High Court hears funeral protest case

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-04-2002
High Court hears funeral protest case
15
Thu, 10-07-2010 - 12:03am

The Supreme Court is currently hearing a case involving the Westboro Bapist Church and the family of a solider killed in action. The family won a judgment and on appeal the amount was lowered to 5 million and on further appeal the award was reversed in favor of the church.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_pl3827

Cl for Religion Debate

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2001
Thu, 10-07-2010 - 2:08am

I think this group's acts should not be protected by freedom of speech. Their "speech" is harmful emotionally and psychologically to the grieving families. In some ways, I see them as committing a psychological hate crime by targeting emotionally vulnerable grieving family members.



Blessings,

Gypsy

)O(



Avatar for maryrca
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Thu, 10-07-2010 - 8:54pm

They are odious, hateful ignorant jerks.


But the have the Constitution on their side on this one.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2001
Fri, 10-08-2010 - 11:44am

"And the implications for the country are far worse if their free speech is restricted."

Sadly this is true and a worthy cautionary. While I know there are "hate crimes" that take on a more severe legal consequence, I wonder if "hate speech" has any special category that preempts freedom of speech? I'm thinking, likely not. Even though such hate speech from many sources encourages violent acts against homosexuals and fosters it.



Blessings,

Gypsy

)O(



iVillage Member
Registered: 10-28-2005
Tue, 10-12-2010 - 7:30am

I don't get it. Why do they continue to live here if they hate it so much? Where would they be w/o our soliders who have fought for their freedoms?

My heart goes out to the families that have to put up with such stuff. :(


iVillage Member
Registered: 02-18-2006
Tue, 10-12-2010 - 8:17am

I think there's a certain radius away from the funeral they have to remain, correct?




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"'Cause love's such an old-fashioned word, and love dares you to care for the people on th
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2001
Tue, 10-12-2010 - 12:10pm
Snow wrote, "The bright side: It makes it that much easier for the rest of us to tell which people are soulless, heartless, ignorant morons when they carry big signs"


Unfortunately, this is correct. We dare not become punitive of others' exercising their freedoms, even if what they say is abhorrent and, yes, emotionally/psychologically harmful to others. :( If we keep banning, for this, that, or the other thing, pretty soon we won't have religious freedoms -- or a host of other freedoms, will we? We deny access to exercising freedoms, then eventually we will be the targeted ones ourselves...and in some cases, for some religions, practitioners, they already *are* targeted and persecuted and discriminated against, just like those of different cultures, races, genders, sexual orientations, despite laws on the books to the contrary. :smileymad: On the other had, how much "harm" can the secular law seek to prevent? It is supposed to prevent physical harm, harm to property, discrimination on the job, but it gets tricky when freedom of speech and religious freedom intertwine, which of course, they do. Lawsuits such as this, or defamation of character or libel try to rectify wrongs done to another, but when we get into the muddy waters of religious freedom and freedom of speech, then what? Where's the line in the sand? Even the judges can't figure it out conclusively. :o



Blessings,

Gypsy

)O(



iVillage Member
Registered: 08-04-2002
Tue, 10-12-2010 - 12:26pm

Really ironic isn't? They are hiding behind the 1st amendment

Cl for Religion Debate
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-28-2005
Tue, 10-12-2010 - 12:37pm
starienite wrote:

Really ironic isn't? They are hiding behind the 1st amendment


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2001
Tue, 10-12-2010 - 1:59pm



Blessings,

Gypsy

)O(



iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2001
Tue, 10-12-2010 - 2:04pm
starienite wrote:

Really ironic isn't? They are hiding behind the 1st amendment



Blessings,

Gypsy

)O(



Pages