Dead Marine's father ordered to pay protesters' legal costs

APRIL FOOLS!!

j/k

 

Well, yes, you can do that. I don't recall Mr. Wilson being arrested or sued now, do I? It's against the rules of decorum, which was why he was censured, but it wasn't against the law.

What the heck is "incitement of violence"? What sort of standard is that? If tomorrow I went on my school's campus center and started ranting on how Obama was a monster who eats babies and plans to enslave us with Communism, I'd probably be inciting violence as there would be quite a few angry people in there. But if I have the right to say such things (I'd probably break other rules, but that's besides the point.), why can't the Westboro people say their crap?
Incitement of violence is a pointlessly vague standard, one which I can't even see the Westboro people meeting - they aren't telling their people to go kill others in the name of God or to fight homosexuality, they're just having their rallies. And they have every right to do that.

 

Ranting against Obama is political and therefore free speech -- as long as you don't threaten violence/death to the President or any other person.

If you are white, try walking up to a person of color and telling him he should be hung from a tree for being black. He would be perfectly justified in cleaning your clock, based on incitement to violence rulings. You would be the one charged and rightfully so.

I'm glad you are in school. You need the education.

 

This isn't about free speech actually. I don't think anyone is questioning their right to say what they want.

The problem was where and how they assembled. The constitution gives people the right to assemble PEACEFULLY.

Peacefully means without commotion, conflict, or agitation.

When this groups starts shouting slogans at a man burying his son - one of the most sacred moments in human life - I would consider that clearly "agitation".

Another definition: Undisturbed by strife, turmoil, or disagreement;

Definitely a lot of turmoil and disagreement going on there.

Once they do that, the are outside the bounds of the third amendment. They are commiting emotional violence and definitely not "peacefully" assembling. They are not protesting the gov't, a business, or the media. They are attacking a man trying to bury his son. They are clearly knowingly causing people pain and grief. They are clearly and knowingly being inciteful, cruel, and antagonizing. That is anything but "peacefully assembling"


Let's not warp this into some kind of free speech thing, it's not even about speech - it's about assembly.

I would be shocked it the Supreme Court upheld the appeal based on "Free Speech" grounds.

 

Hate speech is free speech. Suppressing any speech is wrong. Once you begin removing one groups rights away, leaders in the future will start removing others free speech rights on "prescient ruling".

Inciting anarchy is not free speech. Stating "I wish the president was dead" is free speech. Stating "Kill the president" is suggesting an action, not your opinion. Assaulting someone because they offended you is not a get-out-of-jail-free card.

 

In other words by your definition and logic, the vast majority of all protesting is illegal.

Isn't the whole purpose of a protest because you're in disagreement? Your definition sounds more in line with China's belief.

 

Space Ghost, I am a proponent of free speech. Had they said and done the same thing at the Topeka courthouse, fine. However, their freedom ends at the nose of the aggrieved father. Choosing his son's funeral for taunting was an assault on his rights and cries out for punishment. I can't see how you would think otherwise.

I am as opposed to the Klan as I am to Black Panthers. Nonetheless, each should be accorded the right of free speech as long as it does not violate the rights and safety of others. As I wrote earlier, if this is not true, then shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater is legal.

You are correct in asserting that offending speech "is not a get-out-of-jail-free card" but it is serious mitigating factor, so much so that the offended party would never be charged with a crime. Again, free speech and good sense make a most effective alliance.

 

Uncalled for.

 

Free speech.

 

PWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Heck, they let the KKK march.

 

I really wish the media would stop giving these ****ing ****heads a platform to speak from.

Back in the day, it was an unspoken rule not to give a voice to people like this.

 

Do they still have a right to be called a babtist chruch or even church and stay as a non-profit org?

 

And the Westboros are threatening violence/death to no one - yes they talk on how the soldiers will burn in hell, but obviously, we humans cannot actually burn others there so that's a moot point.

Wrong. Free speech is different on private property as opposed to public property and the internet (if the Westboro people were protesting on private property, I guess they could be arrested for trespassing, though I don't know if they are), and as this forum is owned by Clutch, he has every right to set the rules on what we can discuss, hence why we have rules against flaming. If I'm in a black man's s house and say blacks should be lynched, I can say that - and he has every right then to tell me get the hell off his land.

This. Explain how the Westboro people violated the rights and safety of the father - and saying "The father felt bad from seeing them taunt his son" is not an acceptable answer.

 

And people 50 years ago were probably saying stuff like that about civil rights leaders.

As long as they aren't threatening violence its free speech. It would be a dangerous precedent just so you can shut up some crazy folks.

 

They have the right to call themselves Baptists, but the IRS should change their exempt status -- not for being a non-profit but because they are a political entity rather than a purely religious entity. IMO, that is a rule that should be applied to all religious / charitable organizations who choose to enter the political arena.

 

I didn't say you couldn't do it; after all, you're free to look like a douche.

 

Hey we agree; tax the churches.

 

What part about God hates **** do you not understand?

 

And you are free to sound like one.