Reply With Quote
Just to be perfectly clear, I sincerely hope they find some loophole that allows the authorities to take action against these souless pieces of . I truly despise them.
Let me guess. You think the funeral go-ers are the ones who get to be the sole arbitrars of what words are "offensive" and what noise level is "unreasonable".
Just to be perfectly clear, I sincerely hope they find some loophole that allows the authorities to take action against these souless pieces of . I truly despise them.
I can sympathize, MNMNA, but just to be perfectly clear, that's exactly what you just criticized WC and DarrinS for.
Perhaps you're right. I guess these people are an evil we're going to have to learn to live with.
Seriously, why doesn't some nut ever choose to off THESE people...
I just wish there was something that could be done, even if I know there isn't.
Last edited by MaNuMaNiAc; 04-01-2010 at 02:27 PM.
LOL, I know what you mean, though I can't advocate that because since we are already so dangerously close to a tipping point with right-wing fundamentalists, left-wing fundamentalist, religious fundamentalists, bricks through congressmen's windows, shooting congressmen's windows that I am afraid that even though a bad thing happening to this group seems to be something that we can all agree on, that enacting some type of major violence against them could be the thing that tips the scales and we have a full fleged Right v Left, Religious v. Secular, etc. riot on our hands.
Honestly though, this shouldn't be a right vs left thing. I would think these people are pretty much loathed by both sides. They are de able human beings.
Thing is, WBC seeks to maximize publicity by maximizing their offensiveness. They want to be cracked down on (legally or otherwise) so they can claim status as a persecuted minority.
Ignore them.
It's amazing how indifference can make people go away.
I think we've seen that before.
www.spursreport.com
Pretty hard to ignore them when its your dead son they are slandering is all I'm saying. I geniunely feel for this father.
We all do.
I'm not saying it's easy to ignore what they are saying during a funeral.
What I'm saying is if they were ignored at every single funeral they were to attend, they would most likely go away. What they are wanting is attention.
.....and suing them for $5 million for what they feel is mental anguish is giving them a great deal of attention......and on top of that, now that the father has to pay for their court costs, they just dropped a big fat mav fan troll:
lol funeral
lol grieving father
lol has to pay court costs
lol gay
on them.
were you ever in this thread to begin with?
I agree it should apply to all funerals. But it currently does not, and that was the entire point here.
I'm sure he did, considering he sued them. Unfortunately for him, he was wrong.
A movie theater is private property.
Indeed.
They protested on an public area where protests are allowed, under the supervision of local law enforcement. I'm not sure what makes you think the protesters where not assembled peacefully themselves. Don't forget, the protester's first amendment rights are just as important as the first amendment rights of those attending the funeral.
Freedom does not mean anarchy.You have not proved me wrong. What if you are wrong?
Can you back that up?
What if people decided to protest at 4 AM? Waking everyone up?
You can call "peace" what you want, but that is not the only meaning it has in the 18th century.
1) People have the right to peaceable assemble.
2) Some places have enacted laws to protect their funeral. I believe they were in one of those states.
3) In the case where two cons utional rights are in conflict, seems to me the enacted law now becomes the deciding factor. It cannot trump the cons ution, but it can be the decided factor.
Here is a 19th century definition. Sorry, I don't have an 18th century dictionary:
Please notice what the first definition is.Peace:
1. In a general sense, a state of quiet or tranquility; freedom from disturbance or agitation.
2. Freedom from war; cessation of hostilities; public quiet.
3. Public tranquility; quiet, order and security, such as guaranteed by law; as, to keep the peace.
4. Freedom from mental agitation or disturbance, as from fear, terror, anger, anxiety, or the like; quietness of mind; tranquility; calmness; quiet of conscience.
Yes. The language on the signs was anyway.
Laws are rules for organizing and shaping society, they are not automatically good, just, perfect, unchallengable and IMO absolute. Nor are the people that make them and enforce them beyond question.
Any time a law is actually working against organized society and actually serving just the opposite cause, it is time that to question the applicability of the law.
I mean slavery was encoded to law, that didn't make it indefensible.
Here we have a case of some people unqestionably guilty of being heads, and that law is not only protecting them of their headery against a non- head citizen, in application it's actually wound up punishing the non- head.
Yes I understand the need for freedom of speech, the seminal role in plays in a free society, yes I understand that if laws are not respected than they serve no purpose, yes I understand that bending them or ignoring them for what is deemed a good purpose can be turned around to ignoring them or bending them for a bad one...
But what I also understand is that there is no such as a perfect law or perfect law passers, there is no such thing as an inherently smart or just law...mistakes can be made and when that is exposed to sit back and do nothing, simply because it is law, works against the very goal of laws in the first place.
So ok fine...court won't give this man justice due to the law being stupid in this situation, so be it. That's when people are supposed to take over...people are smarter than laws. There is no excuse for not being so.
I'm not trying to ignore Blake, only convey the sense of pointlessness in arguing with me for him, the same way he conveyed it to me...at least he's not on ignore, which is usually where most posters of his ilk find themselves with me...at least temporarily. He's convinced me that what he does is not something he is in control of or aware of, and so I won't accuse of being deliberately deceitful...nontheless, it's pointless to argue with him so for him, it's going to be pointless to argue with me. He can expect that same response every time he makes a post to me until I see he has overcome his disability.
@WC: By my casual count you've already been spanked by three separate posters in this thread, including MaNuMaNiAc.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
