Archive: 9 posts

---

Okay, this happened in the US, and I know some of you guys are in other countries like Russia, Canada, and so on. But seriosuly, I think this isn't right, and I think that no matter where this would've happened, it will still look wrong. So, the story: a father of a US Marine who died in war has to pay fees for a group of people who picketed his son's funeral with signs of "Thank God for dead soldiers." I was like "WTF!?" when I heard a father taking that from a group that knowd nothing of that topic. It's cruel that they showed how they didn't care who died, and they also forgot why the Marine died: to protect their freedom. Sure, the group's defense is the First Amendment (freedom of speech), but I think it's disrespectful that they would do such a thing. They practically violet something like "Disturning the peace", "For stress and emotional problems to the father", or something. Thanking God for a death of a soldier is not something great, it's bull****. I hate it when people take something for granted. This man served his country well, and only to be dissed by a bunch of ungrateful people. Luckily, the father is taking this to court around fall, that way these portesters can finally see how hard-headed they been. Anyways, read the whole article here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100331/ts_csm/291560 . Sorry for the rant guys, but being a US citizen here, I can sometimes get like this when someone (and some people) think they're doing us a favor by doing things like this, when in fact they're not. So discuss this if you want, and you can even disagree with me if you want, but I just wanted to take that off my chest. No hard feelings. Peace

2010-04-01 12:25:00 Author: CyberSora Posts: 5551

---

those guys are always doing stupid stuff. its hard enough to be a follower of Christ these days without people who claim to be believers acting in this way. absolutely absurd.

2010-04-01 12:33:00 Author: saulbecomespaul Posts: 52

---

If I understand correctly, Bill O'Reilly, a Fox News Host, has volunteered to pay the 16000 instead. Still... yeah. Protesting fees? Never heard of 'em. Just seems like the perfect way to slap someone in the face <_< And yeah, Fred Phelps and his church have been around forever... Apparrently, the Iraq war is God's punishment for us not killing all the gays... or something. Huh. Still... yep, gotta love America.

2010-04-01 13:19:00 Author: RockSauron Posts: 10882

---

It's not "protesting fees" that he is required to pay. He filed a civil suit and was awarded a $5 million dollar settlement, which was later overturned. Because of the ruling, he is required to pay the legal fees of the defendant. While it may not seem fair, the judge ruled correctly in this case. An individual's right to free speech trumps the content of that speech. There are exceptions, of course, but if they were lawfully protesting and expressing their thoughts, then I'd have to say I'd agree with the ruling. That being said, it's sad that a "Christian" organization would spout such hateful rhetoric... free speech is a double-edged sword, it seems. So much for "Love thy neighbor" and "Do unto others."

2010-04-01 14:57:00 Author: schm0 Posts: 1239

---

what a disrespectfull pigs

2010-04-01 15:22:00 Author: Unknown User

---

epic fail.

2010-04-01 16:05:00 Author: Testudini Posts: 3262

---

Yes, it is sad that such an idea can find followers. By principle, a right extends only until it infringes on another's rights. It's a fairly simple principle, but things always get messy when someone tries to define the line in the middle. Yes, the court case was overturned, but the military father has appealed to the Supreme Court. I believe the case will be in court sometime next year, but I'm not sure without looking. That does sound good, but it really doesn't matter who is drawing the aforementioned line. Should the court rule it's within their rights to protest, they'll be emboldened and likely grow larger. Should the court rule it's illegal to protest to an extent that emotional distress is caused, all forms of protesting will immediately be questioned. Tea parties, Pro-choice, life, coffee, rainbows... any type of rally will suddenly have people suing for having been caused emotional distress. Ideally, the court would rule that it infringes on privacy to protest at a family funeral- I can't think of a time protesting at a funeral would be appropriate. Unfortunately, that's not the way the world works.

2010-04-03 08:12:00 Author: Shredator Posts: 151

---

Yes, but couldn't the father sue for emotional stress that the people caused? Or disturbance of the peace? Either that, or harrasing his son in a formal way?

2010-04-03 20:32:00 Author: CyberSora Posts: 5551

---

The group doesn't actually start fights or disrupt what's going on, so they're pretty safe from that. Disturbance of the peace is more of an on-scene arrest anyway, not a court matter. I don't think harassment of his son is really an option, being dead. The original lawsuit, repealed, that the father got 5 million dollars for was for emotional distress, which will play into the supreme court case.

2010-04-03 21:28:00 Author: Shredator Posts: 151

Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.