Posted on 03/29/2010 12:46:18 PM PDT by SmithL
Edited on 03/29/2010 12:48:04 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
AP material must be excerpted at all times.
Outrageous!
This is how Phelps funds his activities.
How can this happen without a standing verdict?
“Baptist” is a false flag for Phelps. He has a one-of-a-kind cult, centered conveniently around himself, which makes Mormon theology look like orthodox Christianity.
Civil rights statutes provide for attorney fees to the prevailing party. Phelps prevailed. Plaintiff should have seen this coming a mile away.
I was wondering about that myself.
Two things. First, it’s risky for an amateur to sue a professional trouble maker with deep pockets, even if he is rightly outraged.
Second, it seems unusual for a law-bending judge to find in favor of a kooky “Christian” pastor. Liberals bend the law, and liberals don’t normally favor pastors. But evidently the anti-war angle trumps the Christian angle.
I feel very sorry for this Marine’s father, having to go through all this after losing his son.
To lose his son over there and then have this happen...may the Phelps clan all burn in hell.
If the USSC reverses, will Phelps then be held liable to reimburse this?
Welcome home, eh?
Looks like they likely will, as their faith has nothing to do with believing in Jesus Christ for eternal salvation.
I would like to see someone set up a fund for this man so that those of us who feel this is an outrage could contribute to offsetting his expenses. I’d like to see him raise more than enough to handle this, plus enough to set up a scholarship or something in his son’s name.
They are coming to Virginia Tech on Apr 10 to make hay with the anniversary of the Apr 16 shootings. They seem to have a West Virginia contingent.
It’s going to get REALLY ugly. I’ll miss it.
They could certainly do so for the fees incurred in the USSC appeal. I don't see the Supremes taking this up as the appellate decision was clearly correct on the merits.
>> I feel very sorry for this Marine’s father, having to go through all this after losing his son.
Lost his son for the Country, his son’s death viciously mocked by deranged scum, and punished by the foul consequences of free speech.
Fighting words are not usually held to be protected under the 1st Amendment.
They are if they are political in nature. Or else no political speech would be protected.
These are not political words. They are religious words expressly shaped to tempt a violent confrontation.
But it does not stop you from beating the scumbags into a pulp. When you utter “fighting words” at someone, you had damn well be prepared to face the consequences. I bet the cops would look the other way.
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.