Way to go, Mississippi!

[Mizzougrad96]

No, no, no.

First off, I'm not exactly jumping up and down at the prospect of aligning myself with WBC for any reason. They're scum. Scum three months past their expiration date. Garbage wrapped in the skin of sub-standard human beings. All in all, a bunch of bad eggs.

But they also have the right to express unpopular thought. Freedom of speech doesn't carry much weight if it's only applied to statements of universal truth.

Cops harassing them for fabricated crimes is wrong, not because of the recipient but because of the action. Who's to say they won't create another artiface to put someone more likable through the same rigmarole? It's not as if there's no precedent down there. Ditto blocking them in with tow trucks.

And assault? That's the worst possible reaction to these clowns. Because while it feels good at the onset, there's people out there who feel very similarly to the WBC members who don't put voice to it because they aren't fond of their tactics. But make them martyrs, and that'll convince the fence-sitters that they were right all along. They get stronger with every slight or punch because it allows them to play the martyr card with factual backing -- they ARE getting persecuted because of their dumbass beliefs, and with that comes sympathy and allegiance, even if only in dribbles.

Ignore them. Sound and fury signifying nothing ... unless you signify it for them.

No.

They are disrespecting people who died fighting for this country.

They are hurting their families who are mourning the loss of a loved one.

People who would even imagine doing such a thing are the worst people on this planet. They deserve no rights.

 

[RickStain]

Everyone deserves rights. Even the worst people on the planet.

Once you start deciding that certain people don't deserve rights, you may still be better than them, but you are both on the wrong side of the line.

 

[deskslave]

You don't have to *deserve* rights. That's what makes them rights.

For a site full of people who are supposed to know what words mean, there's a shocking lack of basic English comprehension here sometimes.

 

[Shifty Squid]

Yeah, I'm surprised by some of the reactions here, and I'm with MM2 on this one.

I couldn't possibly disagree more with pretty much anything the Westboro jackasses believe, say and do. But I've never heard anything about them physically harming anyone. If I've missed that, and they regularly assault people during their rallies, I would admittedly have to adjust my thinking here. But as long as they're just talking, we can't, as a free society, advocate violence against them.

Unpopular speech is precisely what's being protected by the First Amendment. Nobody's having to fight for the right to say puppy dogs are cute. It's the words that hurt, that go against everything we believe, that need to be protected the most. If you believe in freedom of speech, you HAVE to support these people's rights to say what they want without the police aiding in having them assaulted for doing so.

 

[dreunc1542]

You don't have to *deserve* rights. That's what makes them rights.

For a site full of people who are supposed to know what words mean, there's a shocking lack of basic English comprehension here sometimes.

This pretty much sums it up and should really be the end of this part of the discussion.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Yeah, I'm surprised by some of the reactions here, and I'm with MM2 on this one.

I couldn't possibly disagree more with pretty much anything the Westboro jackasses believe, say and do. But I've never heard anything about them physically harming anyone. If I've missed that, and they regularly assault people during their rallies, I would admittedly have to adjust my thinking here. But as long as they're just talking, we can't, as a free society, advocate violence against them.

Unpopular speech is precisely what's being protected by the First Amendment. Nobody's having to fight for the right to say puppy dogs are cute. It's the words that hurt, that go against everything we believe, that need to be protected the most. If you believe in freedom of speech, you HAVE to support these people's rights to say what they want without the police aiding in having them assaulted for doing so.

I believe in being able to go to a funeral of a loved one and not be harrassed. That's just me.

 

[Shifty Squid]

Yeah, I'm surprised by some of the reactions here, and I'm with MM2 on this one.

I couldn't possibly disagree more with pretty much anything the Westboro jackasses believe, say and do. But I've never heard anything about them physically harming anyone. If I've missed that, and they regularly assault people during their rallies, I would admittedly have to adjust my thinking here. But as long as they're just talking, we can't, as a free society, advocate violence against them.

Unpopular speech is precisely what's being protected by the First Amendment. Nobody's having to fight for the right to say puppy dogs are cute. It's the words that hurt, that go against everything we believe, that need to be protected the most. If you believe in freedom of speech, you HAVE to support these people's rights to say what they want without the police aiding in having them assaulted for doing so.

I believe in being able to go to a funeral of a loved one and not be harrassed. That's just me.

