Posted on 11/24/2007 7:44:20 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
TOPEKA | Countless flights across the country. Car rentals, gas money, food and lodging. All those cardboard signs. For the 71 members of Fred Phelps’ Westboro Baptist Church, the costs of doing business must add up.
And those costs could soon grow a lot higher. A Maryland jury recently ordered Westboro to pay nearly $11 million to the father of a fallen soldier whose funeral was the subject of one of Westboro’s protests.
Many hope the lawsuit, and future ones like it, will put the notorious church out of business for good. It’s something that new funeral picketing bans, now passed in 43 states, have proved unable to do.
(Excerpt) Read more at kansascity.com ...
Delicious. I can’t wait until these S.O.B.s have to spend so much time working to pay for their miserable existence that they have no time to harass the brave men and their families who paid the ultimate sacrifice.
Story about your favorite protesters, Ms. B....
Let me say I’m 100% opposed to Fred Phelps’ Westboro Baptist Church and what they are doing. However, this $11 million judgment bothers me. What exactly did the church do to cause $11 million of damages? They are disgusting slugs, but when did the 1st Amendment start prohibiting speech we don’t agree with? This isn’t like the case of shouting fire in a crowded theater. Public safety isn’t at risk, nor is Fred Phelps advocating (to my knowledge) illegal activities. Opinions?
When it is deliberate, outrageous, provocative Fighting Words that is some states and societies could have/should have gotten them shot dead.
“Church members praised the Sept. 11 attacks, said Amish children deserved to die in a school shooting last year, and thanked God for the 2004 tsunami.”
Evil, despicable people—no doubt. However, we let neo-Nazis march in Skokie. Do we have the right to prevent speech we find hateful or disgusting?
“Phelps seemingly always craved publicity. He ran for Kansas governor as a Democrat in the ’90s and launched other failed bids for the U.S. Senate and the Topeka mayor’s office.”
Wow. I’m SHOCKED The Kansas City Red Star actually printed this without leaving off his political affiliation.
Gorzaloon wrote: “When it is deliberate, outrageous, provocative Fighting Words that is some states and societies could have/should have gotten them shot dead.”
What if I say sinners are going to burn in Hell? Are those “deliberate, outrageous, provocative Fighting Words?” Seriously, people say offensive things all the time. Doesn’t the 1st Amendment protect offensive speech?
Keep in mind, I agree this “church” is despicable, but unless they are breaking trespassing or other laws (not related to constitutionally protected free speech), what right do we have to punish them?
Given the "Hate Crime" doctrine, Yes, absolutely. Whether we want it or asked for it or not.
patton wrote: “I think their behavior is so utterly offensive to the conscience of rational people that the jury would have found against them, whatever the law.”
Perhaps, but I think it’s ultimately going to be tossed out as a violation of the 1st Amendment.
The same right you would have to punish me, were I to stay awake at night dreaming up the most loathesome, provocative things possible that I were certain would infuriate you beyond all reason, and then shout them in your face.
I would hope, as a matter of honor, that your response would be something "Remedial".
One has to look at the intent. the intent is not to express, not to preach, but to outrage. As in dressing up like Hitler and attending a Bar Mitzvah, or wearing a Klan outfit and attending the Million Man March. It is deliberately planned to go as far beyond Free Speech as rape is from a wink.
They want outrage and notoriety, and should be given it in full.
You may be correct.
Gorzaloon wrote: “Given the “Hate Crime” doctrine, Yes, absolutely. Whether we want it or asked for it or not.”
I don’t believe sexual orientation is covered (at this time) by federal hate crime laws, and conservatives aren’t generally big fans of “Hate Crime” laws to start with. Even so, the “church” could claim a religious exemption.
Be careful what you ask for. If you start giving the government power to regulate free speech, what kind of speech will be regulated next?
The government didn't do anything to impinge upon their first amendment rights. But the family of the soldier also has rights, and the Phelps mob violated them.
The Government should never have been involved. The Community and the People should have resolved it.
Once. Years ago.
VILE....EVIL people who have done WORSE than yelling FIRE in a theater!! If you think this is Free Speech where they say AWFUL things about DEAD SOLDIERS at their FUNERALS, you are pathetic. Have you NO DECENCY, SIR?
I see on your Home Page that you call yourself a Christian......hmmmmmm.....
