Westboro Baptist church gets their asses fucking chased out of tornado damaged town.

[Zero-Point]

[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;44481081]All because people have no idea what the First Amendment means.

Yes we have a right to protest.

The people America are not saying that the WBC couldn't picket things saying people deserved it.

The people of America were saying that they probably shouldn't.

Just like how I wouldn't cry out how much I love to have sex with corpses and how it should be legal to marry a corpse. Freedom of Speech, does not mean TOTAL freedom of speech.[/QUOTE]

Freedom of speech was mainly added in as a response to people who said things against the [b]government[/b] (or in those days, the [b]King[/b] or [b]other authority figures[/b]) and were hauled off to a tower somewhere. It was meant to protect people who disagreed with the governing body, not a legal excuse to be a massive cunt.
It's not really free speech, either. There's the tired "yelling 'FIRE!' in a theater" argument, but there's also an example of me not legally being able to say "I'm going to shoot Obama tomorrow" because threatening assassination against the president is considered a serious offense.

[FingerSpazem]

[QUOTE=Explosions;44480701]Who cares about free speech right?[/QUOTE]

I'm fine with this. I think legally they should be allowed to say what they want and picket what they want.

They still have to deal with the consequences of an angry community, you can't control hordes of people like that.

[darunner]

[QUOTE=Explosions;44480701]Who cares about free speech right?[/QUOTE]

Freedom of speech prevents the government from silencing you. It does nothing to stop the populace from doing so.

[Explosions]

[QUOTE=Kristviljan;44482499]Man, the freedom of speech you guys have in America just sounds super weird to me. Could I legally go around and say that black people are below white people and should be our slaves?[/QUOTE]

Yes

[QUOTE=deadoon;44482535]No, that would classify as hate speech likely, possibly even "fighting words".[/QUOTE]

Lol you couldn't be more wrong. People currently [b]do[/b] say those things about black people.

[QUOTE=FingerSpazem;44483092]I'm fine with this. I think legally they should be allowed to say what they want and picket what they want.

They still have to deal with the consequences of an angry community, you can't control hordes of people like that.[/QUOTE]

People are guaranteed the right to speak their mind in the U.S. Assault, on the other hand, is completely illegal.

[lavacano]

[QUOTE=Kristviljan;44482499]Man, the freedom of speech you guys have in America just sounds super weird to me. Could I legally go around and say that black people are below white people and should be our slaves?[/QUOTE]

Technically yes, but it's a bad idea unless you think stab wounds are extra pockets.

[Qwerty Bastard]

[QUOTE=Explosions;44480701]I don't know what free speech is or how it works.[/QUOTE]

:downs:

[be]

[QUOTE=Jeep-Eep;44480719]You are free to say what you will. Other are free to respond as they will to your speech.[/QUOTE]

Uh...haha, no they aren't. In this case individuals from the anti-wbc group started to show intent to assault the wbc, which is a pretty disgusting and shitty way to respond to people just exercising their right to free speech, albeit really shitty speech.

[editline]7th April 2014[/editline]

[QUOTE=RustledJimmys;44482658]Doing anything to defend these people is fucking pathetic. They're a bunch of disgusting, useless, ignorant people who deserve to be shot. Go tell any well minded person you're in defence of the WBC and see what they think of you.[/QUOTE]

A fabulous argument I'm certain

[HumanAbyss]

[QUOTE=be;44483856]Uh...haha, no they aren't. In this case individuals from the anti-wbc group started to show intent to assault the wbc, which is a pretty disgusting and shitty way to respond to people just exercising their right to free speech, albeit really shitty speech.

[editline]7th April 2014[/editline]

A fabulous argument I'm certain[/QUOTE]

You're free to meet any speech with any other speech. that's clearly what's implied as much as you be trying to misconstrue the point.

[Sodisna]

[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;44480797]Yeah you're right.

[b]HEY EVERYBODY! I LOVE HITLER! HE'S JUST A STANDUP GUY EH?[/b][/QUOTE]

Your avatar fits so well with that statement.

