Westboro thoughts

[Seamus]

I have to regretfully preach my belief that the Westboro Baptists and their leader, the Devil Fred Phelps, have a right to express their evil opinion, as long as it does not infringe on a grieving families ability to mourn. This falls into line with my lifelong philosophy of doing what you believe is right, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others.

I believe that what they do is wrong. I also believe that what they do COULD be construed as illegal, in that it is inevitably going to result in riot and/or death.

BUT.

Regarding the situation over the past week with the $10.9 million in compensatory and punitive damages to Albert Snyder, the father of a Marine who was killed in Iraq. The father did NOT even know the protesters were there until the next day when he saw it on the news. The Protesters, mainly the family and friends of Fred Phelps, were kept far enough away, and yet were allowed to voice their (imo disgusting) opinions. The mourning family was not harassed, and free speech was upheld.

With that being said. I believe in the outlawing of speech that is guaranteed to result in infringement of other peoples rights of safety. So, under that belief, shouldn't what these people are doing be considered illegal? I think yes.

I don't necessarily believe that you can sue someone for what could have happened in the past, but didn't. I DO however, believe that you can sue someone for doing something that would obviously end in harm in the future. If you point a loaded gun at me, do I not have the right to assume my life is in danger? Yes, you can say "I was just trying to make a point! I wasn't going to actually SHOOT him." But we don't know that.

What these nuts do is, imo, morally wrong and repugnant. I guess my question is, does what they do fall under "free speech" or does it fall under "inciting a riot"?
I think we may all agree what they do is wrong. But is it WRONG?

[Plane]

Every now and then you run across a thing that shows there is a real difference between right and leagal.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Phelps is a cretan and a fool, but I think he has every right to express his vile opinions all he wishes in public. I disagree that he should be fined unless he is guilty of trespassing on private property when delivering his speeches, or interrupting a funeral ceremony when doing same.

It is obvious to me that he is a nutjob, and I doubt that any thinking person would entertain the thought for even an eensie minute that soldiers were dying in Iraq because the US 'permitted' homosexuals the right to express themselves in the same way that everyone has the right to do. If any relative of mine died in the war, I would not believe for a second that the government's allowing freedom of expression to homosexuals was in any way the case of my relative's death.

[Seamus]

It is obvious to me that he is a nutjob, and I doubt that any thinking person would entertain the thought for even an eensie minute that soldiers were dying in Iraq because the US 'permitted' homosexuals the right to express themselves in the same way that everyone has the right to do. If any relative of mine died in the war, I would not believe for a second that the government's allowing freedom of expression to homosexuals was in any way the case of my relative's death.

I really like your statement that you would not believe the governments allowing freedom of expression was in any way the case of your relative's death. That is a thought I had not had.  I don't believe I would feel that either.  That's a good point to keep in mind.  Our soldiers families are (assumedly) not stupid.  They're would strike me as patriotic people.

Let me ask...   Is there anything to holding them responsible for what their actions at a funeral could do?  If veterans were to be attending a funeral of a fallen soldier, I would totally expect violence to break out.  Should the "loons" be held responsible for that?

Thanks for the discussion!

[Xavier_Onassis]

I would be quite surprised if any troops were to attack Phelps and his legion of kooks. I imagine that they have sufficient discipline to shake their heads at the nonsense and walk away. If Phelps and Co. got physical, the cops could cart them off. I would find this okay.

I don't believe in confronting any problem until it  actually occurs.

I would think a soft, squishy out of shape guy like Phelps would not be insane enough to pick a fight with beefy, well-trained soldiers, marines or sailors.

[Seamus]

I would think a soft, squishy out of shape guy like Phelps would not be insane enough to pick a fight with beefy, well-trained soldiers, marines or sailors.

I think you're mostly right...  except for this one line.  This guy is insane enough to blame everything in the world that he sees wrong to homosexuality.  The Trade Centers... they fell due to homosexuality.   The military deaths are due to homosexuality.  I'm sure that when his mail was delivered to the wrong address, it was because of the homosexuals.  I can not imagine a sane person picketing our patriots funerals, and yet there he is.  So... as far as him being stupid enough to confront our soldiers that are their to support their lost comrades...  I certainly wouldn't put it past him.  But like you said, if he did, cart him away I say.

[Universe Prince]

I do get what you're saying, Seamus, and I certainly support freedom of speech, even for people like the sonsobitches of the Westboro Baptist Church, but I just can't dredge up any sympathy for the Westboro Baptist Church. Is what they do wrong? I think so. Personally, I think it is basically an invasion of the privacy of the families at the funerals. Maybe it isn't, but that is how I see it. So I'm all for the $10 million judgment against the Westboro Baptist Haters.

