Protesting Funerals of Dead Soldiers.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I find it wrong to do it. But it didn't do much it is just a small part of censorship....and it didn't really cause a slippery slope...so we are still fairly free just not allowed to scream Heil Hitler and spray Swastikas everywhere.

but you use extremes. screaming can be considered a public disturbance, and vandalism is also against the law regardless.
you are forbidden making a nazi solute. as unsavory as that gesture
is, it neither harms nor threatens anyone. so it is thus a restriction of free speech based on only ONE fact: you would offend people. once a single law like that is passed it becomes exponentially easier to pass another which is yet more frivilous and uselesz. thats what i was pointing out.

:edit: screw it i'll keep the awkwardz misspelling

Originally posted by PVS
but you use extremes. screaming can be considered a public disturbance, and vandalism is also against the law regardless.
you are forbidden making a nazi solute. as unsavory as that gesture
is, it neither harms nor threatens anyone. so it is thus a restriction of free speech based on only ONE fact: you would offend people. once a single law like that is passed it becomes exponentially easier to pass another which is yet more frivilous and uselesz. thats what i was pointing out.

:edit: screw it i'll keep the awkwardz misspelling

Just that it didn't happen in Germany.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Just that it didn't happen in Germany.

what didnt happen?

:edit: oh, i understand.
yes, it didnt happen. yet. whats that prove? nothing really.

You know I hate these sick bastards as much as you do...

You have no idea how much I dislike them. Hate? No, i don't hate someone i dont know.

But NO you're wrong. Unless someone actually physically attempts to harm one of the mourners... there is nothing no one can do about it.

Freedom of Speech is what we are talking about correct? So i never implied that it was thier intention to physically harm the mourners.

Does that mean violence is not an option ? No....

If there is an Irish Parade taking place in the city, and a group of racists interrupt the parade and say "$#$ the IRISH"!!!!....they are obviously risking a possible riot, and therefore freedom of speech will not protect them in this case.

You can't just say "oh well since violence might occur we had better stop them, even though so far no violence has happened"

If there MAY be sudden violence, then yes you can. You can say whatever you want, but not WHEREVER you want.

They are not only INTRUDERS to the funerals, and they are not only VIOLATING the privacy and respectability of the funeral, they are INSTIGATING with thier protests.

do you understand? Freedom of Speech does NOT protect against INTRUSION, TRESPASSING, VIOLATING PRIVACY, OR INSTIGATION.

. Right of Free Speech prevents it.

Nope ^ it doesnt in that case.

Yes I know it's a stupid technicality

Nope, like I already stated Freedom of Speech has its limits to where, when, and how you can say something.

but guess what, this hell hole of a world is full of bullshit technicalities.

True. But not in this case.

Freedom of Speech does NOT protect against INTRUSION, TRESPASSING, VIOLATING PRIVACY, OR INSTIGATION.

That is the CRUX of my argument

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Freedom of Speech does NOT protect against INTRUSION, TRESPASSING, VIOLATING PRIVACY, OR INSTIGATION.

That is the CRUX of my argument

intrusion, tresspassing, and privacy? what if protests take place outside property lines? and instigation is a very loose term.

Originally posted by PVS
what didnt happen?

:edit: oh, i understand.
yes, it didnt happen. yet. whats that prove? nothing really.

Just that you shouldn't claim that it did bad for germany.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Just that you shouldn't claim that it did bad for germany.

i didnt claim that it did bad for germany.
i claimed that it did nothing "fine"

Originally posted by PVS
i didnt claim that it did bad for germany.
i claimed that it did nothing "fine"

No you claimed that Germany wasn't doing fine.....difference. Claimk.

Germany has good brats.....................mmmmmmmmmmm.....and they wear those little suspenders.......

*ok gonna go*

Originally posted by Jonathan Mark
You know I hate these sick bastards as much as you do...

But NO you're wrong. Unless someone actually physically attempts to harm one of the mourners... there is nothing no one can do about it.

You can't just say "oh well since violence might occur we had better stop them, even though so far no violence has happened". Right of Free Speech prevents it. Yes I know it's a stupid technicality but guess what, this hell hole of a world is full of bullshit technicalities.

Are you kidding?? You want to wait until violence breaks out and then do something?? Do you think anything but harm will come from this? Who gives a shit what is in the constitution. The constitution gives us rights not morals, politcal equality, not common curtesy. Thisw is an issue that has everything to do with decency and nothing to do with political technicalities. if these people were taking the opportunity of a soldier's funeral to express a political view like the war in Iraq, it would be tactless and in extremely poor taste, but totally within the law. These people however have no such message, are expressing pure hatred, and ARE PROMOTING VIOLENCE. Like it or not americans can loose their constitutional rights if they choose to threaten peace in our country as these people clearly are.

