Westboro Baptist Church is thwarted!

[N3vans]

I love the smell of area-denial citizenship in the morning, smells like victory.

Also, not the most popular view out there I know what with WBC's first amendment rights, etc (abuses of free speech notwithstanding): Maybe next time there's a closeted, sociopathic, psychotic nutter with a backpack full of ammo, an uzi and a penchant for murder we could point them towards their church instead of the local high school?

Oh and incase that seems a little untoward, I'll use the WBC excuse, 'I'm just saying, it's not what I think, I'm just saying...'

 

[sheic99]

Wow, really? There are people defending what the county did?

I'm going to get flamed hard for this, and people are inevitably going to assume that I'm some kind of homophobe which, of course, couldn't be further from the truth, but if you defend something, it means you must be a part of it right (all you 'straight' people who defend gay rights, and all you 'white' people who defend black rights)?

RANKIN FUCKING DID IT WRONG.

Fred Phelps and his family and church (and yes, they are a church) are a festering, pustulent boil on the world, but THEY HAVE EVERY FUCKING RIGHT TO SAY EVERY TERRIBLE THING THAT THEY SAY. Assaulting them, barricading them, and interfering with them in ANY WAY is a violation of their fucking rights. I don't care that you disagree with them, and neither does the law. What Rankin county did was grounds for a lawsuit, and you know what? I hope the county gets served.

Fuck WBC.

Fuck Rankin county more.

It's worth pointing out that Rankin wasn't doing this to defend someone who was gay. They were pissed off because the protest was coming to a soldier's funeral. If the protest had come to the funeral of some random gay kid who'd been murdered, there would have been ZERO stink.

Also, to those of you saying that they're not 'real' Christians, I hope that the "true Scotsmen" among you are ready to defend those words with your Bibles, because Fred Phelps is ready -- and he does it all the time.

No it is not. What they did is in no way a violation of their rights. Only the GOVERNMENT can violate their first amendment rights, not private citizens. You can say whatever you want in public, but that doesn't mean people are required to let you keep speaking. Just so we're clear on this, the freedom of speech does not cover slander and libel, both of which the WBC have committed in the past.

 

[LordFisheh]

I'm loving what happened to those assholes.

It's a little worrying though. It's not that big a leap from doing this to doing the same to 'those dirty communists/fascists', or whoever else you disagree with. Remember how many people rallied behind McCarthyism, and how many currently oppose Islam on the actions of a few extremists. It wasn't long enough ago that American towns were doing this and worse to civil rights protesters, after all.

 

[The Great JT]

Glad to see that he got the burial and respect he deserved.

 

[DVnotDivvy]

Well, I don't know if I'm the first to bring out this opinion (maybe cos I'm too lazy to read all the posts), but that is a blatant disregard of their constitutional right to free speech; as vile as their message may be, they do have a right to express it without having to fear persecution of any kind. And it is somewhat ironic that the OP's link is a conservative blog and this happened in a conservative, predominantly christian region, when the WBC is as conservative and as christian as someone could get; I mean they go to such an extreme to express their hatred of homosexuals, which is one the core ideas of conservatism and christianity.

 

[Saltyk]

Admittedly, my understanding of the legal system is limited, but I'm pretty sure the WBC would have a strong case. Also, if they could file a suit in civil court, the requirements for proof are almost laughable. I'm not saying they could since this would involve a government, but I wouldn't put it past them to sue individuals.

Wouldn't put it past them? It's how they make damn near all their money!

Step 1: Exercise your rights as enumerated in the Constitution.
Step 2: Incur the wrath of law-ignorant fucktards who trample all over your rights.
Step 3: Sue the pants off of them -- and rightly so.

I hate the Phelps family, but nothing they do is illegal. They keep it that way very, very carefully, so that when people with no sense of what "freedom of speech" actually means (hint: it's not "freedom of speech that I want to hear") infringe on those rights, they can get nailed legally.

Knowledge is power. Evidently Rankin is lacking in power.

Which is why I wouldn't put it past them. That's why I hate them so much. I'm forced to support them. When the Supreme Court sided with them, I had to admit that they were right. They abuse the legal system. For all the hate and evil they represent, they are often right when it comes to First Amendment rights. Case in point, here I am defending them. I don't want to. But when something is wrong. It is wrong. Damn them for being right.

Sometimes I wonder if they aren't doing this just to undermine the First Amendment. To make people hate it.

 

[justcallmeslow]

I think it's important from a human rights perspective to note that freedom of speech is not only the First Amendment of the American Constitution, the European Convention of Human Rights dedicates 3 articles to freedoms of belief, expression and peaceful assembly. Together, this means that many of the most legally developed countries in the world enforce the exact same freedoms and don't limit them with regards to how abhorrent the beliefs expressed are. This is just.

Restricting Westboro's right to protest because you disagree with their message is unequivocally a breach of their human rights, from more than just a legal point of view.

ECHR Article 10.2 reads:
The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

I think this most of these exceptions are reasonable and as such I believe that Westboro members should be officially denied their right to prevent disorder, crimes (their actions must surely qualify as harassment) and their infringement of the right of others to hold a peaceful assembly.

They should be stopped because of how they manifest their freedom of expression, not because of what they express. It may seem a small distinction, but I'd argue that it's important.

