Westboro Baptist

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

they also haven't ruled on slavery recently, randall.

i like the idea of the justices sitting around deciding which cases to take based on the fact they haven't done it in a while. "yeah, it's settled law and there's nothing for us to add but it's been 150 years dude!"

that's not the way it's done though. they have a point to make. we'll find out what it is.

Not really. Again, when the court has changed virtually every member in the past 20 years, they do often look back at similar cases...yes things are different mainly b/c the internet is different. But to believe they will censor blog criticisms is not going to happen....Plus he was searching a month after the funeral when he saw the post. The two really shouldn't be connected at all.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Not really. Again, when the court has changed virtually every member in the past 20 years, they do often look back at similar cases...yes things are different mainly b/c the internet is different. But to believe they will censor blog criticisms is not going to happen....Plus he was searching a month after the funeral when he saw the post. The two really shouldn't be connected at all.

do they look back at similar cases and leave them intact?

i'm not suggesting which way this goes but it's going to be either an expansion of falwell vs. flynt so that it also apply to individuals who aren't public figures or it's going to place some limits on speech.

or they may move the line on what defines a "public figure"

what they aren't going to do is nothing which is what your "i can't believe anyone is even debating this" opening and "sometimes they like to do the same thing again just for the hell of it." suggests.

there's a reason they took the case.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

do they look back at similar cases and leave them intact?

i'm not suggesting which way this goes but it's going to be either an expansion of falwell vs. flynt so that it also apply to individuals who aren't public figures or it's going to place some limits on speech.

or they may move the line on what defines a "public figure"

what they aren't going to do is nothing which is what your "i can't believe anyone is even debating this" opening and "sometimes they just like do the same thing again just for the hell of it." suggests.

there's a reason they took the case.

To me it isn't debatable which is why I chose to portray it that way...Now they surely took it for a reason and as I said already part of that reason could be "internet speech" but also this kind of protest at funerals is not something that used to happen. We will wait and see rather than talk passed each other.

[hi_im_god]

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arg...pts/09-751.pdf

some light reading.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arg...pts/09-751.pdf

some light reading.

Cool reading

If there are 2 votes against the freak Church, I'll be surprised

[chucklestheclown]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Cool reading

If there are 2 votes against the freak Church, I'll be surprised

My attention span would not let me read very much. But I think God wins this one Randall.

[randallscott35]

As usual. I am right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/us/03scotus.html?hp

[Nascar1966]

Because of ignorant people like these there should be a draft. Maybe then they will realize how good they have it. Its a shame you have people like these who have no respect for the dead, especially for a dead person who gave up thier life for our country.

Originally Posted by Nascar1966

Because of ignorant people like these there should be a draft. Maybe then they will realize how good they have it. Its a shame you have people like these who have no respect for the dead, especially for a dead person who gave up thier life for our country.

The majority of them are too old and genetically challenged to be drafted. Should just pick them up and drop them off in the desert with no supplies.

[Nascar1966]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

The majority of them are too old and genetically challenged to be drafted. Should just pick them up and drop them off in the desert with no supplies.

Maybe the above should also apply to the illegals. Lets also put them in the desert without supplies.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Nascar1966

Maybe the above should also apply to the illegals. Lets also put them in the desert without supplies.

You mean like what happens right now?

Seriously: why don't you read up a little on the subjects you so like to hate?

Here, you can read only the first paragraph:

http://www.newser.com/story/102284/r...n-arizona.html

Record Number of Illegals Found Dead In Arizona

(Newser) – Authorities have found the bodies of 252 illegal immigrants in the Arizona desert this year, an all-time high—even though the number of people crossing illegally is down. That’s in part because increased border security has driven would-be crossers to ever more remote and dangerous routes, NPR explains, and in part because Border Patrol simply has more people looking. “We’re getting more skeletal remains,” says one local medical examiner. “There’s greater presence out there by the Border Patrol and whoever, and they’re finding more people who’ve been out there for awhile.”

[SOREHOOF]

Back to the point. Supreme Court or not, if that was my son's, or brother's, or daughter's, or sister's, or friend's funeral someone would be laying bleeding in the gutter clinging to the last thread of life with a God hates fags sign sticking out of their you know what. Then I'd be on trial.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Nascar1966

Because of ignorant people like these there should be a draft. Maybe then they will realize how good they have it. Its a shame you have people like these who have no respect for the dead, especially for a dead person who gave up thier life for our country.

Hey, if you can get them drafted, I am now protected (according to today's ruling) in my right to hold up a sign saying "God loves dead Westboro Baptists."

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Hey, if you can get them drafted, I am now protected (according to today's ruling) in my right to hold up a sign saying "God loves dead Westboro Baptists."

No, Joey, you've always been protected with freedom of speech. That is not a new thing starting today.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

No, Joey, you've always been protected with freedom of speech. That is not a new thing starting today.

I know that -- I was joking. Of course, should violence break out when the Westboro Baptists meet supporters of the military, which side gets charged with a hate crime?