http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/02/judge-overturns-nebraska-ban-mutilating-flags/?test=latestnews
The Westboro Baptist Church just won a lawsuit, in which a judge overturned a Nebraska ban on flag desecration.
Score one for free speech... but also score one for God hating fags...
:vom:
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on September 03, 2010, 02:40:33 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/02/judge-overturns-nebraska-ban-mutilating-flags/?test=latestnews
The Westboro Baptist Church just won a lawsuit, in which a judge overturned a Nebraska ban on flag desecration.
Score one for free speech... but also score one for God hating fags...
Freedom of speech trumps those idiots. The right decision was made, regardless of what drove it.
Having said that, I wish the earth would swallow Westboro Baptist.
I have no problem with freedom of speech. I have a problem with forcing people to listen to them express that freedom.
Go have free speech wherever the fuck you want, but if people do not want to listen to you, then you are infringing on their right to privacy.
And I agree, the Westboro people need to just disappear.
Quote from: Kiaransalee on September 03, 2010, 04:38:19 PM
I have no problem with freedom of speech. I have a problem with forcing people to listen to them express that freedom.
Go have free speech wherever the fuck you want, but if people do not want to listen to you, then you are infringing on their right to privacy.
And I agree, the Westboro people need to just disappear.
Uh, If I don't want to listen then I need to ignore them. As distasteful as they are, they have a right to spout nonsense. Any infringement of the 1st Amendment scares the hell out of me.
Does the thing where they protest at gay soldiers' funerals count as free speech too?
I'm seriously asking, cause I wonder if that would have been allowed here in NL. OTOH our speech is not 100% free since you are prohibited by law to deny the Holocaust happened (which I do find a stupid rule, tbh, not that I'd want to deny it, but well, I think you get it).
So, say, you'd exempt funerals from free speech, just stick to the ceremony. Just funerals. How would that become scary?
Quote from: Charley Brown on September 03, 2010, 04:45:02 PM
Quote from: Kiaransalee on September 03, 2010, 04:38:19 PM
I have no problem with freedom of speech. I have a problem with forcing people to listen to them express that freedom.
Go have free speech wherever the fuck you want, but if people do not want to listen to you, then you are infringing on their right to privacy.
And I agree, the Westboro people need to just disappear.
Uh, If I don't want to listen then I need to ignore them. As distasteful as they are, they have a right to spout nonsense. Any infringement of the 1st Amendment scares the hell out of me.
My issue with them is the protests at the funerals. I don't think forcing your right to freedom of speech on a grieving families is right.
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 03, 2010, 05:04:42 PM
Does the thing where they protest at gay soldiers' funerals count as free speech too?
I'm seriously asking, cause I wonder if that would have been allowed here in NL. OTOH our speech is not 100% free since you are prohibited by law to deny the Holocaust happened (which I do find a stupid rule, tbh, not that I'd want to deny it, but well, I think you get it).
So, say, you'd exempt funerals from free speech, just stick to the ceremony. Just funerals. How would that become scary?
The First Amendment doesn't just grant freedom of speech. It also grants freedom of press, assembly, and religion. So they're free to assemble outside. However, it is also illegal to disrupt a religious service, IIRC, so nothing would really change either way, since they don't physically enter the church and disrupt the service.
Quote from: Kiaransalee on September 03, 2010, 04:38:19 PM
I have no problem with freedom of speech. I have a problem with forcing people to listen to them express that freedom.
Go have free speech wherever the fuck you want, but if people do not want to listen to you, then you are infringing on their right to privacy.
And I agree, the Westboro people need to just disappear.
I can't disagree more.
Free speech laws are there specifically to protect the worse speech out there. No one is going to infringe on popular speech, their specifically going to go after unpopular speech - which is way Atheists and Mormons against Park51 crack me up.
Privacy exists on private property. If you wanna remain private stay there. If you wanna be a human grow up.
EDIT: Please don't take my last statement as directed towards you specifically
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 03, 2010, 05:04:42 PM
Does the thing where they protest at gay soldiers' funerals count as free speech too?
I'm seriously asking, cause I wonder if that would have been allowed here in NL. OTOH our speech is not 100% free since you are prohibited by law to deny the Holocaust happened (which I do find a stupid rule, tbh, not that I'd want to deny it, but well, I think you get it).
So, say, you'd exempt funerals from free speech, just stick to the ceremony. Just funerals. How would that become scary?
yeah, unfortunately it does. They just had a lawsuit overturned filed by a guy who sued them for picketing his son's military funeral.
