Warning: Constant ABSPATH already defined in /home/public/wp-config.php on line 27

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/public/wp-config.php:27) in /home/public/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: First Amendment? https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/ On-line Opinion Magazine...OK, it's a blog Thu, 01 Nov 2007 22:07:44 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/comment-page-1/#comment-30915 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 22:07:44 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/#comment-30915 They have been somewhat careful about their choice of locations, Jams, choosing the more law abiding areas.

It is certainly to be hoped, Badtux, that they will be discomforted by the decision and the loss of assets, but they live in Kansas, so who knows.

]]>
By: Badtux https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/comment-page-1/#comment-30914 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:56:33 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/#comment-30914 It’s come close at times, Jams. But the Patriot Guard Riders and sympathetic cops have been pretty good at keeping the Westboros marginalized to the point where they can’t really disrupt the funerals. Most states now have laws outlawing protests within N yards of funerals (something allowed by earlier Supreme Court decisions regarding protests near abortion clinics), and the cops enforce those laws gleefully. Even the Phelps clan backs down when faced with grinning cops slapping their batons in their hands saying “C’mon, punk, make my day, I feel like beating down an asshole today.”

As with the others, though, I doubt that anybody will ever collect a dime from the Phelps clan (Westboro is Fred Phelps and his many, many offspring of multiple generations). But the Phelps clan will be too busy running from the cops (trying to arrest them for contempt of court for not complying with court orders regarding collection of this fine) to bother anybody else, hopefully…

]]>
By: jams o donnell https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/comment-page-1/#comment-30913 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:29:36 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/#comment-30913 Not that I support violence but I remain astonished that the Westboros haven’t had the living crap beaten out of them.

]]>
By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/comment-page-1/#comment-30912 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:13:06 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/#comment-30912 You hit the core of the problem, Hipparchia, those “terrible, activist” liberal judges and the “commies” at the ACLU would have a very broad interpretation of freedom of expression which would tend to lean towards the “Kansas Kristianist Koalition”, but the reasonable conservative judges are faced with people disrupting a religious service for one of the “troops” that have to be supported. The Westboro homophobes don’t support the troops.

The point is to ensure that they never have the ability to do this again, and a huge court decision ensures that, Fallenmonk. This is the main technique used by Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center to nail the haters and keep them out of business.

That practice just took a major hit with this court decision, Jack. I suspect at some point this is going to haunt the Supremes, as it should. There have always been people in this country who have felt that their rights trump everyone else’s, and there needs to be clarity on the issue. This is a Federal case, so it applies everywhere.

I think “fighting words” is probably the strongest argument against Fred, MB. That is why I don’t want to see him locally, because it is highly probable that there would be violence.

]]>
By: Mustang Bobby https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/comment-page-1/#comment-30904 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:44:21 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/#comment-30904 My guess is that since this was a civil case and there have been acceptable restraints on the freedom of speech before — i.e. yelling “Fire” in a crowded theatre, slander, and “fighting words” — the verdict may stand but the judgment will be knocked down to a million or something.

The Snyder family may end up getting nothing, and Fred got his publicity, but it does make you smile a little nonetheless.

]]>
By: Jack K., the Grumpy Forester https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/comment-page-1/#comment-30903 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:09:04 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/#comment-30903 …it’s actually a charming little bit of karma for Phelps and his gang. They have been accused of making a cottage industry out of suing anyone who tries to deter them from their obscene protest as a means of fund raising…

]]>
By: Fallenmonk https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/comment-page-1/#comment-30901 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:17:49 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/#comment-30901 I thought the judgment was a bit on the high side since there is no way the idiots will be able to pay it. I do think they needed to whacked so hard they cannot recover. There should be serious consequences for being such pigs. I hope they can master the phrase “You want fires with that?”

]]>
By: hipparchia https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/comment-page-1/#comment-30896 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 07:23:41 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/11/01/first-amendment/#comment-30896 i’m all for free speech, and protests, and the right to be obnoxious about it, but those wbc-ers are just jerks.

it will be interesting to see which way the conservatives go on this one.

]]>