supreme court rules in favour of westboro baptist church.

[eastcoast]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the First Amendment protects fundamentalist church members who mount attention-getting, anti-gay protests outside military funerals.

The court voted 8-1 in favor of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan. The decision upheld an appeals court ruling that threw out a $5 million judgment to the father of a dead Marine who sued church members after they picketed his son's funeral.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the court.

Justice Samuel Alito dissented.

It was a huge victory for a group whose antics have outraged many, including veterans groups.
Supreme Court rules controversial funeral protests are free speech

While the protests were painful, the majority wrote that the Constitution protects even hurtful speech on public issues.

"What Westboro said, in the whole context of how and where it chose to say it, is entitled to 'special protection' under the First Amendment," Roberts wrote, "and that protection cannot be overcome by a jury finding that the picketing was outrageous."

"Speech is powerful. It can stir people to action, move them to tears of both joy and sorrow, and — as it did here — inflict great pain," Roberts wrote. "On the facts before us, we cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker. As a nation we have chosen a different course — to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate."

Alito strongly disagreed. "Our profound national commitment to free and open debate is not a license for the vicious verbal assault that occurred in this case," he said.

'Thank God for dead soldiers'
Matthew Snyder died in Iraq in 2006 and his body was returned to the United States for burial. Members of the Westboro Baptist Church, who have picketed military funerals for several years, decided to protest outside the Westminster, Md., church where Snyder's funeral was to be held.

The Rev. Fred Phelps and other family members who make up most of the Westboro Baptist Church have picketed many military funerals in their quest to draw attention to their view that U.S. deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq are God's punishment for the nation's tolerance of homosexuality.

They showed up with their usual signs, including "Thank God for dead soldiers," "You're Going to Hell," "God Hates the USA/Thank God for 9/11," and one that combined the U.S. Marine Corps motto, Semper Fi, with a slur against gay men.
Vote: Do you agree with the Supreme Court's decision?

“God promised dire outpourings of very painful wrath, and there’s nothing more painful than killing one of your children and that’s what’s going on in Iraq,” Fred Phelps told msnbc.com in an interview in 2006 . “That’s what we’re preaching and the forum of choice to deliver such a message, obviously, is the funeral of the kid that’s been blown to smithereens."

The church members drew counter-demonstrators, as well as media coverage and a heavy police presence to maintain order. The result was a spectacle that led to altering the route of the funeral procession.

Several weeks later, Albert Snyder was surfing the Internet for tributes to his son from other soldiers and strangers when he came upon a poem on the church's website that attacked Matthew's parents for the way they brought up their son.

Soon after, Snyder filed a lawsuit accusing the Phelpses of intentionally inflicting emotional distress. He won $11 million at trial, later reduced by a judge to $5 million.

The federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., threw out the verdict and said the Constitution shielded the church members from liability.

Forty-eight states, 42 U.S. senators and veterans groups sided with Snyder, asking the court to shield funerals from the Phelps family's "psychological terrorism."

While distancing themselves from the church's message, media organizations, including The Associated Press, urged the court to side with the Phelps family because of concerns that a victory for Snyder could erode speech rights.

Roberts described the court's holding as narrow, and in a separate opinion, Justice Stephen Breyer suggested in other circumstances, governments would not be "powerless to provide private individuals with necessary protection."

But in this case, Breyer said, it would be wrong to "punish Westboro for seeking to communicate its views on matters of public concern."

[eastcoast]

personally I agree with the supreme court for some funny reason,the westboro baptist church is a dispicable organization that is wrong on so many levels it's not even funny,but they do have the right to protest anything they want peacefully and even though I disagree with them 100% they should have that right protected,I feel bad for the father of the kid who lost, but free speech should stay free with no impeding from the government, and no lawsuits over hurt feelings.

[huntinstuff]

Absolute lowest form of life, but the freedom of speech is exactly that

Constitutionally, they did nothing wrong. Socially, it is disgraceful and about as low life as you can get.

[eastcoast]

Absolute lowest form of life, but the freedom of speech is exactly that

Constitutionally, they did nothing wrong. Socially, it is disgraceful and about as low life as you can get.

I agree.

[Rod1960]

Guess I'll be the first to disagree. Shouting 'fire' in a crowded movie theater is free speech and illegal. Why would/should this be allowed?

[echo]

Absolute lowest form of life, but the freedom of speech is exactly that

Constitutionally, they did nothing wrong. Socially, it is disgraceful and about as low life as you can get.

i agree, but maybe the fire dept should hit them with some 2" water hose to break up the protest,or maybe some one should picket their church service..

