Military Funeral Picketing partially banned, WBC are tools.

[Schadrach]

YES THEY SHOULD CHANGE THE DAMN THING

Your first amendment really isn't all it is cut out to be. It lets people do psychological harm to the grievers of dead soldiers. You Americans have been taught to cling and cherish the term "Freedom of speech" so much that you think that the only possible way to be able to live freely is by letting evil people desecrate your dead, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY. Sacrificing the freedom to rally at funerals to call dead family members of other people FAGGOTS won't take away YOUR right, the normal good-hearted citizen, to voice your opinion on how your government runs things. It will take away the right of an entire group of strangers coming together to call your dead brother a ****** at his funeral.

No it isn't a slippery slope. Just because the WBC won't be allowed to call a man that died protecting his country and family a faggoty homosexual doesn't mean that you can no longer have an opinion and speak it. MY country is proof of that. Is having hate speech legal truly so crucial to your own freedom? Will you never be able to voice your words without doing so hatefully? Can you really NOT live without it?

Laws against hate speech isn't going to guarantee your country getting a thought-police, wake up and stop letting fear of "but maybe then..." blind your judgement. The point of free speech was to combat evil, IE the evil of oppression against good-willed words such as speaking out against an unjust ruler. Now that evil rises again it is allowed to exist because you cannot distinguish right from wrong. Great job.

The problem is that the whole purpose of freedom of speech isn't to protect well liked and popular positions, but quite the opposite. If it doesn't protect people holding positions you find vile, it doesn't protect *anyone* because you never know what the next person in line is going to have a problem with, or how such a thing will be extended.

In the US in particular, there's plenty of evidence of "feature creep" in laws, and there's nothing that would suggest that banning some speech that isn't an immediate provocation of danger or panic without good reason (yelling fire in a theater, organizing a lynch mob, that kind of thing) wouldn't suffer the same fate.

If I owned a cemetery, my policy would be that, during a funeral, only funeral viewers or people visiting other graves are allowed on my property. The WBC would never be allowed on my property during a funeral unless they had buried family members there.

Can someone explain why EVERY FUCKING CEMETERY IN EXISTENCE doesn't already do this? Can someone explain why you (generic parents), with a dead son or daughter, would be retarded enough to pick a funeral home that doesn't have such a policy and that you know will be picketed BECAUSE of this lack of a policy?

Most funeral homes don't own large tracts of land surrounding the funeral home itself (as opposed to the cemetery)? The roads and sidewalks are public land, so WBC can stand on the sidewalk in front of the funeral home and protest the wake without trespassing. As for the actual burial, that's a good question, though they could still protest at the gate, I guess.

 

[chadachada123]

This is such a huge non-issue.

I seriously do not understand how this ever became anything more than a private issue.

If I owned a cemetery, my policy would be that, during a funeral, only funeral viewers or people visiting other graves are allowed on my property. The WBC would never be allowed on my property during a funeral unless they had buried family members there.

Can someone explain why EVERY FUCKING CEMETERY IN EXISTENCE doesn't already do this? Can someone explain why you (generic parents), with a dead son or daughter, would be retarded enough to pick a funeral home that doesn't have such a policy and that you know will be picketed BECAUSE of this lack of a policy?

Can someone please explain this?

There is no protection of free speech while on someone else's property, so how this ever became an issue is far beyond me.

I seriously see no one at fault here besides those in charge of the cemeteries and the parents that clearly can't make good decisions, and see absolutely no reason for the government to get involved in a civil manner.

A combination of many cemeteries being public-owned, and them simply being not that large. Almost every cemetery I know one could easily get within hearing distance of any grave without entering the actual cemetery.

I have never heard of a publicly-owned cemetery aside from Arlington, but I can concede many not being very large.

I just feel that if you worry about your chosen cemetery being too small...that it would be smarter to just pick a larger one. I obviously can't speak for all states, but there are a plethora of cemeteries within 15 miles of me, half of them being more than large enough to be out of earshot of any of the edges from the center.

It just seems like it could never be an issue (and, indeed, it is not an issue) in my own state, but I guess I was too presumptuous in assuming that all states handled funerals with as much common sense as my own.

Edit: Dammit, I've been spending too much time on R&P, and I've been allowing too much snark in my posts. I don't want to come off as confrontive, because I really don't care what happens in this case, and am glad that it's not an issue where I live.

 

[SonicWaffle]

WORDS

Liiiiittle bit harsh there. Speaking as a "fucked up aspie", I certainly can tell the difference in context but you're wrong. It is censorship. It may be censorship for a good reason, but it's censorship nonetheless. The censhorship debate is much like the freedom debate; it's clear that free speech shouldn't be limitless, the question is about where we draw the line.

