Anti gay rally gone too far?

For all of those who haven't seen this, I just wanted to bring it to your attention. Phelps-Roper has been showing up at funerals and military bases saying that "God is killing soldiers because America allows gays rights". Is banning protests at funerals going too far or not far enough to stop him?Error

I just saw that on CNN International this evening. This is simply...disgusting. It's funny, the religious right proclaims all those who disagree with them are unpatriotic. I can't imagine a more unpatriotic act than what Roper is doing. "Scum" is too mild a term for him.

Ahem... 1st amendment...

Ahem yourself! Yell fire in a theater or mention bomb in an airport or on an airplane and see what happens.

Fred Phelps is an American Citizen and as such has every right to spew his message of bigotry and intolerance.AbE:
It is amazing to me that both the House and the Senate have moved on this measure and that it is likely to be passed and sent to the President for signature. Legislation like this is a far greater threat to America than all the terrorists in the world.Edited by jar, : No reason given.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Yes but not at other people's funerals that have not anything to do with his issues. He is scum and he is pushing the envelope too far. He's the sort of person that causes laws to be enacted that are good when used against him but bad overall for freedom of speach.

I will point out that Phelps still has a right to protest, however, there is a 'bubble area' around the funeral so it won't be disrupted.The right for free speach is not unlimited. He still has the right to show up and spew his filth. He just can't intrude on other's rights in their time of grief to do it.There is always the balancing of rights. The families of the deceased soldiers have their right of privacy during their time of grief.The legislation is not perfect. But, neither is life.

Hi Jar it failed in marylandread thisCBS Baltimore - Breaking News, Sports, Weather & Community JournalismIt is not that easy to pass anything that takes rights away from UScitizens. {Off topic - The above link is to an article about an attempt at an anti-same sex marriage amendment. The topic theme is about Phelps-Roper protests at military funerals. Not closely enough related - This is not a same sex marriage amendment topic. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by randy feagley, : misspelled right.rafEdited by Adminnemooseus, : See above.

quote:

---

Fred Phelps is an American Citizen and as such has every right to spew his message of bigotry and intolerance.

---

True, provided such rights do not interfere with the rights of others, in this case to bury their dead in peace. To me this is a clear case of domestic tranquility trumping freedom of speech considering it is confined to specific circumstances.As a Libertarian, even an activist some 15 years ago, I believe in maximizing the freedom of the individual, however in this case such freedom to protest during the service is tantamount to yelling fire in a crowded theater.We do not yet live in a perfect state of libertarianism because of behavior which seeks to create an authoritarian response. However there is hope, cannibalism is extinct, witchburning is extinct, human sacrifice is extinct, at least in the broader set of cultural sanction. Perhaps protests at funerals will someday be extinct as well, then there will be an opportunity to make freedom of speech an absolute. Until then, if the state does not act, I'm afraid individuals would take matters into their own hands. Under such circumstances, insuring domestic tranquility potentially even saves the lives of the protestors.

quote:

---

Legislation like this is a far greater threat to America than all the terrorists in the world.

---

More than the Patriot Act, more than domestic spying, more than the executive interpretations of laws passed by Congress stating the executive does not have to follow the law, more than sanctioned torture, more than the property seizure act concerning accusation (not proof) of drug money source, more than the denial of concil if accused of terrorism, more than the "storm and night" act making individuals accused of terrorism disappear so their constitutional rights disappear, more than Guantanamo, more than Abu Gharib.I think you exaggerate. {I think the second quote and the reply to it are a real threat to shoot things way off topic. Please do not respond to that part of this message. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : See above.

being the family member of a buried soldier, i have to say the least this country can do is allow its defenders to be buried in peace and have the ONLY thing that shatters that be those 7 guns and their 3 shots. these are not public figures. they are private citizens who deserve peace for once. i am all about the free speech. but this is an acceptable law in my opinion. further, funerals tend to take place on private property (of course some military funerals are on government property...) so that is a further defense of the issue. little in the nature of individual rights is protected on private property.

