Posted on 07/19/2004 5:40:38 AM PDT by NRA1995
Philly Pride seeks court order to prevent 'Outfest' evangelism
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
I'd buy this before the freedom of association argument, in this case.
I personally think that the freedom of association argument is more important, as it has recently been upheld on two occasions by SCOTUS. One of the few areas where that bunch has been on target in recent years - and the ruling that overturned the MA Supreme Court's (that bunch again) ruling that forced the St. Paddy's Day parade to accept gay marchers was unanimous.
"Nothing is stopping them from standing across the street and protesting their little hearts out."
That is not dirtboy's position. He is saying that Christians (or, indeed, any breeders at all) cannot even go near the event.
In general, homosexuals who keep their homosexuality a private issue are accepted just fine by others, even if it happens to 'leak out.' It's the in your face, "you must find what I do acceptable" kind of people that cause the problems.
What's interesting is, after shoving this in your face, these same individuals revert to whining 'It's none of your business."
It wasn't my business - until they made it my business.
I have seen your comments before - implying or stating that most "gays" are not radical homosexual agenda pushers. While I doubt that a majority of homosexuals are the quiet, monogamous, buttoned down, beige wearing, Republican voting, non-"gay" agenda promoting (and by inference, non-"Gay Pride" Parade attending and non-Thailand/Philippines visiting) homosexuals, I am sure there are some.
My problem is that even if there are many such conservative, non-"gay" agenda supporting homosexuals, why do they not speak out against the politically destructive agenda of their brethren? The only one is Tammy Bruce, and to some extent, Camille Paglia.
As for the rest, there is a deafening silence. Kind of like the good Muslims who don't support jihad against the rest of the world. Except there are more moderate Muslims speaking out against their fanatical brethren than there are moderate homosexuals speaking out against *their* radical brethren.
My parents were married 41 years (it ended only due to my father's death) and I have a host of aunts and uncles who have been married 40 or more years, including one uncle who has been married 52 years. Let's not diminish hetero marriages.
Indeed. But the protestors can always conduct their activites nearby.
Until I read the whole article, I will assume that those now prohibited from protesting the event were going to do what they did last year - stand on PUBLIC SIDEWALKS. They weren't trying to enter a private building or private organization. They weren't attempting to join a parade. They were standing on a sidewalk.
You think protests should be illegal if those being so protested don't like it?
You think people should be prevented from standing on sidewalks owned by the public because homosexuals don't want them there?
If anyone knows more details, post 'em. I'd like this cleared up.
I don't think that's what he's saying at all.
AFAIK, "attending" the event meant last year (and likely means this year) standing on a sidewalk during the event. The event is held - again, IIRC - on the public street. It looks more like a free speech and freedom of assembly issue than a freedom of association.
Anyway, if homosexuals are going to be given public money, all gloves are off.
Homosexuals were (are) excluded from active participation in the St. Patrick's Day Parade. There were not outlawed from protesting on the sidewalk or nearby. They just couldn't be official parade participants.
Don't you see the difference?
the liberal control of the language is very orwellian.
somewhat off topic, i hate when people say things are orwellian just because some place has a camera in it. Admittily i havent read the book since High school but i dont recall cameras being that big a deal in the story. Yes thier were plenty of intrusions and such but wasnt the bulk of the book about controlling language?
That is not my position at all. They should be able to protest either directly adjacent or close enough to be able to attact both the media and the attendees. But the organizers of the event should be able to exclude them from the event if they so desire.
And if the anti-gay groups wanted to limit themselves to protesting adjacent to the event, fine. But the protestors want to ENTER the event against the wishes of the organizers. Read the article first.
That's not what the group in question is willing to limit themselves to. From the article:
But organizers from Repent America, a Philadelphia-based Christian organization, say they will attend the events, even if it means defying a court order and getting arrested.
Homosexual Agenda Ping - Discussion on freedom of speech, association, and assembly.
Free speech for me, but not for thee?
I really like this comment:
"It wasn't my business - until they made it my business." (MEGoody)
Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.
The lie here is that it is not the government he fears but the people that buy his tickets and cds.
No, in this case, it's freedom of association for me, but not for thee...
I still want to know more about where this event will be held. While it is true that sometimes BSA use public facilities, their meetings, events and so on are not public events, as this "Pridefest" is. IOW, the BSA events are Boy Scoute jamborees, campouts, meetings, and so on. Even the regular public can't just wander around.
Second, the BSA generally rent or pay for said facilities, and additionally are now often prevented from using facilities they always used to use.
And I'm saying that the group should be able to exclude anti-gay protesters - just as political rallies can exclude protestors. We don't like it when libs demand the right to get in our faces - but that means that they have the right to be left alone as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.