Westboro Baptist Church = OWNED - Page 3

Stylerod · 11-01-2007, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by 7960

So?

Are you saying my neighbor can't have a shirt made that says "If 7960 died I'd laugh" and wear it around town?

Sure. But if he screamed at you every day and called you a murderer and had signs in the street saying you were a child molester I would think you would take him to court to make him stop.

Linzyhop · 11-01-2007, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Public or private, it doesn't give you the right to harass people. You can speak your mind but I consider this case harassment and not just a peaceful protest. The jury of their peers apparently felt the same way.

exactly. i don't need to argue this. Dos is doing a fine job.

7960 · 11-01-2007, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Sure. But if he screamed at you every day .........

Every day? They protested that family's funeral every day?

The jury of their peers apparently felt the same way.

And the jury ignored the law.

Stylerod · 11-01-2007, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by 7960

Every day? They protested that family's funeral every day?

Does it matter how many times they do it? Is that a factor in what you think is legal or not?

Originally Posted by 7960

And the jury ignored the law.

Or they didn't. We already know that there are limits in free speech. And the jury felt they crossed the line.

motivez · 11-01-2007, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

As I said before, I don't think I completely agree with the decision. But comparing the "willful purchase" of a Hustler magazine to the "forced encounter" with bigoted protesters is completely different.

So no one should have to have a 'forced encounter' with protesters on public property if they disagree with their message or think it's bigoted?

motivez · 11-01-2007, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Public or private, it doesn't give you the right to harass people. You can speak your mind freely in this country but I consider this case harassment and not just a peaceful protest. The jury of their peers apparently felt the same way.

What constitutes harassment? If I want to protest President Bush's policy in Iraq, am I harassing him if I show up at events where he's at and protest?

If I'm one of those anti-gay people who dislikes that Disney has that 'gay day' or whatever, am I harassing the CEO of Disney if I show up and harass some speech he's giving as long as I'm on public property?

The only reason you guys are considering this harassment is because of the idiotic message these guys are spewing, sorry to say. They didn't follow these families around, they protested a type of event where certain families happened to be.

Scrum · 11-01-2007, 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Public or private, it doesn't give you the right to harass people. You can speak your mind freely in this country but I consider this case harassment and not just a peaceful protest. The jury of their peers apparently felt the same way.

This opens the door to other forms of speech to be considered harassment.

Should a company be able to sue protesting workers for harassment if the workers followed all state laws?

And should the Phelps be sued if they protest nowhere near the funeral, but it ends up in the paper? The family may not have seen the protest, but under the current ruling they are still harassed if they hear about it.

DosEquis · 11-01-2007, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

What constitutes harassment?

Harassment: Over and over, time and time again, a group of people shouting hateful statements, wearing shirts such as "semper fi fags", "god hates fags", and directly attacking/insulting a family that is in route to their sons burial ceremony.

Wearing a shirt down the street that says "god hates fags" would not be harassment, but may lead to an ass whooping by a gay guy with a hairy chest named 'bear'.

The bottom line is the 1st doesn't protect harassment, thats what this is. It also doesn't protect yelling "fire" in a theatre.

motivez · 11-01-2007, 12:37 PM

So if I chant "You have blood on your hands, Mr. Bush" or "War Criminal" over and over again at a protest, that's harassment?

You seem to be basing your opinion on the message and the type of event, but there's no right to a private burial, and so long as they're on public land, they have a right to say what they're saying..

I may not like it, but tearing up the first amendment because of a disagreement about the message is not the solution.

garbagemanlb · 11-01-2007, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Harassment: Over and over, time and time again, a group of people shouting hateful statements, wearing shirts such as "semper fi fags", "god hates fags", and directly attacking/insulting a family that is in route to their sons burial ceremony.

Wearing a shirt down the street that says "god hates fags" would not be harassment, but may lead to an ass whooping by a gay guy with a hairy chest named 'bear'.

The bottom line is the 1st doesn't protect harassment, thats what this is. It also doesn't protect yelling "fire" in a theatre.

over and over? Are the people at WBC calling the families of these soldiers? Are they going to their houses? Or are they going to ONE event involving these families, not interrupting the event, and stating their opinion?

DosEquis · 11-01-2007, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

So if I chant "You have blood on your hands, Mr. Bush" or "War Criminal" over and over again at a protest, that's harassment?

