Hypothetical Situation: Westboro Baptist Church

I think the Westboro Baptists are quite aware of the law and experienced with lawsuits. They know what they can get away with.
 
Westboro Baptists are just trying to increase their membership! You can never have too many sociopaths you know!
 
I would vote to acquit.

And after the trial was over, I would tell the press
that I hope someone else kills all the rest of those
Westboro bastards, the sooner the better.
 
A father loses is son, who served and died in Afghanistan. The WBC pickets the funeral. Due to the lack of protection and laws protecting the funeral, the WBC is able to come within a few feet of the service. They drown out, via shouting and singing, the preacher and others attending the service. The funeral is obviously unable to proceed accordingly. The father, angered and distraught by the events, snaps and attacks members of the WBC.
Click to expand...

I suspect that, provided the father had a good lawyer (I imagine someone would get him one) that he'd get a reduced sentence...but he would be guilty.

As loathesome as I find the WBC...the KKK...and a number of other people not coming to mind ATM, they have a right to say whatever bigoted nonsense they want.
I have a right to yell at them for it, too.

Personally, I think the Westboroites are a secularists' best friend ever.
 
They tend to motivate me... to beat the sh*t out of their beliefs, using logic and reason
Click to expand...

That too. But I was mainly thinking they make Christians look bad. Really bad.
 
MZ3Boy84 said:
Now, it is my belief, that sooner or later, due to the hatred that the WBC spreads and the number of people they piss off, some mentally unstable person is going to snap and make things go boom, if you know what I mean.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. Right-wing Americans are far more likely to solve a problem with violence than left-wingers. They're mostly the ones with the guns, they're mostly the ones who have approved of every idiotic war we've gotten into since Vietnam, and they're mostly the ones who get into bar fights on Saturday night. Liberals like to talk things out, and they're far more likely to understand why other people think and feel the way they do. As a demographic, they're anti-gun, anti-war and anti-violence. Not that you can't push a leftist so far that he'll hit you or shoot you, but it's a lot easier with a rightist. The lefty will probably just follow you onto the subway and try earnestly to explain why you're wrong.
MZ3Boy84 said:
It all comes down to that fine line where "freedom of speech" (legal) turns in to "hate speech" (illegal). Legally, I think that for the most part they are obeying the law.
Click to expand...
We have always made an exception to Freedom of Speech for "fightin' words," hateful things said almost deliberately to make someone angry enough to fight. But this doctrine is rarely enforced outside of a bar, where it is clearly more appropriate than among sober people. A few specific forms of hate speech, like insults based on race, religion, nationality or sexual preference, have been made illegal but you probably won't get busted for it unless you put it on a billboard. Even bumper stickers get away with some amazing shit.
However, this this not a question of the law. This a question of ethics and morality.
Click to expand...
But law is all we've got! It's the way civilizations manifest their members' consensus about ethics and morality--as opposed to Neolithic tribes where the patriarch can make you feel like a hopeless loser by simply ostracizing you.
spidergoat said:
"Hate speech" is not illegal in the USA.
Click to expand...
Certainly not to the extent that it is in Europe, where Holocaust denial is a crime, so all the racists had to go to Tehran to have their antisemitic festival. It would have been so much better to let them have it in Amsterdam or Vienna, so every time they walked out of the conference room they'd be confronted by Auschwitz survivors with tattooed arms.

But still, it is possible to be arrested for the most egregious and politically incorrect types of hate speech in America. If it's widely reported you could lose your job.
MZ3Boy84 said:
Here's a more precise example: A father loses is son, who served and died in Afghanistan. The WBC pickets the funeral. Due to the lack of protection and laws protecting the funeral, the WBC is able to come within a few feet of the service. . . .
Click to expand...
But we've already had that experience and as a society we came up with a decent compromise, as defined by a judge, generally the wisest class of civil "servants." They are now required to be so far away from the actual ceremony that the only way the mourners can know they're out there is to be Twittering their friends at the funeral--which is rather rude in itself! They can't stand on the edge of the cemetery screaming about God, they can't confront the people or even get close to them, and they can't follow them home and picket their houses.

This is a pretty good compromise with Free Speech. After all, we don't want these people to go into hiding so we don't know what they're up to.

Remember what Justice Brandeis said: "The best disinfectant is sunshine." The way I put it is, "You want to keep the cockroaches on top of the linoleum so you can keep track of what they're up to."

America is the country that gives the Nazis a permit to have a parade. Thousands of people line the route, shouting insults. It's good for us to know that they're still around, and it's good for them to know that they are despised. Neither of those would happen so easily if we made them hide in their basement with pictures of Hitler on the walls.
 
Fraggle Rocker said:
But still, it is possible to be arrested for the most egregious and politically incorrect types of hate speech in America.
Click to expand...

Only when such exceeds the bounds of simple "hate speech" and gets into the realm of "incitement to imminent violence" or somesuch. That only adds up to an arrest for hate speech if you conflate "realistic death threats" with "hate speech."

The closest you can get to hate speech legislation in the US is that employers can be punished for fostering a hostile work environment if they persistently tolerate hate speech among employees.
 
