Fred Phelps church being sued . . . FINALLY!

IntoxicatingToxin

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2006
Posts
7,639
Media
0
Likes
246
Points
283
Location
Kansas City (Missouri, United States)
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Female

EagleCowboy

Cherished Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Posts
1,278
Media
4
Likes
476
Points
228
Location
TEXAS
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
"If every time they decide to picket something, they are joined and outnumbered by decent folks, would it make a difference?"

ONLY if the decent folk outnumbered those idiots 20 to 1 and the decent folks made it perfectly clear that if they did not cease and leave, that they would be faced with immediate bodily harm. The only problem with that is that hate rules the mouth and fists and there would most likely be a riot which would not help anybody.

Actually what might be better is we should get names, numbers, addresses of all of them, their entire family and friends, and whenever one of them dies, (friends/family/church members/anyone sympathetic to their cause) the whole city needs to picket and cheer at their funerals or just prevent the funerals from happening at all and literally prevent them from being buried. See how they like it. Market it as "we hate terrorists", "terrorists will never be buried here", and just flat out make it known to everybody that we KNOW they are terrorists and will never be tolerated.
 

edonline

LPSG Legend
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Posts
18,903
Media
23
Likes
171,038
Points
543
Location
United States
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I'm suprised no one has physically attacked the Phelpses and the WBC yet when they've picketed funerals in the past. Even if they were to sue after being attacked, do you think any jury would hold the attacker responsible, not being in the best of minds from attending the funeral of a loved one or friend?
 

dong20

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
6,058
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
183
Location
The grey country
Sexuality
No Response
Sorry but free speech must always be limited, I would of personally executed the man, but others may think that's a little extreme on a person who wishes to desecrate the whole western culture and insipires racial hatred.

OK, so who sets the limits, who decides what is free speech; the person speaking, the person listening, the government, the police.....you?

The problem with free speech is one of definition, namely that it can't easily be defined, at least not objectively.

On the subject of AH, I'm curious why you say would personally execute him, did he do something to you personally that would justify you killing him? - did he kill or hurt a member of your family, did he steal from you, or is merely being vile now a capital crime in your view?

I'm not trying to be an ass, merely trying to understand your rationale. When someone writes a comment such as that "I would personally execute..." it makes me wonder about their ability to make rational decisions. Still. that's a major reason victims of crime are not directly involved in the punishment of criminals.

This is way off topic, probably deserves a thread of its own.

And yes I did know he was banged up in Belmarsh, infact my mother met him on a few occasions, nothing but a vile person and we shouldn't be wasting our money on keeping him alive/in the country.

I wasn't sure, as you referred to him wandering in the present tense. I agree he's a waste of taxpayer money and he should be deported. The problem is that where that to happen he would almost certainly be released.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
"If every time they decide to picket something, they are joined and outnumbered by decent folks, would it make a difference?"

ONLY if the decent folk outnumbered those idiots 20 to 1 and the decent folks made it perfectly clear that if they did not cease and leave, that they would be faced with immediate bodily harm. The only problem with that is that hate rules the mouth and fists and there would most likely be a riot which would not help anybody.
Eagle, I don't think it would take those kinds of numbers. If he had 15 people at a given site, and 16 non-phelps picketers joined them - not a counter-demonstration on the other side of the street, but actually comingled with them, bearing signs like I mentioned above, how do you think he would react? They know better than to try to assault anyone, so the best he could do is say "you can't join my group!" To which you simply reply, "sure I can. This is a public area, is it not? If your right to free speech allows you to be on this sidewalk, mine allows me to be here, too."

I can't help but think that it would take the wind out of his sails pretty quickly.
 

EagleCowboy

Cherished Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Posts
1,278
Media
4
Likes
476
Points
228
Location
TEXAS
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
DC_DEEP: You see the best outcome scenario of that situation. I know how people are as I've seen first hand and even the aftermath of the best situations getting totally blown out of proportion really fast over nothing. Then again, it just might work. I would be willing to put it to the test if someone were video taping me.

Now if someone (or several) were to beat the dog out of them for picketing a funeral, I seriously doubt that there is a jury anywhere in this country that will give them a stiff sentence, but you never know.

However, I'm still with you that we need to track their activities, and anywhere they go, embarrass the hell out of them by making them look like the fools they are especially on TV and do it as peaceful as possible. Let them know that we consider them terrorists that are no better than those who flew the planes into the buildings. Let them know we just aren't going to tolerate their kind of hatred. Make it clear to them they are no better than the KKK.

Another sign that might burn their biscuits: "True Christians Against Phelps". "Phelps makes Christians look bad". :tongue:
 

punk09

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Posts
752
Media
337
Likes
16,524
Points
598
Location
San Francisco (California, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
In the 1990s there was a LGBT march on washington.

A het friend of ours was marching with, and he managed to snag Fred Phelps' leather covered bible from where it was laying on the sidewalk, filthy, profaned and closer to satan, RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE WHITEHOUSE!

He hands it to me, and as we march down Pennsylvania ave I rip pages from the bible, wipe it on a dog's ass, ball it up and throw it at Christian anti-gay protesters along the route.
 

CUBE

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
May 28, 2005
Posts
8,542
Media
13
Likes
7,674
Points
433
Location
The OC
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
If I was...say the devil...and wanted to make sure my name held fast ...and continue to be a destructive force on the planet. I would make up a religion and cast myself as the enemy. I mean who cares if I am the bad guy in the story so long as I am a major character within the belief system. I can get players for "the other guy" that continue to do my work of spreading hate. I think the plan has worked well with my minion Fred Phelps don't you?
 

frizzle

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Posts
1,043
Media
0
Likes
9
Points
183
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Sexuality
Pansexual
Gender
Male
OK, so who sets the limits, who decides what is free speech; the person speaking, the person listening, the government, the police.....you?

