Missouri Court Rules Worship Act Violates First Amendment

Crux ^ | 3/10/15 | AP

[AppyPappy]

You can disrupt a worship service(because freedom of speech) unless it is performing a same-sex marriage(because freedom of speech violates hate crime).

[AppyPappy]

Any publicity is good publicity

[Pecos]

Someone will have to publish a guide telling me which protected group can trump an other protected group 'cause I'm getting really confused. Of course, that prioritization list will have to be written in disappearing ink because it seems to change every day as new protected groups are defined every day. Facebook now has 58 defined "gender identities" and a 59th spot marked "Other", followed by a blank line.

Example: Whose rights have priority - a transgender lesbian (still possessing the male genitalia he was born with) that wants to use the women's locker room at a health club or a black member of the health club that decides that all labels, including the ones on the locker room doors, are racist?

Now do you see why I'm confused?

[SoFloFreeper]

This ruling gives a green light to anti-Christian fascists to scream down sermons by ministers who preach the whole counsel of Scripture.

The judges on this appeals court WOULD NOT consider it a First Amendment right if you interrupted THEIR proceedings, however.

[rfreedom4u]

So when people start disrupting mosques they can’t be prosecuted right?

[AppyPappy]

It changes with who has the hot narrative.

Sometimes there is no trump. You just ignore inconvenient truths.
If a Hispanic guy shoots a black kid, you just call him “White”. If black women beat up a trannie for using the women’s restroom, you just leave off their race or just ignore the story and hope a white person beats up a trannie so you can spin up the narrative.
You need the right optics for the narrative to work in your favor.

[Zionist Conspirator]

ST. LOUIS — The US Court of Appeals has ruled that the House of Worship Protection Act, which bans anyone from intentionally disturbing the order or solemnity of a house of worship through profane discourse, rude, or indecent behavior, is a violation of the First Amendment.

Will this apply to mosques and Black churches too?

And BTW, the First Amendment (and the entire Bill of Rights) restricts only the federal government. It would not violate the First Amendment if every state in the Union had an official state religion.

[ravenwolf]

Just the courts being stupid again. The First Amendment is meant to protect people from retaliation by the government when they criticize GOVERNMENT.

---

That is exactly right, it has to do with limiting the power of the federal Government.

Unlike the second amendment which also includes limiting the power of state government.

[ravenwolf]

No, it’s time to go and disrupt some courtrooms.

---

That is true, the first amendment was to limit the power of the federal Government, not private institutions.

[Pecos]

“Optics”! That’s the answer! (To everything on the Left.)

[RobbyS]

Simple trespass. The ushers should throw the bums out.