Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Obama 2012

Free Speech Battle: Protesting At Private Funerals. - Pastor And Group Protest At Soldiers Funeral Causing 1st Amendment War.

26 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: AOS (pnd) Country: Canada
Timeline

First off, I think the protesters are disgusting...

At the same time though this is a tough one. Being as they were on public property with their protest, there's a fine line that you have to wonder if it's ok or not ok.

I don't think you can ban this kind of activity without backlash on other things as well.

Will be interesting to see how the SCOTUS rules in October...

---

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Supreme_Court/states-file-supreme-court-fred-phelps-westboro-baptist/story?id=10770402

ap_matthew_snyder_funeral_100531_mn.jpg

Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia are backing the family of fallen Marine Matthew Snyder in a pending U.S. Supreme Court case that could decide the constitutionality of laws restricting protests at private family funerals.

Lance Cpl. Snyder, who was deployed to Iraq in 2006, was killed just a month later in an accident. His funeral in Maryland was disrupted by demonstrators led by Kansas pastor Fred W. Phelps, yelling, among other things, that America's military is evil because it defends a country that tolerates homosexuality.

Snyder's family sued, but an appeals court said the hecklers were exercising their right to free speech.

Now, all but two state attorneys general have signed a "friend of the court" brief, to be filed tomorrow, that argues the First Amendment should not apply to some "intrusive and harassing" forms of expression.

"Funeral goers are a captive audience and they are engaged in a deeply personal and private mourning process," said Kansas Attorney General Steve Six, who drafted the brief. "The Constitution does not give the respondent the right to hijack solemn proceedings such as funerals in order to spread their hateful ideas."

The respondent, Phelps, has staged loud protests with members of his Westboro Baptist Church at military funerals around the country. He argues his signs, bearing messages such as "You're in hell" and "God hates you," are protected forms of speech.

Court observers called the near-universal state support for Snyder and funeral protest laws "exceptional" and say their brief will likely affect the justices when they weigh the case this fall. Only Maine and Virginia have withheld support for the "amicus curiae" brief.

But Phelps' supporters, including his daughter Megan Phelps, say the states' brief does not change the facts of the case or weaken their constitutional argument.

"The only way you can criminalize standing peacefully on a public sidewalk with Scriptural concepts on hotly-debated public issues is to repeal the 1st Amendment," said Phelps via Twitter. "They're willing to sacrifice the freedoms they claim Matt Snyder fought for on the altar of shutting up our message," she tweeted. "This opposition epitomizes why the 1st Amend. was passed: corrupt gov't trying to shut up religious messages they hate."

In a separate show of support for Snyder Friday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, filed a "friend of the court" brief joined by 42 Senators.

Senators Support Snyder in Brief Opposing Funeral Pickets

Reid has called Phelps' demonstration at the Snyder funeral an "ugly protest" and says state and federal law should "continue to protect, as it long has, the rights of all private persons -- including the families of fallen soldiers -- to mourn their loved ones at a peaceful and solemn funeral."

The Respect for America's Fallen Heroes Act, enacted by Congress and signed by President George W. Bush in May 2006, bars protesters from the property of federal cemeteries without permission and limits the duration and location of any protest approved to be performed. More than 40 states have enacted similar laws.

"In our brief to the Supreme Court, we will be arguing in part that such laws are constitutional and should be upheld," said Six. A summary of the brief provided to ABC News shows the states will argue that their "funeral picketing/protest" laws are constitutional because of an expected right to privacy at a burial and because mourners are a "captive audience" to their dead, leaving them little choice but be subjected to the message of protesters. "Parents, siblings, family, close friends, and neighbors cannot be expected to skip a loved one's funeral in order to avoid the malicious and intentionally hurtful messages the Phelpses love to use to target mourners," the summary reads.

The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case earlier this year on appeal by Albert Snyder, Lance Cpl. Snyder's father.

Snyder first sued Phelps and his congregation claiming that their protest at his son's private funeral was an invasion of the family's privacy and inflicted emotional distress. A U.S. district court ruled in Snyder's favor and awarded a judgment of $5 million. But a federal appeals court overturned that decision, finding that the protest signs weren't aimed at Snyder specifically and said the statements are "protected by the Constitution."

"We are constrained to agree that these signs are entitled to First Amendment protection," the three-judge panel wrote.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case in October.


nfrsig.jpg

The Great Canadian to Texas Transfer Timeline:

2/22/2010 - I-129F Packet Mailed

2/24/2010 - Packet Delivered to VSC

2/26/2010 - VSC Cashed Filing Fee

3/04/2010 - NOA1 Received!

