Thanks for the link!
Regardless of what wrong is being done to someone, I think it's important to know the background, so as not to be caught blindsided by any rebuttals, and to focus on the crime against these protestors, not on the individuals themselves.
Also, many on FR don't seem to be able to separate the victim of a crime from his past. To wit, how many FReepers were justifying abuse and execution of prisoners in Iraq, by the basic idea of "our evil is okay since they are dangerous and have done worse." If Marcavage has a history of defending a molester of boys, many people would find that as relevant as the links you provide about his history of provoking people by use of means that are distasteful and likely not legal (e.g., truck with graphic photographs).*
BTW, when his arrest occurred at the Lansdowne meeting, I wrote letters to the editor of several papers, since it came out at the time one Republican campaign handout implied the Bible might be banned if they don't win. I used the Lansdowne example to correct newspapers that claimed it was preposterous--with ADA Alyssa Kusturiss' words at the time.
* How many of us would like activists to show up at our churches with graphic photographs of homosexuals and bullhorns to shout things we find offensive?
Something like that has already been done on a number of occasions. One infamous example of this was ACT-UP's desecration of St. Patrick's Cathedral.
From what I understand there was NO molestation whatsoever period, only an allegation that the man solicited sex from the boy. He was imprisoned by the testimony and word of a teenage boy, no molestation, no physical evidence, no third party witness. Yet Michael Jackson is still allowed to walk the streets? Prior to that the man had no record of being a pedophile.
* How many of us would like activists to show up at our churches with graphic photographs of homosexuals and bullhorns to shout things we find offensive?
That's not what they were doing at all.
Police arrested 11, but the district attorney's office now is charging only four of them.
Why? It seems they were not "caught" on videotape quoting Scripture. Had they been, they'd be facing the same charges the other four do.
In regards your statement ...
"If Marcavage has a history of defending a molester of boys"
Can you point me to any proof that Brother Stephen was charged and found guilty of "molestation" of any boy or boys (plural) as you implied?!?
Given the topic, and with a nod to Mapplethorpe (sp?), I think you mean bullwhips.
But there's a difference; churches have a long history of being used by worshippers, for worshippers; people have an expectation of going there to worship with like-minded folks. The streets are meant for EVERYBODY, so if one group protests, then they invite counter-protest, right?