|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
 Posted - 04/18/2006 : 16:56:09
|
http://zzz.pridesource.com/article.shtml?article=18294 quote:
"While the ACLU of Michigan abhors the insensitivity of Reverend Phelps and his followers and the hateful and disgusting message they wish to convey, we believe that most of the legislation being introduced and passed is unconstitutional," he said. "We can't weaken the First Amendment no matter how disturbing and upsetting are the messages of others."
I don't see how after this anyone can argue that the ACLU has a liberal or anti-religious bias. But I gotta say, I'd hate to be the lawyer on this case!
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 17:17:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
According to an April 4 Chicago Tribune article on the proposed anti-protest laws, "Most of the proposed laws, which already have been approved in half a dozen states, require picketers to keep back 300 or 500 feet from churches or funeral homes where services are being held, and they limit the protests to an hour before or after the service."
Is this really a violation of the first amendment though? I'm not so certain myself. It seems as if it still allows people to protest and keep free speech, just not when there is a service.
The slippery slope of course, is that other laws can be passed saying you can't protest at location X at time Y, which if unreasonable, would of course be a violation. But I see it as just that, a slippery slope. Just because they are banning protests at funerals, it doesn't logically follow they will ban them elsewhere. |
Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov |
| Edited by - Ricky on 04/18/2006 17:17:19 |
 |
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 18:03:16 [Permalink]
|
As much as I would like to see the Phelps of the world be swallowed up in some fiery cataclysm, if their rights are being violated, then they should be protected. Because I would want the same protection....
Pesky morals again, "do unto others"...I need to check my atheist handbook again to make sure I'm not supposed to have any. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
trogdor
Skeptic Friend
198 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 19:40:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
quote:
According to an April 4 Chicago Tribune article on the proposed anti-protest laws, "Most of the proposed laws, which already have been approved in half a dozen states, require picketers to keep back 300 or 500 feet from churches or funeral homes where services are being held, and they limit the protests to an hour before or after the service."
Is this really a violation of the first amendment though? I'm not so certain myself. It seems as if it still allows people to protest and keep free speech, just not when there is a service.
The slippery slope of course, is that other laws can be passed saying you can't protest at location X at time Y, which if unreasonable, would of course be a violation. But I see it as just that, a slippery slope. Just because they are banning protests at funerals, it doesn't logically follow they will ban them elsewhere.
But it will set a legal precedent to localize and minimize protests. Bush has already been doing this since he was governor.in 1999 Bush, gearing up for his presidential run, and was all hot and bothered by a group of protesters outside his mansion. so he sent the state cops on 'em. the protesters were rounded up and sent to a "Protest Zone" far from Dubya. This (illegal) system has also been used at the 2000 GOP nominating convention in Philadelphia, and various other campaign stops. It has also been used by democrats. It is illegal and any law that begins to open the door for it should be stopped. Nice work ACLU! |
all eyes were on Ford Prefect. some of them were on stalks.
-Douglas Adams |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 05:11:58 [Permalink]
|
| MArtha Burke was pushed a half mile away from Agusta for her Masters protest. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 05:22:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
quote:
According to an April 4 Chicago Tribune article on the proposed anti-protest laws, "Most of the proposed laws, which already have been approved in half a dozen states, require picketers to keep back 300 or 500 feet from churches or funeral homes where services are being held, and they limit the protests to an hour before or after the service."
Is this really a violation of the first amendment though? I'm not so certain myself. It seems as if it still allows people to protest and keep free speech, just not when there is a service.
The slippery slope of course, is that other laws can be passed saying you can't protest at location X at time Y, which if unreasonable, would of course be a violation. But I see it as just that, a slippery slope. Just because they are banning protests at funerals, it doesn't logically follow they will ban them elsewhere.
Yup, it is. Not that I agree with the hateful arrogant shit, but it is. Abortion protesters are not limited in this way nor was Phelps limited in this way when he was picketing GLBT funerals.
Since servicemen are targeted, his hateful little picketing (and means to fund these excursions as his follower actively seek out confrontation with enraged funeral goers or counter-protesters and sue the people for damages) now rises to the level needed to be limited. The slippery slope is one that hopefully will be overturned. Possibly as precursor to suits against the current regime in office who have set up holding cells for protesters.... sorry, I mean "free speech zones".