[Xavier_Onassis]

It seems to me that this Phelps case is one where the issue is simply, has Phelps violated anyone else's rights or hasn't he?
If his rantings were not heard, they did not disturb the mourners. If he was on public land, he was not trespassing, and being as this is a nation of laws and not a nation of men, he is then within his rights to say whatever he wishes, even though only a handful of people (or even none at all) agree with him.

Free speech is free speech, no matter who does the speaking or what they say, so long as it does not pose a threat to the public, like yelling FIRE! in a crowded theatre.

We do not have to have sympathy for him, only respect for his rights as a fellow citizen.

I am not for arresting him or fining him UNTIL he violates someone else's rights, and it looks as though his could be the case here. I don't have all the particulars, so I could not judge based on what I have read thus fa

[Seamus]

I do get what you're saying, Seamus, and I certainly support freedom of speech, even for people like the sonsobitches of the Westboro Baptist Church, but I just can't dredge up any sympathy for the Westboro Baptist Church. Is what they do wrong? I think so. Personally, I think it is basically an invasion of the privacy of the families at the funerals. Maybe it isn't, but that is how I see it. So I'm all for the $10 million judgment against the Westboro Baptist Haters.

Emotionally, I'm all for it too..   The are hateful and cruel to some of the nations most valuable assets.  These military men and women who have died were brought into the world by people who raised them to BE patriotic.  We should be thanking the families, and praying and morning their loss of the soldiers.  NOT listening to the insanity that is this Westboro group.

However, that being said...  If I wanted to protest... eh..  let say I was against porn, and felt in my soul it was necessary to protest at.. umm.  The Larry Flints or Hefners of the world.  That would be my right as an AMERICAN and I don't believe it should be suppressed.  This is where I'm really at a loss...

I believe in the freedom of speach
BUT
I believe in the right to privacy and mourning (as in a right to happiness)
and WHILE
I believe that they have the right to picket AWAY from the funeral
BUT
I believe that if the funeral is disrupted, the picketers should be carted away.

But I think I'm still torn on the PREEMPTIVE laws that are meant to protect.  We have laws for helmets, seat belts, insurance requirements...  And I always felt these were an intrusion.  But to protect our military funerals...  It's more like, imo, a loaded gun.  Oh, this hurts my wee brain... 

This is why I'm sooo torn.  Do we protect evil deeds?  Ones that may or may not end in evil actions?

 

I don't believe in confronting any problem until it  actually occurs.

I've given myself a day over this one...  and I think I disagree...  We don't wait 'till AFTER a terrorist plot has succeeded to make an arrest.  We don't wait 'till someone is SHOT before arresting for brandishing a firearm or attempted murder...

Please keep your thoughts coming...  This is helping me form my thoughts...

[Seamus]

It seems to me that this Phelps case is one where the issue is simply, has Phelps violated anyone else's rights or hasn't he?
If his rantings were not heard, they did not disturb the mourners. If he was on public land, he was not trespassing, and being as this is a nation of laws and not a nation of men, he is then within his rights to say whatever he wishes, even though only a handful of people (or even none at all) agree with him.

Free speech is free speech, no matter who does the speaking or what they say, so long as it does not pose a threat to the public, like yelling FIRE! in a crowded theatre.

I agree with you 100% I think...  In THIS PARTICULAR CASE...  No ones rights were harmed.  Thus, the judgment should be tossed.  However, I do think it sets a nice precedent...  I fully expect that when he next DOES yell fire in a crowded area...  someone WILL be hurt.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Rev Phelps is not a terrorist, and he isn't even very clever or competent. I don't think he poses a physical threat to anyone. He is just an annoying kook. Very annoying, actually. I would be tempted to bait him with many difficult theological issues just to hear him rant and rave.

If he actually hurts someone, and I doubt that this will happen, I am all for arresting him after the fact. But not before the fact, because he has not showed himself to be dangerous to anyone.

[Seamus]

Rev Phelps is not a terrorist, and he isn't even very clever or competent. I don't think he poses a physical threat to anyone. He is just an annoying kook. Very annoying, actually. I would be tempted to bait him with many difficult theological issues just to hear him rant and rave.

I don't know about him not being a terrorist...  If I understand right, he does promote violence.  He's just too cowardly to do any of it himself.  I'm not sure, however.  I may easily be wrong about this.  Has he ever said "'Mo's should be killed!"?   Dunno... 

I LOVE the idea of trying to discuss theology with him.  He was on a talk show a bit back and just kinda lost it...  Very funny...  If you ever DO get the chance, make sure there is a camera watching...  you could make millions on America's Funniest Videos!

[Amianthus]

Has he ever said "'Mo's should be killed!"?   Dunno... 

Homer would be quite upset.