[eastcoast]

Guess I'll be the first to disagree. Shouting 'fire' in a crowded movie theater is free speech and illegal. Why would/should this be allowed?

nobody yelled fire though.

this should be allowed because if they can take the westboro baptist's rights away they can take your rights away, for me I think they are as low as low can get but it's a slippery slope when you deem someone's rights lesser than others,freedom means freedom weather you agree of disagree with the message.

[eastcoast]

i agree, but maybe the fire dept should hit them with some 2" water hose to break up the protest,or maybe some one should picket their church service..

hitting them with a firehose would impede their right to free assembly, someone picketing their church I agree with.

[alodar]

If I was there id picket them for being liars, hypocrites and worshiping someone whose not as tolerant as it says he should be if your religious I believe they preach tolerance forgiveness and acceptance whats The term? Turn the other cheek while support their right to peaceful protest I disagree with their lack of respect for the dead and freedoms and decisions of others if he was gay it does not affect them at all and imo they should sthui agree, but maybe the fire dept should hit them with some 2" water hose to break up the protest,or maybe some one should picket their church service..

[Rod1960]

nobody yelled fire though.

this should be allowed because if they can take the westboro baptist's rights away they can take your rights away, for me I think they are as low as low can get but it's a slippery slope when you deem someone's rights lesser than others,freedom means freedom weather you agree of disagree with the message.

OK....fire aside. What about racial slurs? I'm 'free' to call someone anything I want. If it's a racial slur it's illegal and aren't they doing just that with words like f*ggot?

[Photoplex]

Guess I'll be the first to disagree. Shouting 'fire' in a crowded movie theater is free speech and illegal. Why would/should this be allowed?

They are scum, but they have as much right to freedom of speech as the next person.

The quote you're referencing is actually misquoted. The key part missing is "falsely shouting fire in a crowded theatre", which makes all the difference.

Evelyn Beatrice Hall said it best with the following:

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

[eastcoast]

OK....fire aside. What about racial slurs? I'm 'free' to call someone anything I want. If it's a racial slur it's illegal and aren't they doing just that with words like f*ggot?

racial slurs are not illegal, they are not socially acceptable but technically not illegal.

[Rod1960]

They are scum, but they have as much right to freedom of speech as the next person.

The quote you're referencing is actually misquoted. The key part missing is "falsely shouting fire in a crowded theatre", which makes all the difference.

Evelyn Beatrice Hall said it best with the following:

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

You're right, thanks. I stand corrected.

[Photoplex]

You're right, thanks. I stand corrected.

A modern version of the Shouting Fire example would be "Falsely shouting BOMB on a plane/in an airport". It better highlights why some things are beyond the remit of "freedom of speech" and become a safety and/or hazard concern. If it causes people to panic, to pull the doors open at 35,000ft and to jump out, and maybe for the plane to crash... that's where your freedom of speech ends.

Same with the panic and stampede that would happen if you falsely shouted fire in a packed movie theatre. If there's an actual fire, shout it till your lungs fly out of your chest!

[eastcoast]

A modern version of the Shouting Fire example would be "Falsely shouting BOMB on a plane/in an airport". It better highlights why some things are not beyond the remit of "freedom of speech" and become a safety and/or hazard concern :)

true but this case has nothing to do with either fire or bombs,those things are not protected under freedom of speech because they can cause public and bodily harm,this case is very different though a man who's son died sued the church and won,then in subsiquent trials got it lowered and now quashed under the supreme court,I believe it's the right decision because at the beginning the church picketed a funeral,they have the right to do that and anything that comes from it is null and void,I understand the guy suing and feel bad for him in this case but this was a nonsence case about hurt feelings that just don't apply, suing over hurt feelings is not as important and a freedom of protest,and the court agreed with me,same way they did back in the 80's with larry flynt over jerry faldwell,little different as flynt was defending the right to freedom of the press vs freedom of speech although they are intertwined quite a bit,it's good to see the court ruling in favour of freedom vs censorship.

[Okotokian]

Absolute lowest form of life, but the freedom of speech is exactly that

Constitutionally, they did nothing wrong. Socially, it is disgraceful and about as low life as you can get.

Personally, I don't know why military as well as gay and lesbian groups don't picket the homes of every member of this "church" around the clock, 24-7. "Church".... man, it feels the same as calling poachers "hunters".

[eastcoast]

Personally, I don't know why military as well as gay and lesbian groups don't picket the homes of every member of this "church" around the clock, 24-7. "Church".... man, it feels the same as calling poachers "hunters".

that's true this isn't really a church it's mostly members of 1 family that are all lawyers who go around and protest on their own dime.paying attention to them is the worst thing one can do but I understand why people do,it's like a train wreck that you can't look away from.