You seem to be basing your opinion on the message and the type of event, but there's no right to a private burial, and so long as they're on public land, they have a right to say what they're saying..

I may not like it, but tearing up the first amendment because of a disagreement about the message is not the solution.

Those people do get escorted out, some get arrested for 'disturbing the peace', etc. I can't sit in my own front yard yelling and screaming at 2am because the cops will be called. They will tell me to shut up or arrest me.

garbagemanlb · 11-01-2007, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Those people do get escorted out, some get arrested for 'disturbing the peace', etc. I can't sit in my own front yard yelling and screaming at 2am because the cops will be called. They will tell me to shut up or arrest me.

So protests have to be quiet?

garbagemanlb · 11-01-2007, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Those people do get escorted out, some get arrested for 'disturbing the peace', etc. I can't sit in my own front yard yelling and screaming at 2am because the cops will be called. They will tell me to shut up or arrest me.

DosEquis · 11-01-2007, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

So protests have to be quiet?

Thats not my point. My point is the 1st does not encompass every single thing that can be done and said. I can't sit in my front yard screaming at 2am, i can't yell fire in a theatre, and i can't harass someone. These people were harassing that family and many other familys. There are harassment cases in court all the time. This one is just more public because those people are genuine assholes.

The 1st has some limitations to it just as the 2nd doesn't mean you can own any weapon you want. That is why we have courts, jury, etc, to determine these kinds of cases. This jury found that these people were harassing a family and not protesting in a manner that would be protected under the 1st.

7960 · 11-01-2007, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Does it matter how many times they do it? Is that a factor in what you think is legal or not?

For harassment, yes. You are saying I should not be able to say anything "bad" about you in a place where you may see it.

WTF is that?

Or they didn't. We already know that there are limits in free speech. And the jury felt they crossed the line.

Right...you can't yell fire in a crowded theater, you can't threaten the president.........how does yelling "We're glad you're dead" fit those limits?

7960 · 11-01-2007, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Harassment: Over and over, time and time again, a group of people shouting hateful statements, wearing shirts such as "semper fi fags", "god hates fags", and directly attacking/insulting a family that is in route to their sons burial ceremony.

They did it for each family ONE TIME. What you're saying is they're harassing a "class" of people because they protest each individual in the group.

Wearing a shirt down the street that says "god hates fags" would not be harassment, but may lead to an ass whooping by a gay guy with a hairy chest named 'bear'.

And the guy guy and the hairy guy should go to jail for it.

The bottom line is the 1st doesn't protect harassment, thats what this is.

Show me a harassment law that fits what they're doing.

It also doesn't protect yelling "fire" in a theatre.

Lame attempt to get what they're doing to fit in a law so you can prevent it....lame.

7960 · 11-01-2007, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Thats not my point. My point is the 1st does not encompass every single thing that can be done and said. I can't sit in my front yard screaming at 2am,

That's because of noise ordinances. You certain CAN do it at 2pm.

i can't yell fire in a theatre,

That's a safety issue. How does anything WBC is doing bring safety into this?

and i can't harass someone.

Define harassment.

These people were harassing that family and many other familys. There are harassment cases in court all the time. This one is just more public because those people are genuine assholes.

The 1st has some limitations to it just as the 2nd doesn't mean you can own any weapon you want.

Awful example. The limits on the 1st and 2nd amendments are there for completely different reasons. Bringing the 2nd amendment into this to defend limiting the 1st amendment is a bogus example. The limits on the 2nd amendment have to do with the definition of certain kinds of weapons that existed when the amendment was written. It'd be easy to argue people knew how to yell at other people when the 1st amendment was written.

That is why we have courts, jury, etc, to determine these kinds of cases. This jury found that these people were harassing a family and not protesting in a manner that would be protected under the 1st.

And juries can also make decisions based on emotion instead of law. That's why they'll lose on appeal.

DosEquis · 11-01-2007, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

That's because of noise ordinances.

That noise ordinace is a violation of my 1st amendment rights then isn't it? It prevents me from saying what i want to say, regardless of what you feel about it.

Noise ordinances, harassment laws, etc. There are just some things you can't do and harassing familys going to funerals is one thing that has been ruled you can't do.

7960 · 11-01-2007, 03:09 PM

It kind of scares me that people think it's ok to toss out free speech because they don't like what's being said.