Though I strongly believe the Westboro Baptist are doing the cause of Christ great harm I understand the SC's decision on this. If the Westboro folk were muzzled, regardless of how reprehensible they are, who would be next to be muzzled?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Military Funeral Protesters
- Thread starter Crabtownboy
- Start date
- Status
:tear: :tear: :tear:
The actions of the Westboro group are reprehensible but they are protected by the 1st amendment ... it would have been unconstitutional to rule against them. I believe their actions do great damage to the message of Christ ... but those horrible demonstrations are protected. If they had been muffled who would be next? I do have to hold my nose while saying they are protected by the 1st amendment.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
I hate to agree, but...
What constitutional grounds would the court have to rule against this hate filled cult?
There are restrictions on protests - ie, you must keep walking, even if in circles, ect.
Do I have a right to go onto a school playground and preach with a megaphone- even if I walk in circles?
No right is absolute - U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. in a 1919 case said you cannot yell fire in a crowed theater.
Likewise, the grieving family should have rights also. One consolation is if the burial is in a private cemetery - that might be another story.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Apparentley, in this particular case, the cultists were out of sight and sound range.
Tough one. Most of us want strict constructionists as justices. This appears to be a constructionist decision.
Tough one. Most of us want strict constructionists as justices. This appears to be a constructionist decision.
Of course it is. It is the correct decision.
Perhaps an audit of the church, I mean, how can a small church like this afford to send people all across the country to do this ?
Perhaps an audit of the church, I mean, how can a small church like this afford to send people all across the country to do this ?
Some of the members are lawyers. And several of the members are related.
Here is a report by NPR
From the link: "When they win, they often receive tens of thousands of dollars in court fees."
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
I think the most effective response to stuntists like this would be to ignore them.
They have the right to assemble lawfully and peacefully. That should never be withheld.
Now if they happen to have a wall of willing volunteers who will block their view and the view of their protest that is also a lawful assembly.
Now if they happen to have a wall of willing volunteers who will block their view and the view of their protest that is also a lawful assembly.
You have the right to go onto a school playground with a megaphone, unless their are ordinances against noise. Then you must do it without amplification.
In this case, the City had ordinances that said the people had to be at least 300 yards away from funeral activities. The Westboro crazies abided by that ordinance. Thus, they were well within their rights.
As much as I hate what the Westboro people are doing, I support their right to do it. If you take away their rights, you take away mine as well. Braavo, Supreme Court!
Alive in Christ
New Member
Salty posted...
And I *second* that post.
This ruling is insanity on display in our Supreme Court.
We can legally kill small children in this country, but its unconstitional in this country to make sure that grieving family members of a hero son or daughter doesnt have be assaulted by brain dead hate filled demonic lunatics.
And this clown court voted 8-1 in favor of this insanity.
God have mercy on the USA. We are becoming a God forsaken cesspool.
And I *second* that post.
This ruling is insanity on display in our Supreme Court.
We can legally kill small children in this country, but its unconstitional in this country to make sure that grieving family members of a hero son or daughter doesnt have be assaulted by brain dead hate filled demonic lunatics.
And this clown court voted 8-1 in favor of this insanity.
God have mercy on the USA. We are becoming a God forsaken cesspool.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
According to several sources the family did not even know the extent of what happened until they saw it on television.
As abhorrent as this behaviour was these vicious people assembled peacefully and according the the laws and requirements set down.
The Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of a decision. How did the Westboro cult constitutionally violate the law at any level?
Actually he said that you can't 'falsely' yell fire.
The case being debated involved passing out anti-draft leaflets. Though Holmes and the rest of the court ruled that the First Amendment did not protect such behaviour, that decision was later overturned in favour one that prohibits speech which would incite a crowd to riot.
I am a big believer in First Amendment rights. While everything these folks did was wrong, it was not illegal.
As abhorrent as this behaviour was these vicious people assembled peacefully and according the the laws and requirements set down.
The Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of a decision. How did the Westboro cult constitutionally violate the law at any level?
Actually he said that you can't 'falsely' yell fire.
The case being debated involved passing out anti-draft leaflets. Though Holmes and the rest of the court ruled that the First Amendment did not protect such behaviour, that decision was later overturned in favour one that prohibits speech which would incite a crowd to riot.
I am a big believer in First Amendment rights. While everything these folks did was wrong, it was not illegal.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yup. And Alito's dissent, while well written & well thought out, is a classic example of a well-versed liberal writing from his heart, and not his brain.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
And we hear the same from @sarahpalinusa tweet - "Common sense & decency absent as wacko ‘church’ allowed hate msgs spewed@ soldiers' funerals but we can't invoke God's name in public square”
I don't know when 'common sense and decency' became conditions for free speech. Setting those intangibles as constitutional boundaries is dangerous precedent. Many would consider messages preached from American pulpits to violate Palin's 'common sense and decency' clause even if they are solid Bible preaching. Do we really want the Supreme Court (or a president) deciding what is 'common sense and decency?'
Last edited by a moderator:
Alito a liberal? Thanks for the early morning laugh ... nice way to start the day with a good laugh to brighten an already bright morning. The Cato Institute described Alito as a conservative jurist with a libertarian streak. I do think he was wrong in his vote against the Westboro group, and thus the 1st amendment ... but that hardly makes him a [GASP] liberal. :laugh:
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
This is not an unusual choice for Alito. He has a history if drawing the line on free speech differently than the rest of the court. I don't know if that makes him a 'liberal' or a 'conservative' but in this case he appears to have taken a stand with many professed conservatives such as Gov Palin.
Off topic personal note - BTW, CB, we are having a wonderful run of bright, if chilly, days here, as well ;-)
Good morning brother! Would love to get over there sometime when you are over and see the work!
Last edited by a moderator:
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
I'm ignorant of how things work in America, so please forgive me if my question sounds ridiculous, but is it really true that any American has the right to go onto any school playground, with or without a megaphone, and say anything, however bizzare or perverse? Wouldn't parents of the pupils complain?
- Status