PDA

View Full Version : Westboro Baptist Church Wins Supreme Court Appeal Over Funeral Protests.



Ponce
3rd March 2011, 09:27 AM
The real meaning of all this is that the Zionist "Jews" cannot tell us what to think or say about them...however.....as you can see the news didn't say this but only what they want us to know.
================================================== ==============


Westboro Baptist Church Wins Supreme Court Appeal Over Funeral Protests.

MARK SHERMAN 03/ 2/11 09:34 PM

stumble WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a grieving father's pain over mocking protests at his Marine son's funeral must yield to First Amendment protections for free speech. All but one justice sided with a fundamentalist church that has stirred outrage with raucous demonstrations contending God is punishing the military for the nation's tolerance of homosexuality.

The 8-1 decision in favor of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., was the latest in a line of court rulings that, as Chief Justice John Roberts said in his opinion for the court, protects "even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate."

The decision ended a lawsuit by Albert Snyder, who sued church members for the emotional pain they caused by showing up at his son Matthew's funeral. As they have at hundreds of other funerals, the Westboro members held signs with provocative messages, 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.

Justice Samuel Alito, the lone dissenter, said Snyder wanted only to "bury his son in peace." Instead, Alito said, the protesters "brutally attacked" Matthew Snyder to attract public attention. "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.

The ruling, though, was in line with many earlier court decisions that said the First Amendment exists to protect robust debate on public issues and free expression, no matter how distasteful. A year ago, the justices struck down a federal ban on videos that show graphic violence against animals. In 1988, the court unanimously overturned a verdict for the Rev. Jerry Falwell in his libel lawsuit against Hustler magazine founder Larry Flynt over a raunchy parody ad.

What might have made this case different was that the Snyders are not celebrities or public officials but private citizens. Both Roberts and Alito agreed that the Snyders were the innocent victims of the long-running campaign by the church's pastor, the Rev. Fred Phelps, and his family members who make up most of the Westboro Baptist Church. Roberts said there was no doubt the protesters added to Albert Snyder's "already incalculable grief."

But Roberts said the frequency of the protests – and the church's practice of demonstrating against Catholics, Jews and many other groups – is an indication that Phelps and his flock were not mounting a personal attack against Snyder but expressing deeply held views on public topics.

Indeed, Matthew Snyder was not gay. But "Westboro believes that God is killing American soldiers as punishment for the nation's sinful policies," Roberts said.

"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. On the facts before us, we cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker," Roberts said.

StoryAdvertisementSnyder's reaction, at a news conference in York, Pa.: "My first thought was, eight justices don't have the common sense God gave a goat." He added, "We found out today we can no longer bury our dead in this country with dignity."

He said it was possible he would have to pay the Phelpses around $100,000, which they are seeking in legal fees, since he lost the lawsuit. The money would, in effect, finance more of the same activity he fought against, Snyder said.

Margie Phelps, a daughter of the minister and a lawyer who argued the case at the Supreme Court, said she expected the outcome. "The only surprise is that Justice Alito did not feel compelled to follow his oath," Phelps said. "We read the law. We follow the law. The only way for a different ruling is to shred the First Amendment."

She also offered her church's view of the decision. "I think it's pretty self-explanatory, but here's the core point: the wrath of God is pouring onto this land. Rather than trying to shut us up, use your platforms to tell this nation to mourn for your sins."

Veterans groups reacted to the ruling with dismay. Veterans of Foreign Wars national commander Richard L. Eubank said, "The Westboro Baptist Church may think they have won, but the VFW will continue to support community efforts to ensure no one hears their voice, because the right to free speech does not trump a family's right to mourn in private."

The picketers obeyed police instructions and stood about 1,000 feet from the Catholic church in Westminster, Md., where the funeral took place in March of 2006.

The protesters 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 assailed 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. The Supreme Court agreed.

Forty-eight states, 42 U.S. senators and veterans groups had 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 that 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

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/02/westboro-baptist-church-w_n_830209.html

Grand Master Melon
3rd March 2011, 09:35 AM
I can't believe there was even one dissenting vote. This was clear as day to me, then again we're talking about the Supreme Court so one can never really know what's going on.

Twisted Titan
3rd March 2011, 02:30 PM
John Roberts said in his opinion for the court, protects "even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate

Try and open up a debate about Isreal and see what happens.

T

mick silver
3rd March 2011, 02:34 PM
your funny T T ... DAM THAT REALLY GOT ME GOING

mightymanx
3rd March 2011, 08:43 PM
John Roberts said in his opinion for the court, protects "even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate

Try and open up a debate about Isreal and see what happens.

T


QFT

mick silver
3rd March 2011, 08:53 PM
i know they have right to do this but there a group of bikers i ride with some times and we show up there if they say there coming this way to show there asses ... we stay in the middle of this

willie pete
3rd March 2011, 08:54 PM
John Roberts said in his opinion for the court, protects "even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate

Try and open up a debate about Isreal and see what happens.

T




Well IF you do that in a LOT of European countries, you WILL be thrown in jail.....ask John Galliano,..some Brit designer that works for Christian Dior...apparently he had a little to much to drink and said (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3436757/Film-of-John-Gallianos-racist-rant-in-bar.html) somethings things he should've.... :D

Ponce
3rd March 2011, 09:23 PM
"Those" people may pick on one, two or three but they cannot pick on a nation....remember that ANYONE will do to you only what you let them do to you......some of you may think that I talk to much, well, I can only hope that someday my actions will be stronger than my words.

My sign (avatar) is still there and "those" people havent tried to do anything else for the past four years, I can only hope that they try.

Apparition
4th March 2011, 12:00 AM
Well, that's at least one reasonable decision out of that mostly worthless branch of gov't.

silver solution
4th March 2011, 01:35 AM
"Those" people may pick on one, two or three but they cannot pick on a nation....remember that ANYONE will do to you only what you let them do to you......some of you may think that I talk to much, well, I can only hope that someday my actions will be stronger than my words.

My sign (avatar) is still there and "those" people havent tried to do anything else for the past four years, I can only hope that they try.
Ponce I don't get your avatar?

You live in one of the nations that make up the Commonwealth, multitude of nations that is Israel.

The little nation in the middle east is NOT Israel!! At best it the little kingdom of Judea.

You live in Israel. If you don't get this, read the Bible, study it and pray for wisdom. One is never too old to learn.

Hillbilly
4th March 2011, 02:07 AM
This is a very bittersweet situation. I'm glad the supreme court held up the first amendment but it's really sad that people are being so cruel to the families of fallen soldiers.

This was a big one though and they really committed them selves to the first amendment on this one so I can't see anyone coming along any time soon with some bullshit anti first amendment case and winning now, thank God.

Ponce
4th March 2011, 06:46 AM
Silver Solution.......... "NO USRael" means that the Zionist from the state of Israel have to much influence on the US government and that I don't want them to become part of the US...........as we all know they are now part of the US but not with the power needed to have their flag nex to ours above the White House.

About the Bible?.....I'd better say nothing.