Oh, and I'd suggest you edit your post before a mod sees it and gives you the banhammer.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censor

....right? Sorry, I'm just not sure why that was relevant. To grab a definition from that old standby Wikipedia;

Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations or by individuals who engage in self-censorship.

All restriction on your speech is censorship. The question is not whether certain things should be censored, but to what degree things should be censored.

A funeral is considered a private event and thus should be regarded as such. People can protest outside your home, but not go inside and scream in your ear.

Is it held in private, or is it held in a location available to the public? If I decide to have dinner with a friend in the middle of Times Square, can I tell anyone who dislikes it to fuck off because it's a private event?

If it's a private event being held on private property, the WBC are trespassing. If it's a pirvate event being held on privately owned but publically available property, the responsibility to get rid of them lies with the owner of the property.

Anyone who thinks yelling 'God hates fags' at a soldiers funeral is legit probably has some sociopathic problems, perhaps on the autism scale...thus--->aspie.

Yeah....no. It doesn't really work that way. Having opinions that differ from yours do not automatically mean someone is mentally disabled. Not everyone who is a dickhead has aspergers and not everyone with aspergers is a dickhead.

 

[BOOM headshot65]

I'm shocked that there haven't been mass counter-protests from Christians yet.

Evidently you missed the general counter-protest where even the smallest ones have had upwards of 20,000 people at them.

 

[spartan231490]

Well, yeah, the last part was obvious.

So this happened. For those of you not able to load that up for some reason, Obama put restrictions on the way that military funeral protesters could protest, i.e. staying back 300 ft. and other restrictions. OK, let's just get it out of the way that WBC are pretty much the only people we're talking about because no one else has reached their level of scum to protest dead soldiers.

Now, not too many people are standing up for the underdogs in this case due to the underdogs being swine that the KKK considers too rash and bigoted, but there is discussion on whether or not we should bend the rules of the 1st amendment (freedom of speech for you European people who hate liberty and apple pies) even if those rules allow douchebags to do what they do best by desecrating every inch of space they take up.

So, Escapists, should America let the people who I'm running out of insulting names for protest lest we invalidate the 1st amendment? Should I be taking my meds more often? And why is there a floating piece of garlic bread levitating in the corner of my room trying to convince me that OJ didn't do it? Let me know below. Quickly.

This isn't new. Most things that get protested heavily are eventually restricted to prevent people from interfering with what's going. Example, you have the right to protest at an abortion clinic, but you have to stay off the property and you can't prevent people from walking through your protest to visit the business.

 

[SonicWaffle]

I am positively shocked no one has gone Rambo on their asses yet.

I'm shocked that there haven't been mass counter-protests from Christians yet.

Christians have condemned their behaviour, many many times, it just doesn't make the headlines. Hell I'm a Christian and I believe their behaviour is the opposite of Christianity.

Condemning is a very, very different thing from standing between them and their victims. Tutting disapprovingly to yourself isn't going to change any minds.

Never get into a fight with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. That's the logic I use when dealing with idiots like the WBC. If I stand in front of them waving a sign, I'm giving them exactly what they want, attention.

But that's precisely the point - you shouldn't be fighting them! You should be turning their own beliefs back against them. Stand between them and their victims and take the abuse. Don't respond in kind, don't wave aggressively worded signs, don't spit at them or try to start fights. Turn the other cheek. Be humble, be meek, and do all you can to remind them that they're doing an awful thing and that you believe that Jesus can still forgive them if they stop doing it.

Condemning their behaviour simply makes it clear that they do not speak for me, just as when other organisations condemn their behaviour it makes it clear they do not speak for those organisations.

Yes, but here's the kicker; they don't care. Not only that, but it's your religion they're dragging through the dirt. How many people think the WBC are representative of Christianity? Why aren't there Christians standing up to not only try to change this perception but show some good old Christian love? Jesus hung around with whores and whatnot, the least you can do is put yourself between a bunch of cunts and a grieving family.

 

[tkioz]

Yes. I believe you and they are both free to hate and I don't like forcing people to change. But I would like the hate to stop.

Hatred doesn't go away because you would really, really like it to. Sorry to disappoint.

Correct. It doesn't. But I'll continue to try, with a calm voice and a kind word, to persuade. Shouting insults at people you disagree with and attempting to belittle them will only increase the gap between you and them.

Why cause more anger and negative emotion? From where I stand, there's two parties being as bad as one another.

Excuse me... are you seriously claiming that people who lose their temper when these hate-mongering oxygen thieves picket the funeral of their loved one are just as bad as the WBC?

Seriously?

 

[Andrew Bascom]

Ok I'm just saying, but even I feel it's disrespectful to picket a funeral. I don't know what the WBC stand for really, but regardless if I agree or disagree, it's just wrong to picket a funeral. I mean it just feels so disrespectful, of course, I don't really picket anything so... perhaps I'm just missing the point.

