Discussed several times over, a good while back.
And, you're way off base.
burner, you're a week late, dude.
that horse was beat, killed and buried.
Read it.
They are planning to protest the funeral of 7 children at a dairy farm in PA who were killed in a fire a few days ago.
This isn't about Snyder.
Read it.
You're still off-base, by a LONG shot.
How so?
We've empowered them with that ruling.
Explain to me.
I don't think the veterans in my family fought to support that.
it falls under free speech......if you want freedom take the bad with the good.....honestly think it aint gonna take but one or two severe beatings to curtail their activities by a whole lot and get through their heads that with rights come responsibilities......
The Freedom of Speech, isn't about protecting speech you LIKE and agree with; it's about protecting speech that you don't like or agree with.
And, the veterans in your family that actually understand the Constitution, DID fight to protect your right to say what you think and believe, regardless of whether what you say is right, accepted, or agreed with by anyone else.
There's nothing preventing folks who DISAGREE with the Westboro nutjobs from going to the funeral and voicing THEIR faith and belief for the family.
So I can walk down the street now screaming racial obscenities at black people? Long as I'm in a public place?
Or maybe I can stand outside a synagogue with a sign that says "Oven Dodgers?"
Snyder's lawyers f***ed up by not making this about hate speech. He should have used the liberal tactics to his advantage.
Imagine how this would have turned out if Snyder was black? I picture an entirely different verdict.
am I missing something? this is like deja vu, all over again.
I don't think the veterans in my family fought to support that.
I disagree.
Our veterans fought for the right of every American to be able to speak their mind without fear of persecution.
So you agree with hate speech?
So I can walk down the street now screaming racial obscenities at black people? Long as I'm in a public place?
Or maybe I can stand outside a synagogue with a sign that says "Oven Dodgers?"
Snyder's lawyers f***ed up by not making this about hate speech. He should have used the liberal tactics to his advantage.
Imagine how this would have turned out if Snyder was black? I picture an entirely different verdict.
"hate speech" is [bleep] up and a chitty ruling.....should follow freedom of speech aswell.....if your stupid enough to do it on the southside of Chicago, be prepared to take a beating over your beliefs....
am I missing something? this is like deja vu, all over again.
Reading comprehension, and staying up on current events.
Burner....roll through this thread and then offer up your thoughts. Try to separate the rational from the emotional. Don't feel bad....many had to.... and did.
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...preme_Court_upholds_doucheba#Post4999443
So I can walk down the street now screaming racial obscenities at black people? Long as I'm in a public place?
Or maybe I can stand outside a synagogue with a sign that says "Oven Dodgers?"
Snyder's lawyers f***ed up by not making this about hate speech. He should have used the liberal tactics to his advantage.
Imagine how this would have turned out if Snyder was black? I picture an entirely different verdict.
"hate speech" is [bleep] up and a chitty ruling.....should follow freedom of speech aswell.....if your stupid enough to do it on the southside of Chicago, be prepared to take a beating over your beliefs....
Not saying I would do it - just pointing out the double standard in our government's policies.
This is a disturbing precedent that's not entirely unexpected because it again shows that our gov.org believes that the rights of the many outweigh the rights of the few.
Specifically, the rights of people to harrass and otherwise torment private individuals for their own agenda, vs. the right of a family to grieve in peace and "pursue happiness."
Funny how liberal this place gets over some things, and not others.
Have read that thread, still disagree. In America, we have the right to disagree.
This is a disturbing precedent
=============
For over 200 years years it has been,then.
no you want to beotch and moan and have someone else deal with him......man up and beat the [bleep] to a pulp or convince his arse he needs to protest up here and we will do it for you.....
Have read that thread, still disagree. In America, we have the right to disagree.
=================
You read it,huh? What then caused you to fire up the debate again today?
So I can walk down the street now screaming racial obscenities at black people? Long as I'm in a public place?
Or maybe I can stand outside a synagogue with a sign that says "Oven Dodgers?"
Snyder's lawyers f***ed up by not making this about hate speech. He should have used the liberal tactics to his advantage.
Imagine how this would have turned out if Snyder was black? I picture an entirely different verdict.
Fighting words, and hate speech are legal terms. If you're going to try to use them in conversation, you might want to figure them out.
Your comprehension of the situation, and of the First Amendment protections is rather much off-base.
Perhaps a simple SEARCH for "westboro" will show you the threads where this was already discussed before.
In fact....
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/4999881http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/4999605http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/4999443
This is a disturbing precedent that's not entirely unexpected because it again shows that our gov.org believes that the rights of the many outweigh the rights of the few.
....
Funny how liberal this place gets over some things, and not others.
you have manged to draw the exact opposite conclusion from what the case holds. the case protects the right of an extremely unpopular few against the wishes of the vast majority of the country.
which is exactly why the first amendment is there in the first place. popular speech doesn't need protection.
I think rattler has the answer - I can say without a doubt that local law enforcement would laugh at them if they tried to report having all of their azzes severely beaten during a protest in this area. I'm thinking the solution lies not in the courts, but in enticing them to protest in an area that will not tolerate them. Similar to the example of yelling racial slurs in the hood - Nobody in their right mind would do it twice.
This is a disturbing precedent that's not entirely unexpected because it again shows that our gov.org believes that the rights of the many outweigh the rights of the few.
....
Funny how liberal this place gets over some things, and not others.
you have manged to draw the exact opposite conclusion from what the case holds. the case protects the right of an extremely unpopular few against the wishes of the vast majority of the country.
which is exactly why the first amendment is there in the first place. popular speech doesn't need protection.
exactly, SC made the right ruling.......however i dislike the preacher enough to put his arse in traction.....aint gonna take but one or two beatings and he aint gonna be protesting no more cause i guarantee you he isnt solid enough in his beliefs to regularly take a beating over them.....
A totally disfunctional family of 7-8 individuals. Not a church, not Baptist and not christian. Do not practice Biblical Christian values.
You came to the party and it's over dude.
nope
sir you are the one exercising liberal thought process in this matter
freedom means just that, free to speak your mind no matter how distasteful it is to a few or many
hate speech or hate crimes are offspring of liberal thought and serve an agenda, not freedom
use the opposite of hate crime to see the fallacy of such
what? you love someone of the same race or sexual identity if you assault or kill them?
ludicrous to the extreme
another product of politicians pandering for votes via feel good legislation
liberalism of the highest order
Westboro can protest all they want , let a kid in school draw a picture of a gun.....
Mike
Westboro can protest all they want , let a kid in school draw a picture of a gun.....
Mike
never had that problem locally......course whole lot of teachers and administrators here hunt and fish.....
WBC needs a little of what I got.
I would like to think that anything that happens to the WBC in Perry County would be handled in Perry County. That said, a jury of peers from Perry would set things right.