The problem with free speech is one of definition, namely that it can't easily be defined, at least not objectively.

On the subject of AH, I'm curious why you say would personally execute him, did he do something to you personally that would justify you killing him? - did he kill or hurt a member of your family, did he steal from you, or is merely being vile now a capital crime in your view?

I'm not trying to be an ass, merely trying to understand your rationale. When someone writes a comment such as that "I would personally execute..." it makes me wonder about their ability to make rational decisions. Still. that's a major reason victims of crime are not directly involved in the punishment of criminals.

This is way off topic, probably deserves a thread of its own.

The government determines free speech and it's limits, but I thought that was a given?

Anyone who feels it's fine to attack and kill every member of my country deserves to be hung by piano-wire.
 

Jovial

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Posts
2,328
Media
8
Likes
124
Points
193
Location
CA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
A bullet is too good for them. And a complete waste of money. We can only hope they may do a Jim Jones/Guyana thing and drink the Kool-Aid. I'll buy the Kool-Aid, anyone have a huge tub to make it in?
Most people don't know it was actually Flavor Aid. Make sure you get grape. Just add water and cyanide and we're good to go. :tongue:
 

camper joe

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Posts
2,744
Media
0
Likes
457
Points
193
Location
North Carolina
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
It is my understanding that most of the family members are lawyers. and that is how they avoid financial bankruptcy. ''no need to hire one to defend their actions''

I think that their efforts are more twisted than a Kansas tornado.
 

SpeedoGuy

Sexy Member
Joined
May 18, 2004
Posts
4,166
Media
7
Likes
41
Points
258
Age
60
Location
Pacific Northwest, USA
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male

It'll be interesting to see where the first amendment ends and harrassment/intimidation/invasion-of-privacy begins. I'm generally quite leery of limitations imposed on politically motivated speech but I'm not quite sure that freedom extends to obnoxious protestors with airhorns and cowbells violating noise ordinances and disrupting civil order.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
It'll be interesting to see where the first amendment ends and harrassment/intimidation/invasion-of-privacy begins. I'm generally quite leery of limitations imposed on politically motivated speech but I'm not quite sure that freedom extends to obnoxious protestors with airhorns and cowbells violating noise ordinances and disrupting civil order...
...or blocking egress?
 

edonline

LPSG Legend
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Posts
18,903
Media
23
Likes
171,038
Points
543
Location
United States
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Gay News From 365Gay.com

Phelps Clan Ordered To Pay $2.9M In Anti-Gay Military Suit
by The Associated Press
Posted: October 31, 2007 - 5:00 pm ET

(Baltimore, Maryland) A federal jury on Wednesday awarded the father of a fallen Marine $2.9 million in compensatory damages after finding an anti-gay Kansas church and three of its leaders liable for invasion of privacy and intent to inflict emotional distress for picketing the Marine's funeral in 2006.

The jury was to begin deliberating the size of punitive damages after receiving further instructions, although U.S. District Judge Richard Bennett noted the size of the compensatory award "far exceeds the net worth of the defendants," according to financial statements filed with the court.

Albert Snyder of York, Pa., sued the Westboro Baptist Church for unspecified monetary damages after members staged a demonstration at the March 2006 funeral of his son, Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq.

Church members routinely picket funerals of military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, carrying signs such as "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "God hates fags."

A number of states have passed laws regarding funeral protests, and Congress has passed a law prohibiting such protests at federal cemeteries, but the Maryland lawsuit is believed to be the first filed by the family of a fallen serviceman.

Snyder's suit named the church, its founder the Rev. Fred Phelps and his two daughters Shirley Phelps-Roper and Rebecca Phelps-Davis, 46. The jury began deliberating Tuesday after two days of testimony.

The York, Pa. man claimed the protests intruded upon what should have been a private ceremony and sullied his memory of the event.

The church members testified they are following their religious beliefs by spreading the message that the deaths of soldiers are due to the nation's tolerance of homosexuality.

Their attorneys argued in closing statements Tuesday that the burial was a public event and that even abhorrent points of view are protected by the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and religion.

The judge said the church's financial statements, sealed earlier, could be released to the plaintiffs.

Earlier, church members staged a demonstration outside the federal courthouse, which is located on a busy thoroughfare a few blocks west of Baltimore's Inner Harbor, while passing motorists honked and shouted insults.

Church founder Fred Phelps held a sign reading "God is your enemy," while his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper stood on an American flag while carrying a sign that read "God hates fag enablers." Members of the group sang "God Hates America,"' to the tune of "God Bless America."

Snyder sobbed when he heard the verdict while members of the church greeted the news with tightlipped smiles.

©365Gay.com 2007
 

Hockeytiger

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Posts
721
Media
0
Likes
306
Points
283
Location
Illinois (United States)
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Like others I am very torn on this issue. I find these demonstrations completely repugnant. However, it should be the method of the protest, not the message that should be punished. Fred Phelps and his pathetic congregation have an absolute right to be bigots. The freedom to be stupid is the most fundamental freedom we have.

I guess my concern is that they are being berated by the press, not for their methodolgy, but for their message. I ask everyone to consider this. Would you be more sympathetic to them if they were war protesters instead of anti-gay activists? When I asked myself that question, I found that I was, in fact, more sympathetic and that disturbed me.