[huntinstuff]

If Canadians were half as committed to rights as the US, we wouldnt be simply fighting now to have the proper right to protect ourselves and our property

Anyone is free to go and picket that church if they want......is anyone doing it? Nope. Why? Apathy

[eastcoast]

If Canadians were half as committed to rights as the US, we wouldnt be simply fighting now to have the proper right to protect ourselves and our property

Anyone is free to go and picket that church if they want......is anyone doing it? Nope. Why? Apathy

we do have the right to defend ourselves it's in the costitution, the problem is the government finds ways to charge the person with other things unrelated,I believe there should be an investigation for sure after someone gets shot/killed but when the investigation is over and the guy defending himself is cleared they should leave him alone and not go on a witch hunt to charge the guy with anything they think will stick.

[eastcoast]

Personally, I don't know why military as well as gay and lesbian groups don't picket the homes of every member of this "church" around the clock, 24-7. "Church".... man, it feels the same as calling poachers "hunters".

although that would make alot of people happy, it would bring more attention to the members and that's why they do it for attention to spread their message,the best thing to do in situations like this is to ignore,I know it's hard to do and I have watched them more than most but it's the best remedy,same goes for peta,crazy environmentalists etc.

[hardy]

I believe what the court did was right, freedoms need to be protected. On another note being a fellow believer in Jesus Christ what this group did is NOT founded Biblically! GOD does not hate people He hates the sin example: John 3:16 For God so LOVED the world that he gave his one and only Son, so that EVERYONE who believes in him shall not perish but have ETERNAL LIFE. If you go on to read other parts of the text you will find that God did not create Hell for man but for Satan, although whoever chooses sides with Satan will reap the same judgement.

I don't mean to sidetrack this thread just wanted to post what the Bible actually says to clear any misconceptions.

[Photoplex]

I believe what the court did was right, freedoms need to be protected. On another note being a fellow believer in Jesus Christ what this group did is NOT founded Biblically! GOD does not hate people He hates the sin example: John 3:16 For God so LOVED the world that he gave his one and only Son, so that EVERYONE who believes in him shall not perish but have ETERNAL LIFE. If you go on to read other parts of the text you will find that God did not create Hell for man but for Satan, although whoever chooses sides with Satan will reap the same judgement.

I don't mean to sidetrack this thread just wanted to post what the Bible actually says to clear any misconceptions.

And in just the same way that there are nutters out there who twist the words in the Bible to suit their own means, there are nutters who are twisting the words in the Koran to suit their own agenda (war).

[hardy]

An Extremist in most cases is not a good thing unless its hunting of course!




And in just the same way that there are nutters out there who twist the words in the Bible to suit their own means, there are nutters who are twisting the words in the Koran to suit their own agenda (war).

[Photoplex]

An Extremist in most cases is not a good thing unless its hunting of course!

And drinking! :oregonian_winesmile

[rugatika]

as I recall phelps announced ahead of time he was going to protest this soldiers homecoming....this is the result...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpahWjYp_ec

Just a bunch of hillbillies likely.

[Coulee]

I agree with the decision of the Supreme Court. However, the leaders of this church (cult), need to be made disappeared.

[eastcoast]

amazing what you can find out on the internet looking for 2 minutes.








NEW VALID CONTACT INFORMATION FOR PHELPS

Elizabth Phelps Work 785 233 0822

Tim Phelps Home 785 273 4780

Tim Phelps Work 7852915100

Abigal Phelps Work 7852967709 (Ask to be put through)

Fred Phelps JR Home 785 272 4135

Fred Phelps Work 785 296 3195

Shirley Phelps Work 785-233-4162 (Phelps Chartered)

Fred Phelps Sr Work 785 2963317

[Coulee]

Good work eastcoast.

[eastcoast]

this is the right way to deal with these people,make it a joke because they are a joke.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iT7xQJrqUQ8&feature=related

[eastcoast]

im sure most of you guys hate micheal moore but you have to take your hat off to him in this segment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra_fAYl4Th4&feature=related


:scared0018:

[Ken07AOVette]

THIS is the story on them;

He is a lawyer, as all his family are. He was an extremely successful civil rights lawyer.

They do this so people get mad and hit them, then they sue.

It is all for the money. 2 of his family have left them, and have talked about their agenda.

[elkhunter11]

It's about time a few hundred veterans protested outside of their church, during their services.

[eastcoast]

THIS is the story on them;

He is a lawyer, as all his family are. He was an extremely successful civil rights lawyer.

They do this so people get mad and hit them, then they sue.

It is all for the money. 2 of his family have left them, and have talked about their agenda.


exactly they want the attention and they are mostly all lawyers, the best thing to do is ingore them.