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 10:41:26 [Permalink]
|
| I think if they are allowed to continue this line of idiocy they will eventually piss off the wrong people and get some real punishment for their actions. They are pretty much giving a great big FU to every member of the military current and former, a pool from which the crazy snipers are derrived. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
trogdor
Skeptic Friend
198 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 20:20:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
quote:
But it will set a legal precedent to localize and minimize protests. Bush has already been doing this since he was governor.in 1999 Bush, gearing up for his presidential run, and was all hot and bothered by a group of protesters outside his mansion. so he sent the state cops on 'em. the protesters were rounded up and sent to a "Protest Zone" far from Dubya.
But I see a huge difference between this and not allowing people to protest funerals. I don't think they can be compared. There is something fundamentally wrong with not respecting the death of someone, whether you hate them or not.
I agree. There is something fundamentaly wrong with what Phelps did. But it is still protected under the law.
But then again, maybe that's just my opinion on death and shouldn't be applied to everyone.
[/quote] |
all eyes were on Ford Prefect. some of them were on stalks.
-Douglas Adams |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 04/20/2006 : 14:59:10 [Permalink]
|
I am unsure how this is even an issue....
Phelps has the right to say what he wants, anytime he likes.
The people who own the private property of the church, cemetary, and funeral home are not obligated to allow him on their property.
As long as he keeps to public areas, what is the issue?
If he trespasses, the property owners just need to press charges.
Why does there need to be a new law that starts a dangerous slide?
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2006 : 13:06:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
I am unsure how this is even an issue....
Phelps has the right to say what he wants, anytime he likes.
The people who own the private property of the church, cemetary, and funeral home are not obligated to allow him on their property.
As long as he keeps to public areas, what is the issue?
If he trespasses, the property owners just need to press charges.
Why does there need to be a new law that starts a dangerous slide?
And as long as he doesn't obstruct the pedestrian traffic on the sidewalk, or do it in the street and frighten the horses...
BTW, if Phelps' crazies do trespass in a church, funeral home or cemetery, the owners would be perfectly within their rights to eject them, using reasonable force if they refuse to leave.  |
"The Republican agenda is to turn the United States into a third-world shithole." -P.Z.Myers |
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2006 : 14:43:38 [Permalink]
|
Phelps is a putrid pus bag who should be sent to the front lines in Iraq to deal directly with the fag-loving soldiers while they're still alive.
That said, I don't see how these laws can stand. If you can't protest at the same time and proximate location as the event you are tagetting, then your right to assemble has been infringed. And we all are guaranteed that right, even the most abhorrent turd among us. |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2006 : 14:54:36 [Permalink]
|
I have decided to chime in, despite the deeply mixed feelings that have silenced me on this subject previously.
Simply put, no laws should be made that restrict the Phelps people's right to free expression, if such laws could ever conceivably be used to restrict free public expression by others.
There, that's my official, philosophical position.
But in the meantime, I have this dark, abiding hope that a gang of five hundred motorcycle outlaws will arrive at one of Phelps' soldier-funeral-taunting demonstrations, and rip the participants limb from limb, and then set fire to the gory remains. Then, I hope the bikers escape unscathed.
And that about sums up both my thoughts, and my feelings, on this issue.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 04/22/2006 14:56:12 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2006 : 15:19:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
But in the meantime, I have this dark, abiding hope that a gang of five hundred motorcycle outlaws will arrive at one of Phelps' soldier-funeral-taunting demonstrations, and rip the participants limb from limb, and then set fire to the gory remains. Then, I hope the bikers escape unscathed.
I must object to this... because it lets Phelps off waaaay too easy.
Were I writing the screenplay, I think it'd be much more fitting were the downfall of Phelps to include lots of forced sodomy while behind bars (due to being arrested under one of these stupid laws), and him begging the ACLU or other such group for help (perhaps because one of his relatives embezzles his Church into bankruptcy). After his bittersweet victory at the Supreme Court level, in a TV interview, he profusely thanks his openly homosexual attourney, and later that week is assassinated by a former parishoner for having "joined the dark side." And finally, of course, there'd be his climactic meeting with Jesus, who smites the crap out of Phelps for all of his failures to love his neighbors, followed by an eternity in a lake of fire.
Maybe that's why people don't ask me to write screenplays. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2006 : 15:19:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
five hundred motorcycle outlaws
five hundred GAY motorcycle outlaws |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
