Corvette Forum : DigitalCorvettes.com Corvette Forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,668 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Since I read the news room but rarely get involved I still think you all have made some great posts over the time that I've been lurking. What's the feeling about the SCOTUS decision by an 8-1 margin that allows the Westboro Baptist Church to picket funerals of dead servicemen with signs and chants of hate?

The Court is out of their minds in my opinion and while I agree that we all have first amendment rights we should also have the right to a respectful funeral. Surely some law applies to this. This could best be addressed on a local level, IMHO, by fining anyone that assaults a church member $10.00. It would be payable to the LEO's on the scene with no paperwork and go to their favorite charity. They could make millions.

Your thoughts? Can't wait for my Airborne, baggy pants devil to get in here.:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
798 Posts
I think the court is wrong!

I must admit I was surprised by their finding, not what I would have expected from this SCOTUS !!

:crazy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
Bottom Line:

It's damned disrespecting to the deceased servicemen and toward what they went to war for....our freedom.

They need to have a size 10 planted in their behinds sideways

:crazy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
798 Posts
Bottom Line:

They need to have a size 10 planted in their behinds sideways

:crazy:
Not enough,

They need a good ASS WHOOPIN !!!!!!

:smack
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,106 Posts
"Westboro stayed well away from the memorial service," Roberts wrote. "Snyder could see no more than the tops of the signs when driving to the funeral. And there is no indication that the picketing itself in any way interfered with the funeral itself."

The ruling was a narrow one, dealing with the specific, unusual facts of this appeal. Such vocal protests at military funerals are almost entirely confined to this one small group. Roberts said on the free speech question, it was enough to rely on "limited principles that sweep no more broadly than the appropriate context of the instant case."

Even as a service member--Unfortunately but I agree with SCOTUS as it involves this case and it's circumstances.

Now it's up to the states to write laws about protesting within distances from certain events that "while not within the privacy of one's home are by general agreement meant to be private functions"

State lawmakers later passed the Spc. Edward Lee Myers Law, criminalizing picketing "in front of or about" a funeral location or procession.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,206 Posts
First let me say, I hope that every participating member of the Westboro Baptist Church rot in hell. Along with anybody who burns our flag on our soil

But this country is great because you are allowed to do things here that will not cause you to be incarcerated or killed

I agree the judgement of the SCOTUS is the the correct one. Local governments need to develope regulations that protect the sanctity of funerals and weddings for that matter. We cannot as a nation start cherry picking which right is to be abolished. When you start to remove rights we ALL loose

How are these people finding out when these funerals are taking place? Maybe somebody should start finding out who are the individuals are that are participating and print their names and phone numbers, E-mail in the paper for them to be judged by society:lookinup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Even as a service member--Unfortunately but I agree with SCOTUS as it involves this case and it's circumstances.
Unfortunately, I have have to agree, also. They did their job... they protected the constitutional rights of the people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
798 Posts
Then again it is common knowledge that the right is anti-gay and since the wackos are anti-gay I suppose it is to be expected!!

:crazy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,374 Posts
It is hard in my opinion to be right in theory and wrong in reality. In theory the court is right in upholding the constitution, but in reality the church is wrong in how it is handling its constitutional right. This can apply to a lot of situations.

Lets look at medical marijuana. I see the argument for taking it to relieve pain, but how many people use that argument just to use an illegal drug to get high? Theory vs. reality.

Bad decisions and common sense are not taken into consideration.
 

·
I have poor impulse control.
Joined
·
3,813 Posts
First let me say, I hope that every participating member of the Westboro Baptist Church rot in hell. Along with anybody who burns our flag on our soil

But this country is great because you are allowed to do things here that will not cause you to be incarcerated or killed

I agree the judgement of the SCOTUS is the the correct one. Local governments need to develope regulations that protect the sanctity of funerals and weddings for that matter. We cannot as a nation start cherry picking which right is to be abolished. When you start to remove rights we ALL loose
:agree:

Fortunately, or unfortunately, being an asshole and showing no respect is every American's right. The 1 judge who voted against got it wrong. As much as you or I may despise the people who picket these funerals, the people still have a right to free speech. Trampling on that right would be a huge step in the wrong direction. Props to the SCOTUS; and to hell with those protesters.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,823 Posts
Oh, lets see here....

to hell with their protecting the constitution, since they-along with congress and the individual states- have been shitting on it for decades. just look at all the laws that are a direct violation of 2A? Or all the laws that the govt refuses to uphold?

as for those chanting targets holding shoot me signs, all i can say to/about them is "I SEE THE LIGHT! I SEE THE LIGHT! I SEE THE LIGHT!"

considering ive spent the last 60 of 72 hours at work, im too tired to really think now....
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
"Westboro stayed well away from the memorial service," Roberts wrote. "Snyder could see no more than the tops of the signs when driving to the funeral. And there is no indication that the picketing itself in any way interfered with the funeral itself."

