ACLU Sues for Anti-Gay Group That Pickets at Troops' Burials - Page 2

imind · 07-24-2006, 12:10 AM

Originally Posted by TekDragon

Drag them to Guantanomo and torture them with electricity. I wouldn't give a shit. They're gonna get far worse when they're burning in hell.

hahahaha. you do realize you'll be meeting them there, correct? i mean, if thats all it takes to go to hell, being dickheads, you're well on your way.

how has anything you've said, in this thread, any better than what they've said? don't you find it peculiar that you've lowered yourself to their level in your attempt to combat them?

to the OP...

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

Thorgrim · 07-24-2006, 01:41 AM

One of the finest moments in ACLU history

It's easy to do the right thing when its obvious...to praise non-violent protests...to help international relief organizations...

The real test of honor is to do the right thing when millions will hate and oppose you

Diesel66 · 07-24-2006, 05:36 AM

ACLU is correct.

kinggovernor · 07-24-2006, 08:09 AM

I think they have a right to be there until they interrupt the service

ballz2wallz · 07-24-2006, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

I think they have a right to be there until they interrupt the service

haven't they interrupted the service?

Stylerod · 07-24-2006, 09:50 AM

The law bans picketing and protests "in front of or about" any location where a funeral is held, from an hour before it begins until an hour after it ends. Offenders can face fines and jail time.

A number of other state laws and a federal law, signed in May by President Bush, bar such protests within a certain distance of a cemetery or funeral.

I see nothing wrong with it. It's a law designed to give respect do grieving families. The protesters can protest before, during (away from the cemetary) and after if they like. They have a right to protest, they don't have a right to be HEARD any time or place of their choosing.

ballz2wallz · 07-24-2006, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

I see nothing wrong with it. It's a law designed to give respect do grieving families. The protesters can protest before, during (away from the cemetary) and after if they like. They have a right to protest, they don't have a right to be HEARD any time or place of their choosing.

trespassing on private property is illegal right?

Stylerod · 07-24-2006, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

trespassing on private property is illegal right?

For sure.

Donkey® · 07-24-2006, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

trespassing on private property is illegal right?

Where does it say they are on private property?

ballz2wallz · 07-24-2006, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Where does it say they are on private property?

it doesn't say anywhere they were trespassing, but if you've ever been to a funeral, you'd know that the services and burials typically don't happen right next to the road, but on the property a bit. if they were so far away from the funeral that they wouldn't be heard, what's the whole point of this?

kinggovernor · 07-24-2006, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

haven't they interrupted the service?

yes they are. I think it is ok if they stood across the street with signs. I would argue that they are interferring with military missions. I get paid/orders for every funeral that I do, and they would be interferring with those orders by disrupting the military's mission. Thus I believe they have no legal right to be there.

TekDragon · 07-24-2006, 01:34 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

yes they are. I think it is ok if they stood across the street with signs. I would argue that they are interferring with military missions. I get paid/orders for every funeral that I do, and they would be interferring with those orders by disrupting the military's mission. Thus I believe they have no legal right to be there.

It's an act of war

ballz2wallz · 07-24-2006, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

yes they are. I think it is ok if they stood across the street with signs. I would argue that they are interferring with military missions. I get paid/orders for every funeral that I do, and they would be interferring with those orders by disrupting the military's mission. Thus I believe they have no legal right to be there.

from what i've seen they've been severely disturbing. if anything, they could even be charged with disturbing the peace.

kinggovernor · 07-24-2006, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by TekDragon

It's an act of war

not exactly, but we can detain/remove people who interfer with our business. I don't see how this is any different

Donkey® · 07-24-2006, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

it doesn't say anywhere they were trespassing, but if you've ever been to a funeral, you'd know that the services and burials typically don't happen right next to the road, but on the property a bit. if they were so far away from the funeral that they wouldn't be heard, what's the whole point of this?

If they're standing in the street across from the cemetary or the funeral home...that's not private property.

ballz2wallz · 07-24-2006, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

If they're standing in the street across from the cemetary or the funeral home...that's not private property.

:rly:

i had no idea

bheld · 07-24-2006, 02:18 PM

Well all the debate just in this thread proves how it needs to be decided in court.

ballz2wallz · 07-24-2006, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by bheld

Well all the debate just in this thread proves how it needs to be decided in court.

where's the debate? i think everyone here agrees that:

if they are distrupting the funeral services or trespassing, they are doing so illegally. if they are on the street off the property and are not disrupting anything, then they are free to do so.

nobody's really arguing anything are they?

Donkey® · 07-24-2006, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

where's the debate? i think everyone here agrees that:

if they are distrupting the funeral services or trespassing, they are doing so illegally. if they are on the street off the property and are not disrupting anything, then they are free to do so.

nobody's really arguing anything are they?

There's one person who thinks sending these people to guantanmo or shooting them is a wonderful idea.

ballz2wallz · 07-24-2006, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

There's one person who thinks sending these people to guantanmo or shooting them is a wonderful idea.

i'd be willing to bet it was a feable attempt at sarcasm