• Congress Passes Restrictions On Military Funeral Protests, Delivers Blow To Westboro Baptist Church
    163 replies, posted
[QUOTE=ac/14;37076192]I still do not understand how the things they say are not considered hate speech.[/QUOTE] They would be in a less socially liberal country like Canada or the UK. We don't really have hate speech legislation because hate speech laws are, by definition, oppressive.
[QUOTE=Beetle179;37075076]I'm sorry, why is this getting so much support? Aren't we always pouncing on politicians who try to pass laws that are obviously in violation of the Constitution? Why is this an exception? So what, WBC is a terrible organization (though they don't practice what they preach, they just do what they do so that they can sue people who attack/harass them), but why is it suddenly okay to strip them of their rights as American citizens? I don't support what WBC does. I really don't. I hate them just as much as the rest of you. But this is ridiculous. I honestly hope this gets overturned by the Supreme Court. [editline]a[/editline] For those who aren't aware, the first amendment grants all American citizens the right to freedom of "speech, press, assembly, religion, and petition".[/QUOTE]Grieving families and friends are also entitled to privacy, something westboro keeps stripping from them.
[QUOTE=Marbalo;37076210]There is a very thin line between free speech and hate speech.[/QUOTE] There is not a line at all. Hate speech is a subcategory of free speech. [editline]3rd August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=SKEEA;37075725]This doesn't remove their right, it only puts a limitation on it in a very specific circumstance. Morally questionable? Perhaps to some. Constitutional? Certainly. [editline]3rd August 2012[/editline] Damn ninjas [editline]3rd August 2012[/editline] Our freedom of speech is already limited. Have you ever heard of libel and slander? Permits for rallys? Marches? Not saying things that induce deliberate panic, such as the "fire in a theatre" example? Such as not having full rights until you are 18 and out of school? [editline]3rd August 2012[/editline] Our freedom of speech is already limited. Have you ever heard of libel and slander? Permits for rallys? Marches? Not saying things that induce deliberate panic, such as the "fire in a theatre" example? Such as not having full rights until you are 18 and out of school?[/QUOTE] permits for rallies are not a limit on free speech, they're a way to keep the peace while still allowing for for free speech. Libel and Slander laws are a touchy subject. There's a fine line between stopping someone from using lies to hurt others, and censorship. That's why American libel laws are significantly different than Europe's, and are biased towards the defendant. Also, when did constitutional rights not come into effect until you turn 18? I don't remember an exemption for minors.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;37076214]They would be in a less socially liberal country like Canada or the UK. We don't really have hate speech legislation because hate speech laws are, by definition, oppressive.[/QUOTE] I have difficulty with the portrayal of the US as "socially liberal"
[QUOTE=SKEEA;37076088]Also, you guys are overlooking this line: It will pass if not only for this reason. I know that these issues need to be addressed. Our benefits, housing, and education are always in a state of readjustment. My TA and my future VA health benefits are very necessary for my health after the Army, as well as my education to be set up for success, not failure after my service. [editline]3rd August 2012[/editline] Argh, my automerge.[/QUOTE] even worse. They take a perfectly respectable bill, and then try and sneak some censorship in. Woohoo! [editline]3rd August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Elecbullet;37076365]I have difficulty with the portrayal of the US as "socially liberal"[/QUOTE] depends what you mean by liberal. You have to remember that Europe calls libertarians liberals.
[QUOTE=Maloof?;37076173]I don't mean to nit-pick but I can't figure out how somebody following orders to do military stuff in the Middle East was protecting the constitution. If we were talking about fighting off a massive invasion force bent on dominating the nation (Hitler v Poland) then I could see where that was coming from[/QUOTE] It is more symbolic than anything. When we enlist, we swear an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States. That is where that comes from.
.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37076365]I have difficulty with the portrayal of the US as "socially liberal"[/QUOTE] Liberal in the very traditional sense. It means liberty. I mean the US is less liberal in some ways, and more liberal in others, but when talking about free speech the USA is incredibly liberal while Canada is fairly conservative.
[QUOTE=Arachnidus;37075100]Yeah, as much as I hate those ignorant, bigoted, mother fuckers, this is treading on some dangerous ground.[/QUOTE]Harassment isn't usually protected as free speech, I don't see how this is any different.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;37075771]The USA: Land of freedom and liberty. Unless you say something objectionable, then you can fuck off.[/QUOTE] I don't see anything productive from protesting funerals. They can protest them somewhere that's not around the crying family members.
Deeply torn between finally being possible to starve the lawsuit trolls of WBC of their primary source of money, and the obvious problems this creates with the 1st Amendment.
.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;37074738]Not that I'm complaining, but how is Congress able to do this when the Supreme Court already ruled it legal under the First Amendment?[/QUOTE] You still have a right to protest. just 300 feet away.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;37077485]Deeply torn between finally being possible to starve the lawsuit trolls of WBC of their primary source of money, and the obvious problems this creates with the 1st Amendment.[/QUOTE] what scares me is that those problems are even on the same level for you. The loss of Freedom of speech is much worse than the problems WBC causes.
