• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Westboro Baptist Church and other Radicals: Enough is enough?

And er why is there economy being the only developed one to barely contract in the last two years

*eerie silence*

Our banks haven't been throwing around money like drunken sailors recently.

EDIT:

Want to see a country who's actually doing well? Australia's currencey is actually worth more than Canada's now and very close to the US$.
 
Upvote 0
Our banks haven't been throwing around money like drunken sailors recently.

EDIT:

Want to see a country who's actually doing well? Australia's currencey is actually worth more than Canada's now and very close to the US$.

Indeed
But for Australia, if China does well they do well due to mineral exports.
And China is still growing at 10% a year
Canada's main trading partner -the US.
 
Upvote 0
mourning is restricted JUST TO THE DAY OF THE FUNERAL? Some people/cultures mourn for weeks/months. Back in the 1800's here in the US, it was considered normal to mourn for AT LEAST a month

Try to follow along.

This particular right to privacy is tied to the funeral. You have a right to mourn in private during the funeral.

We are not talking about mourning in general, or anything else.

You have other rights that allow for your uninterrupted grief during the rest of your day (privacy at your home/private property, and the right to not be harassed).

but they can argue they weren't on the funeral grounds....Disrupting at the intersection halfway between the funeral home and grave site is no different than the intersection right off the graveyard.

And? Their intention was to cause emotional distress to the mourners.

It doesn't matter if they were 100 yards away with loud speakers, or 1 mile away with REALLY LOUD SPEAKERS.

Their intention was to interfere with the participants right to mourn their dead.

What about air space? Can I rent a plane and pull behind it, a sign that says "God killed your son because America supports gays"

Same thing applies. If you are going to interfere with the mourners rights, I would recommend against it.

What about cyberspace?

How about Mars? How exactly would cyberspace interfere with the mourners rights to mourn?

My point is.... lines have to be established both ways... I'm allowed to protest... setting a 10 mile bubble from whatever arbitrary point opens up to stuff like I stated.... airspace, travel route, etc.

People aren't allowed to provoke violence with speech, the line is, provoking violence with speech. It doesn't matter where they do it, or how they do it.

The line here, is interfering with the mourners right to mourn their dead during the funeral.

"MLK, you can protest that Alabama won't allow this african-american child from going to an all white school all you want, you just can't do it at the school she wants to go to, you have to do it at the black school she's supposed to go to". That just doesn't cut it.

Umm... how is this relevant? What right to mourning would the school have?

IDK, encourage anyone who supports it to go by and honk and make noise as they drive by. See, there's the double standard... a popular view protest of a baby-killer marine would have people take them up on the offer if the event is well organized. We are again, now punishing unpopular protests over popular protest

So, your argument is: a website might violate their rights, by encouraging people to violate their rights?

The actual rights violation would be the honking (not that you could actually do anything about it).

so again I ask, at what point am I allowed to criticize JFK's presidency.... I'm sure one of his kids could argue "I'm still mourning my father's passing" and get me to stop if they didn't like what I was saying...

Again I ask, how are you mourning at a funeral over JFK?

I can create a protest parade down your street.... or at the corner your house is on and you can claim "MOURNING STILL" for how long. Mourning time is too arbitrary a period to limit. We STILL mourn John Lenin's death every year.

Again... (this gets redundant after awhile).

I'm not burying anyone at my house.

you haven't convinced me Westboro violated any rights. And unlike Right to free speech.... right to an agreeable mourning is not in the Bill of Rights

Unlike your right to free speech, your right to own property isn't in the Bill of Rights either.

Neither is your right to life. Neither is your right to custody of your children.

We can go all day on the rights that are more fundamental than free speech, but aren't included in the Bill of Rights.

on a side note... how did the Westboro protest of the highschool that someone mentioned on here go today? I am very interested in hearing about that.

See, this I have no issue with.
 
Upvote 0
Try to follow along.

This particular right to privacy is tied to the funeral. You have a right to mourn in private during the funeral.

please direct me to the part of the Constitution or Bill of Right, or amendment that states this..... because I CAN point you the amendment that states I have the right to peacefully assemble. And it has no caveat about saying it must be popular speech.


kthx.... I'll wait for your reply before I will entertain the rest of this clap trap below....