8/14/2010 - Touched!

10/04/2010 - NOA2 Received!

10/25/2010 - Packet 3 Received!

02/07/2011 - Medical!

03/15/2011 - Interview in Montreal! - Approved!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What on earth is wrong with these people?

I'm surprised that it remained a peaceful protest. If I was there, and I am normally a non-violent person, it would NOT have remained peaceful. "Thank God for dead soldiers"? "God hates fags.com"? I would have been ripping that sign to pieces and tearing that bib right off of her. How dare they be so insensitive to a family's mourning. And how dare they protest a soldier because they do not agree with government policy. Despicable.


Post on Adjudicators's Field Manual re: AOS and Intent: My link
Wedding Date: 06/14/2009
POE at Pearson Airport - for a visit, did not intend to stay - 10/09/2009
Found VisaJourney and created an account - 10/19/2009

I-130 (approved as part of the CR-1 process):
Sent 10/01/2009
NOA1 10/07/2009
NOA2 02/10/2010

AOS:
NOA 05/14/2010
Interview - approved! 07/29/10 need to send in completed I-693 (doctor missed answering a couple of questions) - sent back same day
Green card received 08/20/10

ROC:
Sent 06/01/2012
Approved 02/27/2013

Green card received 05/08/2013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is actually rather simple. The funeral is private, ergo any uninvited--including Phelpsians--have no business/say about it; not First-amendment issue at all, but one of trespassing--of which Phelpsians are guilty, and should be penalised!


2005/07/10 I-129F filed for Pras

2005/11/07 I-129F approved, forwarded to NVC--to Chennai Consulate 2005/11/14

2005/12/02 Packet-3 received from Chennai

2005/12/21 Visa Interview Date

2006/04/04 Pras' entry into US at DTW

2006/04/15 Church Wedding at Novi (Detroit suburb), MI

2006/05/01 AOS Packet (I-485/I-131/I-765) filed at Chicago

2006/08/23 AP and EAD approved. Two down, 1.5 to go

2006/10/13 Pras' I-485 interview--APPROVED!

2006/10/27 Pras' conditional GC arrives -- .5 to go (2 yrs to Conditions Removal)

2008/07/21 I-751 (conditions removal) filed

2008/08/22 I-751 biometrics completed

2009/06/18 I-751 approved

2009/07/03 10-year GC received; last 0.5 done!

2009/07/23 Pras files N-400

2009/11/16 My 46TH birthday, Pras N-400 approved

2010/03/18 Pras' swear-in

---------------------------------------------------------------------

As long as the LORD's beside me, I don't care if this road ever ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: AOS (pnd) Country: Canada
Timeline

The issue is actually rather simple. The funeral is private, ergo any uninvited--including Phelpsians--have no business/say about it; not First-amendment issue at all, but one of trespassing--of which Phelpsians are guilty, and should be penalised!

They were along a public street and never stepped onto private property. It makes a difference.


nfrsig.jpg

The Great Canadian to Texas Transfer Timeline:

2/22/2010 - I-129F Packet Mailed

2/24/2010 - Packet Delivered to VSC

2/26/2010 - VSC Cashed Filing Fee

3/04/2010 - NOA1 Received!

8/14/2010 - Touched!

10/04/2010 - NOA2 Received!

10/25/2010 - Packet 3 Received!

02/07/2011 - Medical!

03/15/2011 - Interview in Montreal! - Approved!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were along a public street and never stepped onto private property. It makes a difference.

Why? Does the Constitution not apply on private property?

I did enjoy your comment about the SCOTUS. Why even have a democracy when ultimately the judicial system gets to call the shots?


According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: AOS (pnd) Country: Canada
Timeline

Why? Does the Constitution not apply on private property?

I did enjoy your comment about the SCOTUS. Why even have a democracy when ultimately the judicial system gets to call the shots?

We're not and never were supposed to be a democracy.

Actually the part of the problem (as i've mentioned plenty of times before) is the fact we've gotten away from a true representative republic that we started out as.

As far as the SCOTUS goes, their job is supposed to take and decide if something is or is not constitutional. Though this often gets bastardized as most justices these days are party hacks themselves, so it's really a game of roulette of what you're going to get for a ruling.