Fraggle Rocker said:
I don't think so. Right-wing Americans are far more likely to solve a problem with violence than left-wingers. They're mostly the ones with the guns, they're mostly the ones who have approved of every idiotic war we've gotten into since Vietnam, and they're mostly the ones who get into bar fights on Saturday night. Liberals like to talk things out, and they're far more likely to understand why other people think and feel the way they do. As a demographic, they're anti-gun, anti-war and anti-violence. Not that you can't push a leftist so far that he'll hit you or shoot you, but it's a lot easier with a rightist. The lefty will probably just follow you onto the subway and try earnestly to explain why you're wrong.We have always made an exception to Freedom of Speech for "fightin' words," hateful things said almost deliberately to make someone angry enough to fight. But this doctrine is rarely enforced outside of a bar, where it is clearly more appropriate than among sober people. A few specific forms of hate speech, like insults based on race, religion, nationality or sexual preference, have been made illegal but you probably won't get busted for it unless you put it on a billboard. Even bumper stickers get away with some amazing shit.But law is all we've got! It's the way civilizations manifest their members' consensus about ethics and morality--as opposed to Neolithic tribes where the patriarch can make you feel like a hopeless loser by simply ostracizing you.Certainly not to the extent that it is in Europe, where Holocaust denial is a crime, so all the racists had to go to Tehran to have their antisemitic festival. It would have been so much better to let them have it in Amsterdam or Vienna, so every time they walked out of the conference room they'd be confronted by Auschwitz survivors with tattooed arms.

But still, it is possible to be arrested for the most egregious and politically incorrect types of hate speech in America. If it's widely reported you could lose your job.But we've already had that experience and as a society we came up with a decent compromise, as defined by a judge, generally the wisest class of civil "servants." They are now required to be so far away from the actual ceremony that the only way the mourners can know they're out there is to be Twittering their friends at the funeral--which is rather rude in itself! They can't stand on the edge of the cemetery screaming about God, they can't confront the people or even get close to them, and they can't follow them home and picket their houses.

This is a pretty good compromise with Free Speech. After all, we don't want these people to go into hiding so we don't know what they're up to.

Remember what Justice Brandeis said: "The best disinfectant is sunshine." The way I put it is, "You want to keep the cockroaches on top of the linoleum so you can keep track of what they're up to."

America is the country that gives the Nazis a permit to have a parade. Thousands of people line the route, shouting insults. It's good for us to know that they're still around, and it's good for them to know that they are despised. Neither of those would happen so easily if we made them hide in their basement with pictures of Hitler on the walls.
Click to expand...

Fraggle;

The laws vary state to state. Unless I'm missing something, I don't believe there to be any federal law or mandate regarding the picketing of funerals. Many states still have not enacted such laws.
 
MZ3Boy84 said:
With the constant media spotlight, and their abnoxiously annoying picketing at funerals, one question has been bugging me.

Now, it is my belief, that sooner or later, due to the hatred that the WBC spreads and the number of people they piss off, some mentally unstable person is going to snap and make things go boom, if you know what I mean.

If someone did such a thing as to attempt or commit the murder of a WBC member (or any other hate group) (WHICH I DO NOT CONDONE!!!), do you think that the judge and jury would have mercy on the murderer?

AGAIN, FOR CLARIFICATION, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE INJURY OR MURDER OF ANYONE, NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU DISAGREE WITH THEIR THEOLOGY OR METHODOLOGY!!!!!!!!!! DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, TAKE THIS AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION AND INQUIRY!!! I DO NOT PLAN, NOR WILL I EVER, TO COMMIT SUCH A CRIME NOR DO I SUPPORT OR RECOMMEND THAT ANYONE ELSE DOES!
​
Click to expand...

i don't think most people would have a problem maintaining objectivity in a case like this. most people hold dear laws regarding murder and free speech for good reason, whether you hate or not. i don't think most people have an issue with the consequences of committing a crime like this, it's more a matter of whether they're willing to suffer them not. some people are, and i don't think they're looking for any sympathy. i think they're looking to be martyrs.
 
chimpkin said:
That too. But I was mainly thinking they make Christians look bad. Really bad.
Click to expand...

spidergoat said:
That's why I like them.
Click to expand...

this is fucked up. i'm a christian and i am testifying that christ isn't anything like those hateful motherfuckers, and neither am i. i don't see how using god's name in vain is funny. and i don't see how the idea of people who do this disparaging those of us who don't is funny, or amusing, or anything to be supportive of. :mad:
 
I think your original question is too narrow. Why would it have to be someone mentally unstable? I mean, was Jack Ruby mentally unstable or just a calculating killer?

For me, just being mentally unstable would not be enough to find not guilty regardless of how little I personally value Phelps life.

Now if a reasonable person could find it was an accidental death... say someone fell asleep at the wheel while Phelps was walking down the sidewalk.... well... accidents do happen.
 
“
Originally Posted by chimpkin
That too. But I was mainly thinking they make Christians look bad. Really bad.
Click to expand...
”
“
Originally Posted by spidergoat
That's why I like them.
Click to expand...
”
this is fucked up. i'm a christian and i am testifying that christ isn't anything like those hateful motherfuckers, and neither am i.
Click to expand...

I agree that you aren't a hateful person-you're nice-and I'm glad you aren't hateful. I respect people who follow Christ's teachings...but a lot of Christians are far more Old Testament-flavored.

People less fundamentalist than the Phelpsies but still fundie enough want to make sure my relationship is never and can never be considered equal to theirs in the eyes of what ought to be secular law, because of their religion.

That, m'dear, makes me an unequal citizen and is fucked up.

Aaaand I'm mad about it, 'natch.
 
chimpkin said:
I agree that you aren't a hateful person-you're nice-and I'm glad you aren't hateful. I respect people who follow Christ's teachings...but a lot of Christians are far more Old Testament-flavored.

People less fundamentalist than the Phelpsies but still fundie enough want to make sure my relationship is never and can never be considered equal to theirs in the eyes of what ought to be secular law, because of their religion.

That, m'dear, makes me an unequal citizen and is fucked up.

Aaaand I'm mad about it, 'natch.
Click to expand...

i know people blame their religions, and perhaps it is the religion's fault, but i don't know that it's substantiated by scripture, and i definitely don't think it's christ-like. I know that christ is about freedom and will abolish religion soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top