I massively agree. If the person whose funeral it is was a homosexual rights advocate there might be cause, although even then it would still be a very distasteful action. To harrass an event because of an unrelated issue is absolutely inexcusable.There are anti-harassment laws are there not? Anti-gay protests at funerals is harassment, not justified free speech.By the way, I seem to recall that even Terry at Terry's Talk Origins thinks that Fred Phelps is an asshole, althought he didn't quite phrase it that way.Moose

Yelling fire in a crowded theater and peaceful protest are two different things. You know better than to use such blatant fallacy.Added by edit.I was listening to NPR today and their speakers all seemed to agree that if Phelps decides to take this to court that he will probably win. This particular law is nothing more than a political stunt that exploits people's emotional response.I hate Fred Phelps to a point where I would campaign for a monument for his cease of existance once he's dead. But as an American citizen, he has the right to free speech. Yes, it probably causes some emotional pain for the people at the funerals, but I'd swallow this a lot easier if they proposed this law after Phelps wanted to erect that monument for Matthew Shepard's so-called 'entrance to hell'.Once again, we see the current administration come up with a bullshit issue, like gay marriage. The difference this time is it draws so much emotional responses that otherwise reasonable and logical people actually buy it.Edited by rgb, : Further thought....

Minnemoose writes

quote:

---

There are anti-harassment laws are there not?

---

Then use those laws to curb Phelps and his followers, that is if what Phelps did at these funerals can be defined legally as harrassment. This nation needs a lot of reforms. Adding more dumb laws that are only useful for a specific event or events ain't one of them.

He has won before in similar circumstances--if you hold your nose and sift through his web site, you can find the particulars which included the limiting authority (?city) having to pay his legal costs.Interestingly, a group of motorcycle-riding vets follow Phelps around the country, drowning out his hateful speech by throttling up their bikes. As I have noted on prior occasions, hate-mongers do more good than harm with open displays of their hatefulness and ignorance. Those who embrace hatred but exhibit more canny restraint are far more dangerous.Freedom is a messy word. I sympathize with the offended families, but current laws keep Phelps some distance away, and anything that prompts veteran bikers to contest gay-bashing speech has already done some good. Attempting to silence him makes him a martyr to some, but witnessing his special brand of obscenity is on balance a good thing.

Omnivorous writes

quote:

---

Interestingly, a group of motorcycle-riding vets follow Phelps around the country, drowning out his hateful speech by throttling up their bikes.

---

Yes, and these bikers have every right to do so.

quote:

---

As I have noted on prior occasions, hate-mongers do more good than harm with open displays of their hatefulness and ignorance. Those who embrace hatred but exhibit more canny restraint are far more dangerous.

---

While I agree with you on this, I am more content to point out Phelps' rights as a citizen than having a hidden agenda behind my support for Phelps' right to free speech. To me, the rights that are already guaranteed to everyone are more important than anything. We want to support gay rights? First we must support Faith's right to hate without any hidden agenda (like hoping that she'd slip and fall flat on her face... or something like that).With that said, I would feel much better if there were bikers following Freddy around when he was pestering the people at the funerals of gay people that were victims of hate crimes (well, technically they weren't hate crimes). What does this tell me about people in the society we live in? It tells me that people are still just as naive and selfish as the people that lived under the Nazi regime. Despite how many times we try to tell people the saying "First they came for the Jews, then they came for the Gypsies, then they came for the disabled... blah blah blah... then they came for me..." the people still think like that. They still think that if it doesn't affect them directly then they don't have to stand up and say anything. The silent majority seems to never speak up until something earth-shaking happens.

quote:

---

Attempting to silence him makes him a martyr to some, but witnessing his special brand of obscenity is on balance a good thing.

---

This is completely true. However, unlike most people I just don't see it that way. To me, coming up with a law to silence this nutcase is nothing different than coming up with 3 different laws banning gay marriage (as if 1 isn't enough). Can't people understand that the rights that we enjoy must be applied to everyone and not just the people we think we like?