The ruling was a narrow one, dealing with the specific, unusual facts of this appeal. Such vocal protests at military funerals are almost entirely confined to this one small group. Roberts said on the free speech question, it was enough to rely on "limited principles that sweep no more broadly than the appropriate context of the instant case."

Even as a service member--Unfortunately but I agree with SCOTUS as it involves this case and it's circumstances.

Now it's up to the states to write laws about protesting within distances from certain events that "while not within the privacy of one's home are by general agreement meant to be private functions"

State lawmakers later passed the Spc. Edward Lee Myers Law, criminalizing picketing "in front of or about" a funeral location or procession.
Spot on. :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,435 Posts
Do you think that since the high court's job is the final interpretation of the law, it has them over a barrel in a case like this. Even though they may feel obliged to render a decision that will make us happy, their hands are tied by the Constitution? I think that the task must be over-
welming.

If it wasn't such a scary thought, rewriting parts of the Constitution, to encompass todays modern problems, it
might be a good idea. The scary part would be letting the assholes in Congress and the White House take part in the
job.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,109 Posts
"Westboro stayed well away from the memorial service," Roberts wrote. "Snyder could see no more than the tops of the signs when driving to the funeral. And there is no indication that the picketing itself in any way interfered with the funeral itself."

The ruling was a narrow one, dealing with the specific, unusual facts of this appeal. Such vocal protests at military funerals are almost entirely confined to this one small group. Roberts said on the free speech question, it was enough to rely on "limited principles that sweep no more broadly than the appropriate context of the instant case."

Even as a service member--Unfortunately but I agree with SCOTUS as it involves this case and it's circumstances.

Now it's up to the states to write laws about protesting within distances from certain events that "while not within the privacy of one's home are by general agreement meant to be private functions"

State lawmakers later passed the Spc. Edward Lee Myers Law, criminalizing picketing "in front of or about" a funeral location or procession.
:agree:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
If it wasn't such a scary thought, rewriting parts of the Constitution, to encompass todays modern problems, it might be a good idea. The scary part would be letting the assholes in Congress and the White House take part in the job.
The constitution is just as modern as it was when written. The founding fathers had enough foresight to give us the necessary tools to make adjustments as needed, the constitutional amendment process. Laws should not be passed until it's proven that they are within the framework of the constitution, and judges should not legislate from the bench. This is a seemingly tricky case, because of the emotion involved. There are simple fixes that can be applied at the state and local level, like it was intended to be.

We don't need a constitutional convention, we need to force the federal government to live within the framework of the constitution. :cheers:
 

·
I'm related so I get a title.
Joined
·
212 Posts
How about a new idea? How about the SCOTUS did ok? How about the scumbags have a right to be disgusting? How about as BLKVWTTE94 quoted "the parents could only see the top of the signs as they left"? How about all of that is compeletely correct.
How about the main part? The media put it on every station, paper, internet story, etc? What if they just ignored it. The family would have had minor discomfort from the scumbags, the SCOTUS would have been applauded and the situation would go away.
I am not suggesting the media not reporting the situation because that is a 1st A right. However, I am suggesting that maybe we should put a time out on the 24/7 news cycle. Maybe like you can't buy beer after 3 am and before 1pm?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,668 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Good idea Rookie, that would work with a lot of things such as school shootings. etc.

˙ǝƃuɐɹʇs sʞooן ƃuıʇıɹʍ sıɥʇ ǝsnɐɔǝq ǝɯıʇpǝq s,ʇı ʍou puɐ ǝuıʍ ɟo sǝssɐןƃ ǝןdnoɔ ɐ pɐɥ ı ˙ssɐ ɹıǝɥʇ ʞɔıʞ oʇ sʞɔnq uǝʇ ʎɐd ןןıʇs pןnoʍ ı noʎ ɟo ʇsoɯ ɥʇıʍ ǝǝɹƃɐ ı ǝןıɥʍ

Oops, sorry, the keyboard got turned around.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top