We are not talking about mourning in general, or anything else.

You have other rights that allow for your uninterrupted grief during the rest of your day (privacy at your home/private property, and the right to not be harassed).



And? Their intention was to cause emotional distress to the mourners.

It doesn't matter if they were 100 yards away with loud speakers, or 1 mile away with REALLY LOUD SPEAKERS.

Their intention was to interfere with the participants right to mourn their dead.



Same thing applies. If you are going to interfere with the mourners rights, I would recommend against it.



How about Mars? How exactly would cyberspace interfere with the mourners rights to mourn?



People aren't allowed to provoke violence with speech, the line is, provoking violence with speech. It doesn't matter where they do it, or how they do it.

The line here, is interfering with the mourners right to mourn their dead during the funeral.



Umm... how is this relevant? What right to mourning would the school have?



So, your argument is: a website might violate their rights, by encouraging people to violate their rights?

The actual rights violation would be the honking (not that you could actually do anything about it).



Again I ask, how are you mourning at a funeral over JFK?



Again... (this gets redundant after awhile).

I'm not burying anyone at my house.



Unlike your right to free speech, your right to own property isn't in the Bill of Rights either.

Neither is your right to life. Neither is your right to custody of your children.

We can go all day on the rights that are more fundamental than free speech, but aren't included in the Bill of Rights.



See, this I have no issue with.

"blah blah blah.... I don't agree with what Westboro is saying, so lets take away their rights because they are jerks.... blah blah."

it's all I get from all that.
 
Upvote 0
please direct me to the part of the Constitution or Bill of Right, or amendment that states this..... because I CAN point you the amendment that states I have the right to peacefully assemble. And it has no caveat about saying it must be popular speech.

It also has no caveat about yelling fire in a theater. It also has no caveat about lying under oath. It also has no caveat about lying in public to ruin your reputation.

There are limits to free speech. Those limits lie when they infringe on the rights of others.

"blah blah blah.... I don't agree with what Westboro is saying, so lets take away their rights because they are jerks.... blah blah."

it's all I get from all that.

Then why don't you let me know what your reading level is, and I will try to make it clearer for you.
 
Upvote 0
I'm not sure what the circumstances of the ruling are but this is very dangerous territory. Essentially this invalidates the first amendment unless there are limitations to the ruling.
I personally think this is over due. There should be rules protecting military personnel and there families for their service. I don't understand the logic anyway, protest at marine funerals because of gays? Shouldn't they be picketing gay funerals? This is like my kicking you for what she said.
 
Upvote 0
From what i understood, the ruling was that the signs were too vulgar and disrespectful to be covered under the first amendment. Also because it was infringing on others rights. I'm not 100% sure I agree with that, although I am happy they got what they deserve

while it dang sure doesn't break my heart these idiots got their comupances.... I don't like the precedent it sets.
 
Upvote 0
while it dang sure doesn't break my heart these idiots got their comupances....

You didn't about the case that was decided against them that led to the pending Supreme Court case?

Then what have we been discussing?

I don't like the precedent it sets.

The precedent it sets is that people have more rights than just free speech, and you can't use your right to free speech to infringe on the rights of others.
 
Upvote 0
I am an equal opportunity hater. I don't care what color, sex, rage, religion, or anything else you are. If you suck I hate you.

Free speech has long been dead. You can't say something non-PC or you get fired, sued, or killed. It sucks. One day it's all going to come to a head.

Job = private property and you are representing someone other then yourself
Cemetery = state owned land

Big difference
 
Upvote 0
What is your point? Who brought up cemeteries?

You're citing that free speech is dead and then list a locale that is not private. I'm just clarifying. The best example is this forum, it's private and that's why some things are censored but others are not. The owners makes the rules however arbitrary they may be.

btw did you know Pastor Fred Phelps is a registered democrat? Doesn't that explain some things?
 