Well, I don't think any of us is advocating their behavior or saying you should want to be harassed at a funeral. What we're saying is that someone saying something you don't like should not be legal grounds for you assaulting them, according to the First Amendment of this country.

If someone uses their car or whatever to block the Westboro forkers from getting anywhere near the funeral, I'd applaud that. It's been found time and again that freedom to speak doesn't necessarily mean freedom to speak wherever you want to speak. That's why the government can segregate protesters to certain areas, as long as they don't try to stop them from protesting.

Their speech offends you, and that's fine. But that's not a legal defense of assaulting them. I simply can't find any way to advocate beating someone up because you don't like their words, and I particularly can't support government agents aiding in that sort of action.

 

[RickStain]

I believe in being able to go to a funeral of a loved one and not be harrassed. That's just me.

There are laws in place to prevent that. The protesters are kept far away from the actual funeral.

 

[Baron Scicluna]

Yeah, I'm surprised by some of the reactions here, and I'm with MM2 on this one.

I couldn't possibly disagree more with pretty much anything the Westboro jackasses believe, say and do. But I've never heard anything about them physically harming anyone. If I've missed that, and they regularly assault people during their rallies, I would admittedly have to adjust my thinking here. But as long as they're just talking, we can't, as a free society, advocate violence against them.

Unpopular speech is precisely what's being protected by the First Amendment. Nobody's having to fight for the right to say puppy dogs are cute. It's the words that hurt, that go against everything we believe, that need to be protected the most. If you believe in freedom of speech, you HAVE to support these people's rights to say what they want without the police aiding in having them assaulted for doing so.

They don't physically assault people. They verbally assault people.

I know I'm paraphrasing a movie here, but it's like in that scene in Hoosiers, where the first Hickory coach says that if a guy runs around naked and howls like a moon, that's his problem, but if he does it in the coach's living room, well, that's a big difference.

Like I said, if they carry around a sign saying that they don't like gay people in general, that's their business, much as I disagree. I'd just shrug my shoulders and walk away. But if they get up in my face and say, "I'm glad your kid died, he's in heck because God hates America and your kid." Well, that's a verbal assault. Be prepared for the consequences. And that also means I should also be prepared for the consequences, either them punching me back, and/or myself getting arrested.

Until the Westboro folks generated enough attention to have people block them, they were standing right outside funerals and shouting loud enough for people to hear. That's harrassment.

 

[RickStain]

Baron, as mentioned above, the Westboro protesters are usually not allowed in anyone's face.

 

[Shifty Squid]

Yeah, I'm surprised by some of the reactions here, and I'm with MM2 on this one.

I couldn't possibly disagree more with pretty much anything the Westboro jackasses believe, say and do. But I've never heard anything about them physically harming anyone. If I've missed that, and they regularly assault people during their rallies, I would admittedly have to adjust my thinking here. But as long as they're just talking, we can't, as a free society, advocate violence against them.

Unpopular speech is precisely what's being protected by the First Amendment. Nobody's having to fight for the right to say puppy dogs are cute. It's the words that hurt, that go against everything we believe, that need to be protected the most. If you believe in freedom of speech, you HAVE to support these people's rights to say what they want without the police aiding in having them assaulted for doing so.

They don't physically assault people. They verbally assault people.

I know I'm paraphrasing a movie here, but it's like in that scene in Hoosiers, where the first Hickory coach says that if a guy runs around naked and howls like a moon, that's his problem, but if he does it in the coach's living room, well, that's a big difference.

Like I said, if they carry around a sign saying that they don't like gay people in general, that's their business, much as I disagree. I'd just shrug my shoulders and walk away. But if they get up in my face and say, "I'm glad your kid died, he's in heck because God hates America and your kid." Well, that's a verbal assault. Be prepared for the consequences. And that also means I should also be prepared for the consequences, either them punching me back, and/or myself getting arrested.

Until the Westboro folks generated enough attention to have people block them, they were standing right outside funerals and shouting loud enough for people to hear. That's harrassment.

If they're in your face, I'd be more inclined to agree. Are they doing this normally? Were they in this case? If they're just shouting loudly enough for you to hear them from a distance, I'd hardly call that "in your face."

 

[Mizzougrad96]

I believe in being able to go to a funeral of a loved one and not be harrassed. That's just me.

There are laws in place to prevent that. The protesters are kept far away from the actual funeral.

Not far enough away.