 

[tkioz]

I am positively shocked no one has gone Rambo on their asses yet.

I'm shocked that there haven't been mass counter-protests from Christians yet.

Christians have condemned their behaviour, many many times, it just doesn't make the headlines. Hell I'm a Christian and I believe their behaviour is the opposite of Christianity.

Condemning is a very, very different thing from standing between them and their victims. Tutting disapprovingly to yourself isn't going to change any minds.

Never get into a fight with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. That's the logic I use when dealing with idiots like the WBC. If I stand in front of them waving a sign, I'm giving them exactly what they want, attention.

But that's precisely the point - you shouldn't be fighting them! You should be turning their own beliefs back against them. Stand between them and their victims and take the abuse. Don't respond in kind, don't wave aggressively worded signs, don't spit at them or try to start fights. Turn the other cheek. Be humble, be meek, and do all you can to remind them that they're doing an awful thing and that you believe that Jesus can still forgive them if they stop doing it.

Condemning their behaviour simply makes it clear that they do not speak for me, just as when other organisations condemn their behaviour it makes it clear they do not speak for those organisations.

Yes, but here's the kicker; they don't care. Not only that, but it's your religion they're dragging through the dirt. How many people think the WBC are representative of Christianity? Why aren't there Christians standing up to not only try to change this perception but show some good old Christian love? Jesus hung around with whores and whatnot, the least you can do is put yourself between a bunch of cunts and a grieving family.

And if they could actually protest in my country without being arrested I would do so. But given I'm several thousand kilometres away from the hate mongers there is very little I can do, other then condemn them.

Just like the largest churches in the UK did when they supported the government ban on the WBC entering the country.

 

[SonicWaffle]

I'm shocked that there haven't been mass counter-protests from Christians yet.

Evidently you missed the general counter-protest where even the smallest ones have had upwards of 20,000 people at them.

Indeed, I haven't heard a thing about them. Got a link? The only ones I've heard of have been by bikers and college students.

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

I think this may open a door and I don't like it. It blocks the peoples right to protest. Yes its wrong, sickening and down right cold hearted, but its a first amendment right. What could come of this is people may have to stay away from politicians, places of worship, high traffic areas like Wall Street, etc. Who gets to decide what limits should be put where? Its a very scary concept.

Please don't take it the wrong way. Ever since the Matthew Shepard case where he was tied to a fence beaten and left to die. (He eventually did) Then there was a protest rally at his funeral where they shouted "God Hates Fags" and held up signs such as "No Tears for Queers" and "Fag Matt in Hell." I have been shocked and sickened by what a human being is capable of. Still, this is a free country and to deny ones freedom of speech because we believe it is wrong isn't the way to go. No matter how ugly we think it is.

 

[The White Hunter]

I'm not sure why the WBC even does this. I mean, if you hate someone or something that much, why not keep away from it?

Because God or some other such bullshit. They're interfering pricks who think everyone should be like them and that it's their business to "save" people who don't want "saving.

OT: By all means ban them. Make it illegal to protest at funerals because it's fucking disrespectful and tell them that if they have a protest to make they should take it through the correct channels or w/e rather than be douche bags about the whole thing.

Also I have run out of things to call them. Now they're just "those extremist morons".

 

[tkioz]

Correct. It doesn't. But I'll continue to try, with a calm voice and a kind word, to persuade. Shouting insults at people you disagree with and attempting to belittle them will only increase the gap between you and them.

I can assure you - with people like them, I'd like that gap to be as wide as humanely possible. The less they infect my life, the happier I'll be.

Yet you came here, read the OP and various posts, and now continue to discuss them. What have you gained from stewing in negativity? If you truly do wish to be far away from them and not have them affect your life, shouldn't you leave this thread?

Yes. I believe you and they are both free to hate and I don't like forcing people to change. But I would like the hate to stop.

Hatred doesn't go away because you would really, really like it to. Sorry to disappoint.

Correct. It doesn't. But I'll continue to try, with a calm voice and a kind word, to persuade. Shouting insults at people you disagree with and attempting to belittle them will only increase the gap between you and them.

Why cause more anger and negative emotion? From where I stand, there's two parties being as bad as one another.

Excuse me... are you seriously claiming that people who lose their temper when these hate-mongering oxygen thieves picket the funeral of their loved one are just as bad as the WBC?

Seriously?

Neither are bad people, but they are both behaving as bad as each other. In my opinion, of course.

I'm speechless... you're blaming the victims for the actions of an aggressive cult...

 

[SonicWaffle]

I don't know what the WBC stand for really

Hating on the gays, the Jews, pretty much anyone either secular or religious who isn't a part of their church. Not their own hatred, of course; they're just God's messengers. God hates seemingly everyone except about 30 people with signs and an attitude problem.