Upvote 0
You're citing that free speech is dead and then list a locale that is not private. I'm just clarifying. The best example is this forum, it's private and that's why some things are censored but others are not. The owners makes the rules however arbitrary they may be.

btw did you know Pastor Fred Phelps is a registered democrat? Doesn't that explain some things?
So I can have free speech in cemetaries. Yeah that's great. They're all dead so they don't care what the frick I say. I am still missing your point on that one.

My employer may be a privately owned company, but I shouldn't be allowed to be punished for saying something within reason. Words have never hurt anybody!

If I say something like "I am going to kill you all" well that should definitely be grounds for firing. But if I say "I hate white people" or "All the Irish should go back to their own country" I should be allowed to do so!!!

BTW I am white and part Irish so I was using that as an example.
 
Upvote 0
So I can have free speech in cemetaries. Yeah that's great. They're all dead so they don't care what the frick I say. I am still missing your point on that one.

My employer may be a privately owned company, but I shouldn't be allowed to be punished for saying something within reason. Words have never hurt anybody!

If I say something like "I am going to kill you all" well that should definitely be grounds for firing. But if I say "I hate white people" or "All the Irish should go back to their own country" I should be allowed to do so!!!

BTW I am white and part Irish so I was using that as an example.

Interesting idea, but I can think of one place where totally free speech is curtailed. It forces you to be polite and non-offensive. In fact, if you cuss and swear, you are in plenty of trouble or could be in trouble.

I'm betting you are not allowed access to this public arena because it is restricted to a select few who can pass the tests..

I am talking about Amateur Radio. We do not allow bad behavour and if you constantly fall outside the rules, you can be in trouble.

As for the workplace, if I hire you and you call a black person the "N" word or you harass a woman, my company could be held liable because we are very litigous these days. Therefore, I would impose rules that restrict your freedom of speech.

I agree, words do not hurt. I know a few bikers, however, who would teach you just how much as poor choice of words can hurt.

I think the bottom line is behave yourself.

Bob Maxey
 
Upvote 0
So I can have free speech in cemetaries. Yeah that's great. They're all dead so they don't care what the frick I say. I am still missing your point on that one.

My employer may be a privately owned company, but I shouldn't be allowed to be punished for saying something within reason. Words have never hurt anybody!

If I say something like "I am going to kill you all" well that should definitely be grounds for firing. But if I say "I hate white people" or "All the Irish should go back to their own country" I should be allowed to do so!!!

BTW I am white and part Irish so I was using that as an example.

No company is required to employ you if they find your free speech offensive.
 
Upvote 0
Interesting idea, but I can think of one place where totally free speech is curtailed. It forces you to be polite and non-offensive. In fact, if you cuss and swear, you are in plenty of trouble or could be in trouble.

I'm betting you are not allowed access to this public arena because it is restricted to a select few who can pass the tests..

I am talking about Amateur Radio. We do not allow bad behavour and if you constantly fall outside the rules, you can be in trouble.

As for the workplace, if I hire you and you call a black person the "N" word or you harass a woman, my company could be held liable because we are very litigous these days. Therefore, I would impose rules that restrict your freedom of speech.

I agree, words do not hurt. I know a few bikers, however, who would teach you just how much as poor choice of words can hurt.

I think the bottom line is behave yourself.

Bob Maxey
Bikers? Please! As a motorcycle rider myself, I can't stand "bikers". They thing they are big, tough hard asses yet they have to join gangs and attack people in packs rather than one on one. Gangs are for pussies. Just ride!
 
Upvote 0
Bikers? Please! As a motorcycle rider myself, I can't stand "bikers". They thing they are big, tough hard asses yet they have to join gangs and attack people in packs rather than one on one. Gangs are for pussies. Just ride!


As am I. FYI: The gentlemen I know ride with the Barrons. Bet you don't have the stones to call a gang member a ***** to his face.

I do not condone their antics, I just know a few.

Bob Maxey
 
Upvote 0

BEST TECH IN 2023

We've been tracking upcoming products and ranking the best tech since 2007. Thanks for trusting our opinion: we get rewarded through affiliate links that earn us a commission and we invite you to learn more about us.

Smartphones