Freedom of Speech

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006...ests_x.htm

Does the 100/300 ft rule infringe upon one's rights? Explain.

 Spoiler

I couldn't find anything from google.

the right to free speech is meant to keep the government more or less accountable by saying that they (the government) can not take away your right to say what you want. technically they arent, they are just controlling where they can say it.
technically because it is government regulated it could be considered unconstitutional, but that is not to say it isnt needed. phelps and his ilk should not be allowed to do this kind of thing, especially at funerals. especially of those who have fallen in service to our country, but at any funeral is just wrong. a funeral is a time to remember the deceased and to honor them (even if you dont believe they should be honored you have no right to say that others cant believe it).

the government has a responsibility to protect the rights of all, which means also protecting us from those who wish to infringe upon our rights. while the ban may be in question, i find no fault, in at least a funeral setting for allowing the local law enforcement to make a quarantine type zone. though i think if i didnt mistakenly read there in the article there is already a group doing this anyway.

either way in my opinion, phelps should be stopped. im a christian and i am appalled by what he does, that he does such in the name of my faith is next to unfathomable.

tl:dr while it may be unconstitutional, it doesnt mean its not needed.

I understand perfectly WHY it's done. But you said it yourself "it could be considered unconstitutional". So how does this law get by? What makes this OK?

To the best of my knowledge freedom of speech is an issue on public property, property owned by the government. This is frequently misconstrued by people to mean that they can mouth off wherever and whenever they want. On private property the owner of the property sets the rules of behavior on that property. People on forums frequently b!tch that their "freedom of speech" is being infringed upon, but these forums are not owned by the government, so the admins can prohibit the word "green" from being said if they feel like it. Similarly, most cemetaries are not public property, so these guys are not entitled to jack $hit on them. As for picketing on the street outside, well, I personally don't mind if the government interferes just this once. I mean, picture losing your father or brother and then some assholes start shouting that he deserved to die while you're at the funeral. This is more obscene than neo-Nazis and the KKK, and those are commonly thought to be pretty much the most obscene that freedom of speech permits.

Edit: I must say the ACLU is a bunch of prostitutes. They claim to have the Bill of Rights as their client, but really they defend every piece of $hit that wants to do something horrible. Back when the Nazis wanted to march through Skokie, (then the most heavily Jewish town in America, and having many Holocaust survivors,) the ACLU got a Jewish lawyer to get those Nazis their "rights." Now, that same ACLU is trying to get Westboro the "right" to smear soldiers' funerals. I know lawyers are considered throughout America to be whores, but these guys spread their legs extra wide.

I know lawyers are considered throughout America to be whores, but these guys spread their legs extra wide.

qft

quantact pretty much said what i was trying to, but much better.

To the best of my knowledge freedom of speech is an issue on public property, property owned by the government. This is frequently misconstrued by people to mean that they can mouth off wherever and whenever they want. On private property the owner of the property sets the rules of behavior on that property. People on forums frequently b!tch that their "freedom of speech" is being infringed upon, but these forums are not owned by the government, so the admins can prohibit the word "green" from being said if they feel like it. Similarly, most cemetaries are not public property, so these guys are not entitled to jack $hit on them. As for picketing on the street outside, well, I personally don't mind if the government interferes just this once. I mean, picture losing your father or brother and then some assholes start shouting that he deserved to die while you're at the funeral. This is more obscene than neo-Nazis and the KKK, and those are commonly thought to be pretty much the most obscene that freedom of speech permits.

Edit: I must say the ACLU is a bunch of prostitutes. They claim to have the Bill of Rights as their client, but really they defend every piece of $hit that wants to do something horrible. Back when the Nazis wanted to march through Skokie, (then the most heavily Jewish town in America, and having many Holocaust survivors,) the ACLU got a Jewish lawyer to get those Nazis their "rights." Now, that same ACLU is trying to get Westboro the "right" to smear soldiers' funerals. I know lawyers are considered throughout America to be whores, but these guys spread their legs extra wide.

Ah, so the cemetary(sp?) is private property, and thus has the right to say "get off my lawn"? That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

That is sick. I'm old fashioned; I say we prosecute them under the Alien & Sedition Acts.

I'd like to punch all those fuckers right in the face.
But yes- they have every right to their blathering Hate Speech.

^-- Someone in New Zealand was charged with sedition a couple of years ago. Because they gave out fliers saying to attack the Prime Minister's office. I lol'd.


The problem with this is... how far do we let this go? Do we just limit this to funerals? Why not limit other kinds of protests at other kinds of events?

(To clarify, in no way do I support the WBC or their stance on, well, anything. But this tends to lead towards a slippery slope)

wani is right as well. there really is no good answer. so long as there is a good thing abused by bad people we'll have to put up with a level of crap to keep the freedom. but you could also just say, keep a chapter of those riders near by whenever there is a military funeral. that might help.

What they should do is deny the protests based on the evidence against their usefulness. Take a look at any of the other countries that have similar views to the ones these insane protesters say are killing people.

And what exactly are they protesting? Are they protesting a proper burial? do they want to throw the corpses in the streets since they obviously don't want anyone doing anything respectable to people who have nothing to do with what's "wrong" with the country?

Do they think god, if he exists, even gives a second thought to what country a person would be from? Are they saying god stereotypes people based simply on what human-defined region they live in?

The entire issue is lacking any thought. They should just be banned from protesting altogether. You can't protest when there isn't anything to protest about.

Edit: Sorry repeated my last post.