As far as the private property thing goes, the government has little to no say as to what goes on off of public property... Your land is your land and someone cannot encroach upon it without risk of getting their head blown off. :)

Edited by Paul and Vanessa

nfrsig.jpg

The Great Canadian to Texas Transfer Timeline:

2/22/2010 - I-129F Packet Mailed

2/24/2010 - Packet Delivered to VSC

2/26/2010 - VSC Cashed Filing Fee

3/04/2010 - NOA1 Received!

8/14/2010 - Touched!

10/04/2010 - NOA2 Received!

10/25/2010 - Packet 3 Received!

02/07/2011 - Medical!

03/15/2011 - Interview in Montreal! - Approved!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They were along a public street and never stepped onto private property. It makes a difference.
Technically, no; otherwise, apartment dwellers would NOT be able to complain about excessive noise from their neighbours (in our Balto complex, the immediate neighbours played stereo at very high volume, and slammed entrance door--such that it would actually SHAKE OUR BEDROOM WINDOW, which was "considerable distance" away). Phelpsians CAN be penalised for coming too close to private funerals.

2005/07/10 I-129F filed for Pras

2005/11/07 I-129F approved, forwarded to NVC--to Chennai Consulate 2005/11/14

2005/12/02 Packet-3 received from Chennai

2005/12/21 Visa Interview Date

2006/04/04 Pras' entry into US at DTW

2006/04/15 Church Wedding at Novi (Detroit suburb), MI

2006/05/01 AOS Packet (I-485/I-131/I-765) filed at Chicago

2006/08/23 AP and EAD approved. Two down, 1.5 to go

2006/10/13 Pras' I-485 interview--APPROVED!

2006/10/27 Pras' conditional GC arrives -- .5 to go (2 yrs to Conditions Removal)

2008/07/21 I-751 (conditions removal) filed

2008/08/22 I-751 biometrics completed

2009/06/18 I-751 approved

2009/07/03 10-year GC received; last 0.5 done!

2009/07/23 Pras files N-400

2009/11/16 My 46TH birthday, Pras N-400 approved

2010/03/18 Pras' swear-in

---------------------------------------------------------------------

As long as the LORD's beside me, I don't care if this road ever ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're not and never were supposed to be a democracy.

Actually the part of the problem (as i've mentioned plenty of times before) is the fact we've gotten away from a true representative republic that we started out as.

As far as the SCOTUS goes, their job is supposed to take and decide if something is or is not constitutional. Though this often gets bastardized as most justices these days are party hacks themselves, so it's really a game of roulette of what you're going to get for a ruling.

As far as the private property thing goes, the government has little to no say as to what goes on off of public property... Your land is your land and someone cannot encroach upon it without risk of getting their head blown off. :)

So you prefer a handful of idiots you don't even select to be in power and ultimately decide the fate of your country do you? And what a fine job they have done. Do you wonder why ever other first world country has shunned this approach to running a country?

Okay, so you live and die by and for the Constitution yet strangely enough it does not apply to private matters. Sounds logical - Noooooooottttt :lol:

Evidently, the smartest thing the youngest country ever did was not implement some broad-bushed and unchangeable bill of rights. The result speaks for itself and vice-versa. This sort of idiocy would not be permitted there period.

Edited by Booyah!

According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: AOS (pnd) Country: Canada
Timeline

Technically, no; otherwise, apartment dwellers would NOT be able to complain about excessive noise from their neighbours (in our Balto complex, the immediate neighbours played stereo at very high volume, and slammed entrance door--such that it would actually SHAKE OUR BEDROOM WINDOW, which was "considerable distance" away). Phelpsians CAN be penalised for coming too close to private funerals.

Playing loud music isn't a "free speech" issue. Arguing so is completely absurd.

Someone on a public street holding a sign in protest of government action, even if it so happens to be 'near' a private activity, is still free speech. Now if they're yelling and screaming and causing a disturbanc otherwise, then that enters into a whole other issue. So long as they're not obstructing the activity though, then there's not much of a case...

So you prefer a handful of idiots you don't even select to be in power and ultimately decide the fate of your country do you? And what a fine job they have done. Do you wonder why ever other first world country has shunned this approach to running a country?

Okay, so you live and die by and for the Constitution yet strangely enough it does not apply to private matters. Sounds logical - Noooooooottttt :lol:

Again, we've gotten away from our intended model. I've gone over this a hundred times with you. We are no where near the constitutional representative republic we are supposed to be....