interestingly enough, from the wikipenial article on this complete ass hat:
QuotePhelps earned a law degree from Washburn University in 1962, and founded the Phelps Chartered law firm in 1964.[citation needed] The first notable cases were related to civil rights. "I systematically brought down the Jim Crow laws of this town," he says.[13] Phelps' daughter was quoted as saying, "We took on the Jim Crow establishment, and Kansas did not take that sitting down. They used to shoot our car windows out, screaming we were nigger lovers," and that the Phelps law firm made up one-third of the state's federal docket of civil rights cases.[16]
Phelps took cases on behalf of African American clients alleging racial discrimination by school systems, and a predominantly black American Legion post which had been raided by police, alleging racially based police abuse.[citation needed] Phelps' law firm obtained settlements for some clients.[17] Phelps also sued then-President Ronald Reagan over Reagan's appointment of a U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, alleging this violated separation of church and state. The case was dismissed by the U.S. district court.[17][18] Phelps' law firm, staffed by himself and family members also represented non-white Kansans in discrimination actions against Kansas Power and Light, Southwestern Bell, and the Topeka City Attorney, and represented two female professors alleging discrimination in Kansas universities.[16]
In the 1980s, Phelps received awards from the Greater Kansas City Chapter of Blacks in Government and the Bonner Springs branch of the NAACP, for his work on behalf of black clients.[19]
fuck, never thought I'd be ok with anything this fucker has ever done.
also:
QuoteIn response to Phelps' protests at military funerals, President George W. Bush signed the Respect for America's Fallen Heroes Act into law in May 2006,[9] and, in April 2007, Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius signed into law a bill establishing a 150-foot no-picketing buffer zone around funerals.[10]
aaaaand:
QuoteAn appeal by WBC was heard on September 24, 2009. The federal appeals court ruled in favor of Phelps and Westboro Baptist Church, stating that their picket near the funeral of LCpl Matthew A. Snyder is protected speech and did not violate the privacy of the service member's family, reversing the lower court's $5 million judgment.[75] On March 30, 2010, the federal appeals court ordered Albert Snyder to pay the court costs for the Westboro Baptist Church, an amount totaling $16,510.[76] Political commentator Bill O'Reilly agreed on March 30 to cover the costs, pending appeal.[77]
also never thought I'd find much these two ever did that I'd agree with.. the world is a funny place.
but I'm with Charley on this one.. The first time you set a legal precedent allowing the banning of certain speech (except when it endangers life.. for instance, yelling FIRE in a theatre is not protected by the 1st) then you set up an instance where future judges around the country can site that case as a justification for another ruling banning speech.
the domino effect would be devastating, considering the litigiousness of this country.
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 03, 2010, 05:04:42 PM
Does the thing where they protest at gay soldiers' funerals count as free speech too?
I'm seriously asking, cause I wonder if that would have been allowed here in NL. OTOH our speech is not 100% free since you are prohibited by law to deny the Holocaust happened (which I do find a stupid rule, tbh, not that I'd want to deny it, but well, I think you get it).
So, say, you'd exempt funerals from free speech, just stick to the ceremony. Just funerals. How would that become scary?
Any exception would lead to more. There is plenty of evidence.
If any law gets passed that says you no longer have the right to be an asshole in public, just about everyone on this forum is fucked.
I will leave it at this. When one of you have a loved one who these disgusting motherfuckers come and completely disrupt both the church and the graveside service and you don't have a problem with it after experiencing it. Then we can talk.
I've seen this shit up close and personal and I'm sorry it is disgusting how they behave. It isn't freedom of speech it is harassment!
I think you'll agree that there's a big difference between "should" and "can".
Plus, the OP isn't about calling dead soldiers faggots-- it's about the freedom to desecrate the US flag.
ah right they were standing outside. you can't make it illegal for people to be cunts.
An interesting case could be made for funerals... either the church owns the ground (ie they could do what they want) or you could give graveyards park status where you have some say on regulation when for the public or environmental good.
But that isn't the case at hand.
The case at hand is burning the flag, which I see as totally protected.
I disagree with pretty much all flag laws. Here in Canada we have a ton; flags have to be in certain condition, if you fly the French flag you have to fly the Canadian flag higher... all of which I disagree with even at a municipal level. (A case could be made for schools or Federal buildings)
Quoteif you fly the French flag you have to fly the Canadian flag higher...
Canada is claiming sovereignty over France? :?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on September 03, 2010, 10:43:16 PM
Quoteif you fly the French flag you have to fly the Canadian flag higher...
Canada is claiming sovereignty over France? :?
More of a way to keep French Canadiens constantly pissed off. Otherwise there would be absolutely
nothing interesting about the country.
Come on we're grasping for straws here. After the French separatist movement, what do we have left? Cheese and Gravy on fries - and Im serious here.
yes, but poutines is DELICIOUS.
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 03, 2010, 05:04:42 PM
Does the thing where they protest at gay soldiers' funerals count as free speech too?
I'm seriously asking, cause I wonder if that would have been allowed here in NL. OTOH our speech is not 100% free since you are prohibited by law to deny the Holocaust happened (which I do find a stupid rule, tbh, not that I'd want to deny it, but well, I think you get it).
So, say, you'd exempt funerals from free speech, just stick to the ceremony. Just funerals. How would that become scary?
They werent gay soldiers, they were hetero soldiers who were killed by God(working though a divinely inspired IED)/ God kills straight people for OTHER people being gay.
The one thing I'll give the WBC credit for is that they are doing tons to further the gay rights movement. When 300 million + Americans think you're a total asshole, no one wants to agree with you on anything.