[be]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44483883]You're free to meet any speech with any other speech. that's clearly what's implied as much as you be trying to misconstrue the point.[/QUOTE]

He said "others are free to respond to your speech as they will" which clearly is not referring to counter-speeches, he's justifying aggressive and threatening behavior because he doesn't like what a group of people have to say.

I can't say I'm surprised.

[arlygoodbrownie]

[QUOTE=Explosions;44483132]People are guaranteed the right to speak their mind in the U.S. Assault, on the other hand, is completely illegal.[/QUOTE]

That's quite wonderful, but the scenario we're discussing featured no assault, whatsoever. As well, I'm quite sure we all recognize and understand the situation, from a legal standpoint, but are more upset and concerned over the moral standpoint.

[HumanAbyss]

[QUOTE=be;44483971]He said "others are free to respond to your speech as they will" which clearly is not referring to counter-speeches, he's justifying aggressive and threatening behavior because he doesn't like what a group of people have to say.

I can't say I'm surprised.[/QUOTE]

I don't think that's what he's saying

but feel free to be condescending I guess

[FingerSpazem]

[QUOTE=Explosions;44483132]
People are guaranteed the right to speak their mind in the U.S. Assault, on the other hand, is completely illegal.[/QUOTE]

I never said it was, I just said I'm [b]personally[/b] fine with this. No one got hurt, westboro left.

[Bridger]

[QUOTE=Mkt778;44484116]I wonder how long it is before they pull the "WE WERE BEING OPPRESSED" card.[/QUOTE]

Explosions is already leading the charge for them

[Ronin]

God hates Westboro Baptist Church, and now people know a mass advancement on them is a quick and easy way to make them leave and cops should know better than to get violent with it. They kept the individuals away, but if the full crowd went they'd be way outnumbered and outmatched.

[BrownTown]

I don't really see what the fuss is about, the WBC is within their first amendment rights to peacefully assemble, practice religion (if you can call it that), and speak freely. What they're doing is in line with the modern supreme court view of the first amendment as well, which is best described in Justice Thurgood Marshall's quote "[A]bove all else, the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content. [Citations.] To permit the continued building of our politics and culture, and to assure self-fulfillment for each individual, our people are guaranteed the right to express any thought, free from government censorship. The essence of this forbidden censorship is content control. Any restriction on expressive activity because of its content would completely undercut the 'profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.' I don't agree with what they say, but they have a clearly defined right to say what they want and everybody else is free to respond peacefully.

[HumanAbyss]

[QUOTE=BrownTown;44484261]I don't really see what the fuss is about, the WBC is within their first amendment rights to peacefully assemble, practice religion (if you can call it that), and speak freely. What they're doing is in line with the modern supreme court view of the first amendment as well, which is best described in Justice Thurgood Marshall's quote "[A]bove all else, the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content. [Citations.] To permit the continued building of our politics and culture, and to assure self-fulfillment for each individual, our people are guaranteed the right to express any thought, free from government censorship. The essence of this forbidden censorship is content control. Any restriction on expressive activity because of its content would completely undercut the 'profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.' I don't agree with what they say, but they have a clearly defined right to say what they want and everybody else is free to respond peacefully.[/QUOTE]

And the government didn't infringe their rights at all

they left voluntarily when they realized that they were antagonizing a group of people who weren't going to take it. no violence erupted so no one got arrested on the side of the "assaulters".

this isn't an infringement of their rights at all.

[Ganerumo]

Why do people celebrate this, it's an obvious infringement on freedom of speech

[editline]humor![/editline]

Nah just kidding fuck those guys

[HumanAbyss]

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;44484313]Why do people celebrate this, it's an obvious infringement on freedom of speech

[editline]humor![/editline]

Nah just kidding fuck those guys[/QUOTE]

if the police were there doing anything other than protecting them(like they were), then sure i'd agree with you

[be]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44484312]And the government didn't infringe their rights at all

they left voluntarily when they realized that they were antagonizing a group of people who weren't going to take it. no violence erupted so no one got arrested on the side of the "assaulters".

this isn't an infringement of their rights at all.[/QUOTE]

How can you call something done under threat of violence "voluntary"? They were pretty much given no choice, they either left and were safe or stayed and were potentially harmed.