There's always an inherent difference between public and private..


nfrsig.jpg

The Great Canadian to Texas Transfer Timeline:

2/22/2010 - I-129F Packet Mailed

2/24/2010 - Packet Delivered to VSC

2/26/2010 - VSC Cashed Filing Fee

3/04/2010 - NOA1 Received!

8/14/2010 - Touched!

10/04/2010 - NOA2 Received!

10/25/2010 - Packet 3 Received!

02/07/2011 - Medical!

03/15/2011 - Interview in Montreal! - Approved!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, we've gotten away from our intended model. I've gone over this a hundred times with you. We are no where near the constitutional representative republic we are supposed to be....

There's always an inherent difference between public and private..

Actually, the model you propose is similar to what is going on with the SCOTUS. Where a handful of people [supreme court] gets to decide the fate of the country based on their opinions and their personal bias towards the law. Take any law and its interpretation will change depending on someone's ideological views.

Personally, I prefer to have a say on how my country is run and any decisions that can impact the country for years to come. It's also why the government we vote into office, in countries like AUS, does not need to seek permission from their supreme court to make decisions. Thus a government for the people, by the people. Once again, the result of this speaks for itself.

Edited by Booyah!

According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline

What on earth is wrong with these people?

I'm surprised that it remained a peaceful protest. If I was there, and I am normally a non-violent person, it would NOT have remained peaceful. "Thank God for dead soldiers"? "God hates fags.com"? I would have been ripping that sign to pieces and tearing that bib right off of her. How dare they be so insensitive to a family's mourning. And how dare they protest a soldier because they do not agree with government policy. Despicable.

personally, i'd rather see a group of hell's angel's have a run in with them.


* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally, i'd rather see a group of hell's angel's have a run in with them.

Are you saying I'm not enough of a badass? :crying:

But yeah, I see your point. Plus, it would be them going to jail for assault rather than me.


Post on Adjudicators's Field Manual re: AOS and Intent: My link
Wedding Date: 06/14/2009
POE at Pearson Airport - for a visit, did not intend to stay - 10/09/2009
Found VisaJourney and created an account - 10/19/2009

I-130 (approved as part of the CR-1 process):
Sent 10/01/2009
NOA1 10/07/2009
NOA2 02/10/2010

AOS:
NOA 05/14/2010
Interview - approved! 07/29/10 need to send in completed I-693 (doctor missed answering a couple of questions) - sent back same day
Green card received 08/20/10

ROC:
Sent 06/01/2012
Approved 02/27/2013

Green card received 05/08/2013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline

Are you saying I'm not enough of a badass? :crying:

But yeah, I see your point. Plus, it would be them going to jail for assault rather than me.

what are you gonna do, peck at their ankles?


* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: AOS (pnd) Country: Benin
Timeline

It's this sort of thing that tempts me to overlook the constitution. As it is, they had a "right" to do what they did. But I don't see how it would be against the constution to make it an offense to protest within a designated distance from something like a funeral. I know we would be getting into sticky territory, but we already restrict some free speech and other rights around schools, etc. We can temporarily restrict parking and traffic for parades. And cops will overrule the traffic lights for a funeral procession. Can't we just add a restriction for this sort of thing? Or maybe not.

But there has to be some legal way to stick it to these idiots.


AOS Timeline

4/14/10 - Packet received at Chicago Lockbox at 9:22 AM (Day 1)

4/24/10 - Received hardcopy NOAs (Day 10)

5/14/10 - Biometrics taken. (Day 31)

5/29/10 - Interview letter received 6/30 at 10:30 (Day 46)

6/30/10 - Interview: 10:30 (Day 77) APPROVED!!!

6/30/10 - EAD received in the mail

7/19/10 - GC in hand! (Day 96) .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what are you gonna do, peck at their ankles?

animated-3a.gif


Post on Adjudicators's Field Manual re: AOS and Intent: My link
Wedding Date: 06/14/2009
POE at Pearson Airport - for a visit, did not intend to stay - 10/09/2009
Found VisaJourney and created an account - 10/19/2009

I-130 (approved as part of the CR-1 process):
Sent 10/01/2009
NOA1 10/07/2009
NOA2 02/10/2010

AOS:
NOA 05/14/2010
Interview - approved! 07/29/10 need to send in completed I-693 (doctor missed answering a couple of questions) - sent back same day
Green card received 08/20/10

ROC:
Sent 06/01/2012
Approved 02/27/2013

Green card received 05/08/2013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...