.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;37076214]They would be in a less socially liberal country like Canada or the UK. We don't really have hate speech legislation because hate speech laws are, by definition, oppressive.[/QUOTE] We need to remember that the goal of this legislation isn't to restrict protesting freedoms. If it was, the protests would be banned outright. This is about a family's right to privacy and peace during a funeral ceremony for a lost loved one. Anyone who has been to a funeral or seen it broadcast with the WBC shouting their nonsense, it's pretty clearly just a situation of harassment, which is something a grieving family shouldn't have to put up with.
,
[quote]new limitations on military funeral demonstrations as a response to a 2011 Supreme Court case that ruled such actions were protected under the First Amendment.[/quote] Which means this law would be struck down pretty easily as a violation of the 1st amendment.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;37075245]We can't, banishing them would be a violation of the 14th Amendment, specifically; [I]nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[/I]. (being the biggest cunt in the country isn't illegal)[/QUOTE] Make it illegal. But only allow one trial a year. This year, Westboro. Next Year, Rush Limbaugh. Within the mellinium, we'll restore brains to America! [editline]4th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;37079770]Which means this law would be struck down pretty easily as a violation of the 1st amendment.[/QUOTE] Not of no one sees it *Nudge, wink wink*. Christ, just pass a truckload of little boys and Dollar bills under the table and all will be ok.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;37076404]Liberal in the very traditional sense. It means liberty. I mean the US is less liberal in some ways, and more liberal in others, but when talking about free speech the USA is incredibly liberal while Canada is fairly conservative.[/QUOTE] 'incredibly liberal' lol you have free speech zones.
[QUOTE=Detective P;37079554]But the family doesn't have a right to privacy or peace int he context of a funeral. There is no such thing as a right to peace, and a right to privacy is null in a public place, which includes any open-air funerals. Westboro's right to protest on public land overrides a family's right to not hear their protest from the cemetery they're at. And it's definitely not harassment, the Court covered this clearly. All WBC does is call soldiers in general, homosexuals in general, and Americans in general, mean names and says they're going to hell. Anywhere else this is legal and acceptable and no harassment. Placing it on public land does not make it so any longer. By your definition of harassment would include OWS outside of Wall Street saying that bankers will be the downfall of America and are promoting a terrible system. It's pretty much the same for WBC. Not harassment.[/QUOTE] so if i camped outside your apartment or house which is public property, do i have the right to play a music that insults you continuously 24/7 with the volume blaring at it's highest without being penalized?
[QUOTE=lolwutdude;37080281]so if i camped outside your apartment or house which is public property, do i have the right to play a music that insults you continuously 24/7 with the volume blaring at it's highest without being penalized?[/QUOTE] That is a huge strawman. First insulting someone isn't against the law as long as you aren't harassing them. Second WBC doesn't play music continuously 24/7 with volume blaring, they protest.
[QUOTE=Valnar;37080529]That is a huge strawman. First insulting someone isn't against the law as long as you aren't harassing them. Second WBC doesn't play music continuously 24/7 with volume blaring, they protest.[/QUOTE] im not harassing him, im protesting against his existence
I'm ok with this. There's nothing to protest at a funereal. Are they against burying the dead or what? If they want to protest war, this is not how to do it. Funerals have a bunch of sad and depressed people, what the fuck do the fuckheads protesters want is beyond me. This IS harassment to every relative and friend of the dead soldiers.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;37081001]I'm ok with this. There's nothing to protest at a funereal. Are they against burying the dead or what? If they want to protest war, this is not how to do it. Funerals have a bunch of sad and depressed people, what the fuck do the fuckheads protesters want is beyond me. This IS harassment to every relative and friend of the dead soldiers.[/QUOTE] they dont protest the funeral itself they just use it as a means to piss people off, calling soldiers fags and a bunch of other shit.
Goodbye first amendment, was nice knowing you.
[QUOTE=zombieslaya;37082201]Goodbye first amendment, was nice knowing you.[/QUOTE] That is the thickest, most ignorant and most republican post i've seen in my entire existence. Here's why: You proceed to not read the article, presume in your little skull that Harassment is being abolished and proceed to post about how BAD that is! Because FREEDOM!!! READ!
I don't see why people have a problem with doing this. It's to protect the families that are already heartbroken due to the death of a loved one. They don't need asshats to rub it in.
[QUOTE=Derpmonster;37082381]I don't see why people have a problem with doing this. It's to protect the families that are already heartbroken due to the death of a loved one. They don't need asshats to rub it in.[/QUOTE] Some people are just fucking weird. Freedom to do weird abusive shit is more important to them than respecting their next of kin. It's actually weird that murder and rape is even punishable since it's down the same mentality. "I'm better than you, i own you, i can say and do what i goddamn want because either god said so, or this is MY world and everything's about me and my rights. If there ain't enough wiggle space, guess who has to compromise. That would be you, you fucking Minority!" Kind of pathetic. Freedom in the name of hate?
,
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.