[HumanAbyss]

[QUOTE=be;44484345]How can you call something done under threat of violence "voluntary"? They were pretty much given no choice, they either left and were safe or stayed and were potentially harmed.[/QUOTE]

because they caused that threat of violence to occur

as much as I want to protect all speech under any and all conditions, it seems a little more than impossible to do so without also infringing others rights(slander, libel) or causing damages, emotional or physical(instigating a fight, yelling fire in a theatre, yelling at people with dead children who are most definitely not in the right state of mind to have their rights to a pursuit of happyness infringed in such a way)

Honestly, if you can tell me you're 100% sure you know what the right answer to this is, then cool, good for you, but I'm not sure it's so clear cut.

[be]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44484382]because they caused that threat of violence to occur

as much as I want to protect all speech under any and all conditions, it seems a little more than impossible to do so without also infringing others rights(slander, libel) or causing damages, emotional or physical(instigating a fight, yelling fire in a theatre, yelling at people with dead children who are most definitely not in the right state of mind to have their rights to a pursuit of happyness infringed in such a way)

Honestly, if you can tell me you're 100% sure you know what the right answer to this is, then cool, good for you, but I'm not sure it's so clear cut.[/QUOTE]

It isn't clear cut, and there is no correct answer here, I'm just telling you what I think.

[WisdomChief]

that one guy at the end looks like he's wearing chaps over his jeans

[Explosions]

If you leave an area it doesn't count as "voluntary" if I'm standing over you with a club.

[editline]7th April 2014[/editline]

If this was a protest held by the Communist party, and they were outside a bank saying "Bankers are Scum!" and then the bankers came out and menaced them and the communists left, would you people be in favor of that?

[Ganerumo]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44484340]if the police were there doing anything other than protecting them(like they were), then sure i'd agree with you[/QUOTE]

I assume cops want to minimize the number of casualties per minute in their town so it makes sense that they at least block bystanders.

I mean hell if it wasn't for the police the crowd would have trampled all over those idiots in a matter of seconds.

[HumanAbyss]

[QUOTE=Explosions;44484519]If you leave an area it doesn't count as "voluntary" if I'm standing over you with a club.

[editline]7th April 2014[/editline]

If this was a protest held by the Communist party, and they were outside a bank saying "Bankers are Scum!" and then the bankers came out and menaced them and the communists left, would you people be in favor of that?[/QUOTE]

no

i'm pretty sure dead kids is a lot different than that on an emotional level for the people who are there being yelled at

no one has a right to not be offended but that doesn't excuse their actions as the antagonizers of that action.

[arlygoodbrownie]

[QUOTE=Explosions;44484519]If you leave an area it doesn't count as "voluntary" if I'm standing over you with a club.[/QUOTE]

No was was displaying any weaponry against the WBC protesters.

[editline]edit[/editline]

Mind telling me what was so dumb about my statement?

[Awaken90125]

Somebody just needs to bomb them already

[HumanAbyss]

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;44484565]I assume cops want to minimize the number of casualties per minute in their town so it makes sense that they at least block bystanders.

I mean hell if it wasn't for the police the crowd would have trampled all over those idiots in a matter of seconds.[/QUOTE]

and that's why the police were there, like they're supposed to be

[Awaken90125]

[QUOTE=Explosions;44484519]If you leave an area it doesn't count as "voluntary" if I'm standing over you with a club.

[editline]7th April 2014[/editline]

If this was a protest held by the Communist party, and they were outside a bank saying "Bankers are Scum!" and then the bankers came out and menaced them and the communists left, would you people be in favor of that?[/QUOTE]

Trick question, commies would kick the bankers' asses

RIP auto merge