 

[Cavan]

"What officer? A man beaten half to death less than 50 feet from here? Are you sure he didn't just fall into that big pothole down the road and is looking for somebody to blame? It is a pretty hot day, maybe the sun and the smell of petrol made him dizzy."

As neither buying in to the Americanised attitude that is the leading brand of 'freedom' of speech or particular revulsion on violence, I would be happy if similar things happened to every single member every time they try to do so much as go to the market to get more milk. They thrive on being insulted so simply neutralise and then ignore.

Maybe the WBC will die as soon as it realised it can be beaten and that not everybody will simply use words.

 

[crop52]

man, put yourself in the WBC's shoes, look through their eyes.

[WBC eyes]
there are bad people in the world, and people are uninformed on how to get to heaven, so WBC just wants to let you know what's up. the bible is out there to be read so you can get to heaven but you people are just ignoring it so we have to shove it in your face by protesting at funerals.
[/WBC eyes]

this is of course stupid, because the Quran and a whole bunch of other religious texts are also out there to be read.

and of course, they're are going about it in a terrible fashion, and most everyone thinks/knows that they're wrong.

 

[FFHAuthor]

Just remember folks, the Constitution and Bill of Rights only limit what the Federal Government can do, not the State or Local Governments (Those are covered by State Constitutions) and most certainly it does NOT apply to individuals, judging from the article it was a group of private citizens acting against another group of private citizens when those vehicles were blocked in, that falls under local laws.

As for the actions of the local PD, well, the individuals who were questioned were merely brought in for a few questions about a crime that had occurred, no one was arrested, no one was forcibly detained, and no one was placed under arrest for any kind of protest.

It would seem that the individuals who are demonizing the local citizens who undertook these actions are simply saying that one group of protesters has a right while another group opposing them doesn't. You can claim that WBC has a right to protest within the law...but what about all those protesters who violated laws to carry out their protests when they fought for things that we consider 'right' now? Peace marches, sit ins, protests and demonstrations that were illegal?

 

[Om Nom Nom]

I'm rather surprised that these people haven't been gunned down yet. Eh, someone will get to it eventually, I'm sure.

 

[Bento Box]

No it is not. What they did is in no way a violation of their rights. Only the GOVERNMENT can violate their first amendment rights, not private citizens. You can say whatever you want in public, but that doesn't mean people are required to let you keep speaking. Just so we're clear on this, the freedom of speech does not cover slander and libel, both of which the WBC have committed in the past.

No -- fuck you, and fuck that noise. Anyone can infringe on free speech. That's what laws are for. If you're gearing up to go to an anti-war rally, and I block your driveway and refuse to move? I'm breaking the fucking law.

"...but that doesn't mean people are required to let you keep speaking."

Honestly? If that's not what 'freedom of speech' is supposed to mean, then I am truly fucking confounded.

The WBC is not calling for murder. They are not inciting violence. People are getting pissy because they don't want to hear the Phelps family. Too fucking bad. IT IS THEIR RIGHT.

 

[DVnotDivvy]

Just remember folks, the Constitution and Bill of Rights only limit what the Federal Government can do, not the State or Local Governments (Those are covered by State Constitutions) and most certainly it does NOT apply to individuals, judging from the article it was a group of private citizens acting against another group of private citizens when those vehicles were blocked in, that falls under local laws.

Considering it's the Supreme law of the land, I would think it applies to everyone; it just isn't easy for an individual to trample on someone's constitutional rights like the federal government does.

 

[taciturnCandid]

Search bar. This thread was on R&P a few days ago

 

[FFHAuthor]

Just remember folks, the Constitution and Bill of Rights only limit what the Federal Government can do, not the State or Local Governments (Those are covered by State Constitutions) and most certainly it does NOT apply to individuals, judging from the article it was a group of private citizens acting against another group of private citizens when those vehicles were blocked in, that falls under local laws.

Considering it's the Supreme law of the land, I would think it applies to everyone; it just isn't easy for an individual to trample on someone's constitutional rights like the federal government does.

Which says you do not understand the purpose of the Constitution and what it was created to do, which was to limit the FEDERAL government, not State government, not local government, and most certainly NOT private citizens.

 

[Bento Box]

man, put yourself in the WBC's shoes, look through their eyes.

[WBC eyes]
there are bad people in the world, and people are uninformed on how to get to heaven, so WBC just wants to let you know what's up. the bible is out there to be read so you can get to heaven but you people are just ignoring it so we have to shove it in your face by protesting at funerals.
[/WBC eyes]

this is of course stupid, because the Quran and a whole bunch of other religious texts are also out there to be read.

and of course, they're are going about it in a terrible fashion, and most everyone thinks/knows that they're wrong.

To be fair, the Phelps family isn't actually 'warning' anyone. WBC is a five-point Calvinist institution, meaning that they believe that God has already chosen who is and is not saved. Thy're not trying to save anyone -- they're just letting everyone know what the Bible says, and the Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of Yaweh.

As for the people who think/know they're wrong? Those people probably don't know their Bible -- the book certainly does shit all over homosexuals, and never, ever takes it back. Sorry if that makes you uncomfortable, but don't pretend that Bible doesn't say what it certainly does.

 

[roostuf]

MUHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! YESSSS, Carma is a ***** ain't it.