Community Messageboard: That seems to be the case, and the basis for the "fighting words" argument. by Joel

Back to Messageboard

Post New Thread

Help

Stats

Rules

That seems to be the case, and the basis for the "fighting words" argument. Joel Send a noteboard - 13/04/2010 11:43:20 PM

I wouldn't be surprised if a fed up vet got violent with the protesters; I'm kinda surprised none has, and it's a tribute to the restraint of members of the military, but I've never seen anything to indicate the Phelpses are inciting violence against servicemen. I could see it when they protested at Matthew Shepards funeral, because that was an act of assault, torture and murder they seemed to condone. It doesn't seem like they're advocating violence against soldiers though. Perhaps an argument could be made that they're endorsing the death of soldiers, but otherwise I don't think this is on the level of shouting "FIRE!" in a theater.

Which really really sucks, but we're once again back to the principle that popular speech doesn't need protection. I hope there's some legitimate legal wrinkle here that I'm missing and the Justices won't, but I'm not optimistic.

As I stated (at length) in the Skype chat though, the 1942 SCOTUS ruling saying it's OK to arrest someone for "fighting words" puts them in the same class as words that are "lewd, obscene or profane. " Meaning that if we accept that as legitimate reason to forbid their protest on the grounds that it incites violence AGAINST them, we also have to forbid anyone walking up to Phelps and saying, "there is no God" on the grounds that it incites his violence against them. We have to forbid suggestive advertising for the same reason and the awesome T-shirt with the front reading "Even though you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat, I'll still hug your elephant" and the back that says, "and you can kiss my ass. "

Again, I'm surprised no one's beaten their heads in yet, but I think when it happens the law should be on their side. Defending the right only to speech I support isn't much of a First Amendment right.

I'm sure Ghav will be along directly to shoot holes in my legal reasoning, or TVoLT will, but until then I stand by it.

Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.

Fighting Words

This message last edited by Joel on 13/04/2010 at 11:44:03 PM

Edit 1 by Joel on 13/04/2010 at 11:44:03 PM

Reply to message

Father wages court battle against funeral protests Dominic - 13/04/2010 05:09:31 PM 546 Views

If these aren't fighting words, they don't exist. *NM* Ghavrel - 13/04/2010 05:20:19 PM 110 Views

I salute Mr. Snyder. LordPerrin - 13/04/2010 05:20:54 PM 383 Views

I've seen a docu on that church... Bramhodoulos - 13/04/2010 05:42:35 PM 279 Views

There's a special place in hell for you and your family, Mr. Phelps. Kel - 13/04/2010 05:44:03 PM 256 Views

doesn't purposefully hurtful start leading them into "illegal" waters, though? LadyLorraine - 13/04/2010 07:26:13 PM 244 Views

Ugh these people are sick. Avendesora - 13/04/2010 07:00:17 PM 241 Views

Yes they are SilverWarder - 13/04/2010 07:07:29 PM 276 Views

People, people - just collect money to get a sniper team to get rid of the Phelps family. Tom - 13/04/2010 08:22:51 PM 253 Views

See, ironically, this is the only type of violence I could reasonably expect from the protests. Joel - 13/04/2010 08:30:36 PM 237 Views

I'll donate to that envelope. *NM* Urza - 14/04/2010 12:04:32 AM 102 Views

Much as it grieves me, I have a hard time saying the protests aren't legal. Joel - 13/04/2010 08:28:28 PM 245 Views

Re: Much as it grieves me, I have a hard time saying the protests aren't legal. aria - 13/04/2010 11:27:07 PM 315 Views

That seems to be the case, and the basis for the "fighting words" argument. Joel - 13/04/2010 11:43:20 PM 291 Views

Didn't the KKK recently make a public statement saying they don't condone what Westboro is doing? lyringlas - 13/04/2010 09:37:35 PM 242 Views

I am a big fan of free speech but someone needs to just beat the shit out of these people random thoughts - 13/04/2010 10:12:43 PM 242 Views

The villain that is doing the most actual damage is getting away without a scratch. Tashmere - 13/04/2010 11:00:09 PM 311 Views

But, Tash, think of the ratings! WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE RATINGS?!!!

Joel - 13/04/2010 11:11:03 PM 242 Views

This should be legal. Urza - 14/04/2010 12:06:49 AM 247 Views

I wouldn't mind if some of those Patriot Guard Riders ran over them. *NM* everynametaken - 14/04/2010 02:00:08 AM 111 Views

Back to Messageboard

Post New Thread

Help

Stats

Rules

Reply to Message

Subject

Formatting

Smiley Codes

Body

<quote id="97825">
<quote id="97820"><quote id="97773">I wouldn't be surprised if a fed up vet got violent with the protesters; I'm kinda surprised none has, and it's a tribute to the restraint of members of the military, but I've never seen anything to indicate the Phelpses are inciting violence against servicemen.  I could see it when they protested at Matthew Shepards funeral, because that was an act of assault, torture and murder they seemed to condone.  It doesn't seem like they're advocating violence against soldiers though.  Perhaps an argument could be made that they're endorsing the death of soldiers, but otherwise I don't think this is on the level of shouting "FIRE!" in a theater.

Which really really sucks, but we're once again back to the principle that popular speech doesn't need protection.  I hope there's some legitimate legal wrinkle here that I'm missing and the Justices won't, but I'm not optimistic.</quote>

I think the violence that is being referred to is the violence that will take place against the protestors one of these days. And it will probably happen if they keep it up. I don't think anyone will feel sorry for them though, they are asking for it. </quote>
As I stated (at length) in the Skype chat though, the 1942 SCOTUS ruling saying it's OK to arrest someone for "fighting words" puts them in the same class as words that are "lewd, obscene or profane. " Meaning that if we accept that as legitimate reason to forbid their protest on the grounds that it incites violence AGAINST them, we also have to forbid anyone walking up to Phelps and saying, "there is no God" on the grounds that it incites his violence against them.  We have to forbid suggestive advertising for the same reason and the awesome T-shirt with the front reading "Even though you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat, I'll still hug your elephant" and the back that says, "and you can kiss my ass. "

Again, I'm surprised no one's beaten their heads in yet, but I think when it happens the law should be on their side.  Defending the right only to speech I support isn't much of a First Amendment right.

I'm sure Ghav will be along directly to shoot holes in my legal reasoning, or TVoLT will, but until then I stand by it. :P
</quote>

Link title

Link url

Send notification emails?

Username

Password