I get your point. Hang ‘em.
Perhaps you didn’t understand my point. We are a nation of laws. You say you expect folks to behave “decently.” Fine. I agree. The problem is how do you define “decently” from a legal perspective. That was the point I was trying to make throughout this thread. We probably all agree Fred Phelps is a pretty offensive guy. However, how do you write the laws so he can be punished without going too far and limiting other forms of speech?
Example: we don’t want people protesting at funerals. Fine. How do you write laws against protests without affecting other forms of protests we’d want to protect? Do you set up a perimeter around the funeral? If so, how much? Do you prohibit certain types of sayings? If so, how do you legally define those sayings?
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to be concerned about any law that gives government greater power over the citizens. If you reread the thread, you’ll see some of the posters presented information that clarified the case against Fred Phelps. In particular, the case wasn’t necessarily about the funeral protests. It was about slanderous information about the soldier’s family on the church’s web site. Also, the legal concept of Fighting Words was presented.
The truth is, I’d rather allow Fred Phelps to speak than give the government the right to prohibit all offensive speech. In this particular case, other FReepers convinced me the laws aren’t overly broad.
The only point still unclear to me is the distinction between civil suites and the constitution. Several FReepers kept posting how it was a CIVIL matter without further explanation. As I stated, I wasn’t aware civil matters had precedence over constitutionally protected freedoms. I understand slander and libel are not protected speech. I also understand people can try to sue other citizens for just about anything. What I don’t understand is how people can win civil suites against things that are constitutionally protected, like free speech that isn’t slanderous/libelous.
Some FReepers apparently prefer to SHOUT in caps rather than discuss the topic or explain concepts other FReepers may not fully understand. If this is how conservatives intend to win people over to our point of view, we’re sunk.