Originally posted by Bardock42
No you claimed that Germany wasn't doing fine.....difference.

no thats not what i was saying

Originally posted by Bardock42
Claimk.

intrusion, tresspassing, and privacy? what if protests take place outside property lines? and instigation is a very loose term.

PVS, if the protestors TRESPASS a Military Funeral Service, INTRUDING on a ceremony that they were not invited to, and interrupt the mourners of a loved one with their protests.....

Then yes, whether they mean to or not, they are instigating. There's no way around this fact. You dont F@#K with the ceremony of the death of a family's loved member. That is JUST ASKING for trouble.

Outside property lines? How about protest where mourners cannot see you or hear you protesting. Mourners have the right to a private funeral service, without it being torn down by protestors who have nothing to do with the service.

Doing so may provoke backlash. A Funeral is not a place of guaranteed rationality and order.

These people are HURT already....grieving over the loss of a beloved relative.

You would say it is constitutional or RIGHT for protestors to interrupt their ceremony? Sorry bro, thats bullshit.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
That is JUST ASKING for trouble.

but it doesnt create it.

Thanks for not trying to counter my other points PVS, that would have been interesting if you would have made the attempt....

Doesn't matter. It provokes it.

Freedom of Speech has its limits to WHEN, WHERE, and HOW you can say something. You can say whatever you want, but not in a situation where you are risking immediate physical conflict.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen

PVS, if the protestors TRESPASS a Military Funeral Service, INTRUDING on a ceremony that they were not invited to, and interrupt the mourners of a loved one with their protests.....

....There's no way around this fact. You dont F@#K with the ceremony of the death of a family's loved member. That is JUST ASKING for trouble....

...Mourners have the right to a private funeral service, without it being torn down by protestors who have nothing to do with the service......

...These people are HURT already....grieving over the loss of a beloved relative.

You would say it is constitutional or RIGHT for protestors to interrupt their ceremony? Sorry bro, thats bullshit.

*a single tear rolls down my cheek* thanks for casting relevance aside so that we could have a good rrant. why dont we just make a half a dozen comments on just how WRONG it is and ZOMG THEY ARE GRIEVING!!! ect, and then i get to address every one? no thank you. i will address that which is worth addressing, not cries of "wrong" and "right".

but finally the payoff... you answer the question:

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Outside property lines? How about protest where mourners cannot see you or hear you protesting.

so basically...now they cant be within earshot, which takes us further down the slope.

which is precisely my point. its an invitation to tag on more specific limitations, and then where's the line?

A protest is a display of disapproval intended to incite change. So long as it is lawful, it does not have to be considerate, polite, or tasteful. What this is really about is prohibiting free speech because some people do not like the message or the way it is being expressed. Guess what? Too bad. That first amendment protects even unpopular speech.

I just remembered their name. There's a group called the Patriot Riders made up of war veterans and bikers who ride around the counry and attend the funerals of soldiers, AIDS victims, and gay people specifically to shield them from the Westboro assholes with american flags and human chains. I hear that Phelps' ******* spawn have attacked them on several occasions.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
I just remembered their name. There's a group called the Patriot Riders made up of war veterans and bikers who ride around the counry and attend the funerals of soldiers, AIDS victims, and gay people specifically to shield them from the Westboro assholes with american flags and human chains. I hear that Phelps' ******* spawn have attacked them on several occasions.

The language of the funeral protest ban legislation is so broad, that it would exclude these groups as well.

Originally posted by Rapscallion
Are you kidding?? You want to wait until violence breaks out and then do something?? Do you think anything but harm will come from this? Who gives a shit what is in the constitution. The constitution gives us rights not morals, politcal equality, not common curtesy. Thisw is an issue that has everything to do with decency and nothing to do with political technicalities. if these people were taking the opportunity of a soldier's funeral to express a political view like the war in Iraq, it would be tactless and in extremely poor taste, but totally within the law. These people however have no such message, are expressing pure hatred, and ARE PROMOTING VIOLENCE. Like it or not americans can loose their constitutional rights if they choose to threaten peace in our country as these people clearly are.

PVS his this on the mark really... where is the line drawn? The First Amendment is a double edged sword sometimes.