Gorzaloon wrote: “One has to look at the intent. the intent is not to express, not to preach, but to outrage.”
How are we to know their intent? Even so, where does it say the government has the right to regulate speech intended to outrage? An outrage for one group is not necessarily an outrage to another. Where do you draw the line? So long as they aren’t advocating violence or trespassing or breaking other laws unrelated to free speech, where is the legal right to stop them? When the neo-Nazis marched in Skokie, many people made arguments similar to yours, but the neo-Nazis were allowed to march.
“Public safety isn’t at risk, nor is Fred Phelps advocating (to my knowledge) illegal activities.”
Actually public safety is at risk...I can’t believe that he and/or his rubes (useful idiots to you SWW members) haven’t been shot at yet! Oh, and ‘posters’ at funerals is real tacky (but make great birdshot targets)!
well if they were ‘pro-AIDS in San Francisco’, mebbe there is room for negotiation!
Have a few pedophiles crash your young daughter's birthday party at the public park and see if you still feel this way.
Non-Sequitur wrote: “But the family of the soldier also has rights, and the Phelps mob violated them.”
Interesting. How were the family’s rights violated?
I’m not arguing for Fred Phelps BTW. I’m truly interested in this case as it relates to the 1st Amendment. I seriously don’t think this will survive on appeal.
I have long suspected (altough I will concede that I have no proof of this) that Westboro was being bankrolled by someone. The amount of $$ they made off of their lawsuits should have run out years ago. I have also been surprised that the MSM never dug into their fiances either.
I am not one to wear the tin-foil hat, but there are just too many unanswered questions about Phelps and his whelps.
Maybe this lawsuit will help to “out” anyone involved in (for whatever motive) financing these people
“...Interesting. How were the family’s rights violated?..”
Not a lawyer but I would think there right of privacy...can’t I bury my son in peace...this isn’t about preventing their ability to stand on a soap box just where they stand...
Ann Archy wrote: “VILE....EVIL people who have done WORSE than yelling FIRE in a theater!! If you think this is Free Speech where they say AWFUL things about DEAD SOLDIERS at their FUNERALS, you are pathetic. Have you NO DECENCY, SIR?”
My decency extends to even those I vehemently disagree with. I have no problem with laws against protests within so many yards/miles of a funeral so long as they are applied equally to all citizens. I wouldn’t want these jerks at a funeral for one of my family members, but also I value our constitution.
Fred Phelps and his “church” deserve all the public scorn they get BTW.
Let the world show that before I read a single comment, I will put on my fine, oh-so-fashionable tin foil hat and suggest something I said on my own Blog, link below.
http://patfish.blogspot.com/2007/11/true-crime-dog-shoots-man-man-saves-dog.html
But I figure that having a churchy-church group going around the country, going to military funerals under the guise of protesting America’s kindness to homosexuality...I figure this is how the Moonbats think.
I mean how many other homosexual venues, if you would, are far more appropriate for the protesting of the supposed crassness and evil of homosexuality? Wouldn’t this Westboro church be better served to squat down on some of those San Francisco homo events that the world could better see the homosexuality the politically correct don’t want us to see? If not San Fran aren’t there plenty of other sorts of places that could provide a better background that the funerals of American soldiers? By what logic does the Westboro church think the funerals of soldiers will enrage the American public against homosexuality of all things?
But if you wanted, by some nefarious pretense, for the world to see the many funerals of American soldiers...say...well this scam is pretty convenient. Remember, the Moonbats are no longer allowed to show the caskets of the dead as they return to mine own state of Delaware’s Dover Air Force Base. So some way is needed to put dead soldiers, in some form or fashion, in front of the American public, especially the ladies in the beauty parlor.
That bit about having a church group against homosexuals, well that helps deflect the anger to ...duh, church groups! Cause only the holier than thou church groups are so evil as to do this sort of thing.
I think, if they’re really digging for funds for this group, that somewhere, some way....there’s a Soros connection.
I will now remove the tin foil hat and return to my scheduled programming.
Ann Archy wrote: “I see on your Home Page that you call yourself a Christian......hmmmmmm.....”
Yes, I am. Are you saying I should be hateful and/or advocate violence against Fred Phelps and his so-called church?
CRBDeuce wrote: “useful idiots to you SWW members”
Forgive me, but I don’t know what SWW is. Nevertheless, I doubt I’m a member.
