1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderTo tell you the truth, Marauder, I just don't care. I don't care about anything you think, say, or feel. Nobody else here does either.
How about a 1000 feet?
"Snyder testified that he never saw the content of the signs as he entered and left St. John's on the day of his son's funeral," and recall that the signs were 1000 feet away from the church.
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2007_11_04-2007_11_10.shtml#1194480175
People's opinions you don't like are always a nuisance.
this is a sticky issue, frought with peril... but doesn't it seem that the church has chosen to protest funerals to maximize harrassment, rather than the spread of their message? I mean, if they were protesting in downtown Topeka, or handing out idiocy on city sidewalks, it would be a clear-cut "free-speech" issue... but this insistence to invade a family's private time puts the free speech argument on shaky ground.
Originally posted by Sam The ShamI care about what he thinks and he and I have almost never agreed
To tell you the truth, Marauder, I just don't care. I don't care about anything you think, say, or feel. Nobody else here does either.
on anything. I think it odd that you dismiss out of hand an opinion
you dislike while discussiong someone else doing the same thing.
Kelly
Originally posted by Darth SpongeThe judge and jury certainly thought so... to the tune of 11 million dollars.
this is a sticky issue, frought with peril... but doesn't it seem that the church has chosen to protest funerals to maximize harrassment, rather than the spread of their message? I mean, if they were protesting in downtown Topeka, or handing out idiocy on city sidewalks, it would be a clear-cut "free-speech" issue... but this insistence to invade a family's private time puts the free speech argument on shaky ground.
Originally posted by Darth SpongeWhy? Their "argument" is that God is punishing the US by killing off our soldiers because our laws are too lenient towards homosexuals. This is certainly a political and religious message. I have never heard that political and/or religious messages were banned from a city while a funeral was going on. As I pointed out, they were protesting a 1000 feet away on public property. How is this "invading the family's private time"?
this is a sticky issue, frought with peril... but doesn't it seem that the church has chosen to protest funerals to maximize harrassment, rather than the spread of their message? I mean, if they were protesting in downtown Topeka, or handing out idiocy on city sidewalks, it would be a clear-cut "free-speech" issue... but this insistence to invade a family's private time puts the free speech argument on shaky ground.
Originally posted by Sam The ShamSuppose WBC protested on their own property, but their property happened to be visible from nearby funeral sites. If so, then in your view would WBC be constitutionally protected in their protests, despite the fact that their protests were disruptive to nearby funerals?
If it's not overturned, then will you please shut up about it?
Originally posted by Sam The ShamIf you have a principle Sam, surely it means that you stick to it through better and worse?
If it's not overturned, then will you please shut up about it?
Say the church loses this one.
Who's to say that you won't lose when you're protesting something else?
Yes. It's horrible what these people were shouting (well, personally, I don't give a damn, I never listen to religious people anyways), but there is the point that they are allowed to say it.
If I stand up and say: "NO!" Then someone else in turn will stand up and say "No" when I'm screaming my lungs out about nazis.