Posted on 11/24/2007 7:44:20 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
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.”
“IIRC .. this was a civil suite case and not a governement case”
You are correct.
And the First Ammendment and ‘free speech’ have nothing to do with it.
If this were the Government sueing the Phelps, that would be a different story.
No ‘free speech’ violations occurred in this case.
It was a CIVIL lawsuit claiming damages. To understand why the plaintiff won, you’d have to read the complaint and the court transcript — or find an account in the news that explains the basis for the suit.
Mo1 wrote: “this was a civil suite case and not a governement (sic) case.”
Please explain. Do you know how the jury arrived at the $11 million amount? Unfortunately, the article doesn’t have a lot of the legal details.
I have seen a couple people from this group and they have this look in their eye,evil!
Yes you are.
Eaker said nothing about assault or battery.
How about reading his post again?
And no, telling you that you are off track and pulling a Clinton is not a personal attack.
They don’t have the right to slander and libel people without consequence.
Redleg Duke wrote: “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.”
Actually, I thought this was a discussion forum, i.e. for discussing the news. I enjoy debate and find this to be an interesting case about 1st Amendment rights.
I didn’t know I was to refrain from discussing things you disagree with, but I do ask you to stop the personal attacks. Equating me to Fred Phelps is uncalled for.
Slander and libel are not protected by the First Amendment.
the Phelps just learned that to the tune of 11 mil.
What is so hard to understand about that?
Sweden? My God! How low will these people go??
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.