Posted on 03/02/2011 7:27:39 AM PST by Pyro7480
Edited on 03/02/2011 7:31:23 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
The Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment protects fundamentalist church members who mount attention-getting, anti-gay protests outside military funerals.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted2.ap.org ...
Thank you. Good to see you too, and I hope your day is going great too.
Take care...
It looks like they're trying to 'thread a needle' here and leave it open to revisiting but let's not kid ourselves, those cases are DOA.
This case was hardly any different. SCOTUS decided to hear this case because it was brought forth by the man who had a monetary damages judgement against Westboro Baptist Church. If it hadn't been for that, or the other way around, they probably wouldn't even have chosen to hear this case, citing Skokie.
When there is no shred of decency or semblance of humanity left in our nation.. the terrorists have won.
I just hope that the next few hundreds of these that happens and the other new groups who will pick up on these tactics because Westboro has done it so successfully will not raise the whining and bleating here on FR that it has in the past when people were outraged at this kind of thing.
If it's Constitutionally protected Free Speech, then no Freeper should have anything to say about it in the future.
Don’t put speech in quotes as if what they’re doing isn’t speech. These idiots show up on public property, hold up offensive signs, and say offensive things. Surely you don’t mind people showing up on public property to protest, holding signs some might find offensive, or saying things some might find offensive, right? If so, that means the only reason to punish them is the content of the speech. On that basis, you couldn’t object if a church got fined for saying offensive things to women at an abortion clinic, as long as they are punished for saying something offensive to the women.
That too, of course. But people must avoid directly confronting them or trying to get these "protests" banned. That is playing right into their hands.
I agree. Something smells very suspicious about the Westboro Baptist Church. The whole thing is a sham, and I'd love to see some hard facts about where their actual support and money comes from.
A ruling that would've made us feel better today would've been disastrous in the long run. The second a court rules that protests are illegal when they hurt people's feelings or use 'hate speech', the Left will use that to attack and financially destroy Tea Party groups, anti-abortion protesters, even victim's rights groups. I would not be surprised to find that WBC is an outfit designed to ridicule Christians and ultimately to erode the freedoms of speech and assembly.
As soon as any hard evidence emerges of Leftist backing of this ridiculous 'church' we need to get that info out into the public. People need to understand how hell-bent the Left is on destroying this nation...
“...When there is no shred of decency or semblance of humanity left in our nation.. the terrorists have won...”
There IS still, Norm... They’re still breathing, brother.
A testament to the deceny and humanity of OUR side.
LFOD, brother.
WBC is at worst annoying and rude. They aren’t (yet) a
danger to life.
Supremes did get this right.
yesSir, maybe we could dress up as jihadis to counter-protest em...
that would diminish the bubble boobied newssettes coverage...
The day will come when this group which abuses their First Amendment rights will encounter somone abusing their Second Amendment rights.
If anyone finds a link to Alito’s dissent (text) please ping. (I am interested in reading his detailed and particular thoughts on this case.)
Wow. Tough ruling. Still, better these jerks go free than we get more government restrictions on speech. Especially with all the PC-speech codes prevalent in the places our future lawyers and judges are schooled. They’d be more likely to be comfortable with banning future “hurtful” speech if this loony group was banned.
mark
I agree that the best thing to do it to mobilize against them. Whenever they come to an area, we need to join together against them and shield the mourners.
Only Justice Samuel Alito dissented. He said the church’s “outrageous conduct caused petitioner great injury, and the court now compounds that injury by depriving petitioner of a judgment that acknowledges the wrong he suffered,” he said. “In order to have a society in which public issues can be openly and vigorously debated, it is not necessary to allow the brutalization of innocent victims like petitioner.”
If the rest of the SC had gone with Alito, how many here can see muslims shutting down any criticism of islam as hate speech? I can.
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.