I’m concerned that this precedent might allow our side to be sued should we do a Freep in a place with a sufficiently hostile jury pool
I doubt so as well...Socialist Workers of the World
I’ll wade in-
So... phelps is Evil and disgusting?
How about a severly wounded soldier coming back
to an American Hospital-and being greeted by-
CODE PINK! want to see their disgusting signs-
want to listen to their Mocking chants-
This board and the freepers have been fighting
these vile people for some time- we know we cannot
sue- or should we?
Hillary,Pelosi,Dingy Harry, have all supported their
anti american-anti soldier position.
I think they are 10 times WORSE than the Phelps family.
now I’m confused...
What’s a FReep in place? my imagination is working, but not my memory!
Eaker wrote: “Have a few pedophiles crash your young daughter’s birthday party at the public park and see if you still feel this way.”
How would that relate? If pedophiles were violent or implied they were going to rape and/or attack my daughter, that’s a completely different matter. You can’t legally walk around with signs that imply you are going to attack or harm someone (I think that is called assault).
assault: an act which creates fear of an imminent battery.
battery: an unlawful touching.
I’m not going to repeat the trash Fred Phelps uses during these protests, but I don’t believe it creates fear of an imminent battery (except maybe for Fred Phelps).
Who was sued and who got the judgement agaist them.
I think the judgement was against the people. The church was included. The church has the money but since there is no judgement against the church entity it will cough up no money. Things can continue as before with the church sending its minions on missionary endeavors.
a FReep is when FReepers protest somewhere....much the same as the Phelps do, except that FReepers would NEVER disrupt a burial....for instance they FReep at Walter Reed to support the troops.....with positive signs.
“Bankrupt the scumbags” Bump.
They brought this upon themselves.
conservativehusker wrote: “Not a lawyer but I would think there right of privacy...can’t I bury my son in peace...this isn’t about preventing their ability to stand on a soap box just where they stand...”
I agree. Laws restricting protests within so many yards/miles of a funeral, so long as they are applied equally to all protests, might be OK. Hasn’t the SCOTUS already ruled on similar laws preventing protests near abortion clinics?
A FReep is when a bunch of Free Republic members put their keyboards down, go out the door, and physically converge on a place to protest something or other. For example DC Chapter's Freep of Code Pink
I read your blog, Fishtalk. I agree with your observations. Where is this church getting the money to fly all over the country? Who is bankrolling them?
They do appear to be caricatures of how the left sees fundamentalist Christians.
bkmarking your blog link for later. : )
I did not mention violence. They could simply talk about what they like to do to children, to the children.
They could hold signs with flowers and slogans about "teaching" children things they "need to know".
Please refrain from providing definitions to words not in my posts. Try simply answering the post without emulating a Clinton.
IIRC .. this was a civil suite case and not a governement case
“They are disgusting slugs, but when did the 1st Amendment start prohibiting speech we don’t agree with? “
1st amendment may protect their right to say whatever they want. It does not protect them from public condemnation.
If they did their dirty deed anyplace other than a funeral it would be distasteful but not (IMO) criminal. By doing it at the funerals they are causing emotional distress to the families. I’m ok with the 11 million and hope the life of this family is pure misery.
“Evil, despicable people—no doubt. However, we let neo-Nazis march in Skokie. Do we have the right to prevent speech we find hateful or disgusting?”
Do the neo-nazi’s march at funerals celebrating the deaths of American heros?
I would opine that your postings on this forum appear to indicate that you seem to have as great a craving for attention as does Fred Phelps. Why else would you attempt to provoke the other members in such a fashion, and "in the name of Christianity".
bert wrote: “I think the judgement was against the people.”
Either the article doesn’t say or I missed it. Apparently it’s a church of lawyers who know exactly how to use the law. There’s a quote from one of them saying they know how to obey the laws concerning protests, so I wonder what the $11 million judgment was for. I can understand a jury wanting to punish Fred Phelps, but it will only end up helping them if they win the case and counter sue for legal expenses on appeal.
“They could simply talk about what they like to do to children, to the children.”
That would be assault. It creates fear in the children that they would be attacked by the pedophiles.
“Please refrain from providing definitions to words not in my posts. Try simply answering the post without emulating a Clinton.”
Please refrain from personal attacks. I’m not “emulating a Clinton.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.