerals.

Im all for freedom of speech and assembly but in certain environments it should be outlawed, like for instance somebodys funeral, where family goes to say their last goodbyes to their loved ones. Somebodys funeral should not be allowed to be contaminated by others politics. They can do that anywhere else they want to, but a funeral should be specifically protected from protests. There is no reason for anybody to need to picket a funeral. Just no reason.

Mathew Shepards funeral for example is a prime example of why that should be the case.

reply to post by Secularist


Why not educate yourself a bit and read up on actual court cased involving freedom of speech?

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire

Terminiello v. Chicago

Gitlow v. New York - Free Speech - 1925

Texas v. Johnson - Free Speech - 1989

further explained by quoting Texas v. Johnson that it is a "bedrock principle" of free speech protection in the USA that "government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." Continue reading on Examiner.com: Free Speech in Westboro Baptist case upheld by SCOTUS 8-1 - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com www.examiner.com...

Saw this and thought it was comical. I hope stuff like this continues to happen but on a much larger scale. These people with the funny signs are awesome. What a good way to protest the protesters.

30 Best Anti Westboro Baptist Church signs

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Secularist

 

Why not educate yourself a bit and read up on actual court cased involving freedom of speech?

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire

Terminiello v. Chicago

Gitlow v. New York - Free Speech - 1925

Texas v. Johnson - Free Speech - 1989

further explained by quoting Texas v. Johnson that it is a "bedrock principle" of free speech protection in the USA that "government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." Continue reading on Examiner.com: Free Speech in Westboro Baptist case upheld by SCOTUS 8-1 - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com www.examiner.com...

edit on 2-3-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)

What does that have to do with anything?

The law is the law. Laws can be unjust.

Im just glad that "Anonymous" has been hacking their website and taking down their servers. I'm also happy that at least all of us can agree that they are sick and twisted individuals for protesting at funerals, even if it is their right to do so.