|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
Cyberqat Inner circle You can tell I work on the net from my 2209 Posts |
I actually have dithered for a long time between having two different bumper stickers made:
"God hates hate" and "God hates is an oxymoron." I prefer the second but I'm afraid the people who need to read it wouldn't understand it. In any event, Whackos like this were best described in one of the few noteworthy pieces of text in "Inherit the Wind" that wasn't lifted directly from the transcripts of the Scopes Monkey Trial. Quote: Something happens to an Also-Ran.
It is always darkest just before you are eaten by a grue.
|
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
How about "God is p*ssed off at Rev Phelps, but is cool with homosexuality"?
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
critter Inner circle Spokane, WA 2653 Posts |
How about: "God voted for Adam Lambert."
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
What about "god IS gay."
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-10-22 12:24, Chrystal wrote: I agree that is at least one place they should be banned from and arrested if they show up. What is the point of protesting at at a funeral? There isn't one except for showing how uneducated such protesters are. As for the question that was asked if they could be sued for sexual harassment? Of course they could be sued for that. I don't know if anyone has tried as of this time. |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
The password is: Abuse of Process
I'd be surprised if there was a statute under which anything remotely resembling a valid cause of action for sexual harassment could be brought. But state laws vary, and I've been surprised before.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-10-22 13:54, gdw wrote: Maybe Gaiety is next to Godliness.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
Quote:
gdw wrote: Ah, but do you live near where you love?
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
balducci Loyal user Canada 227 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-10-22 11:18, EsnRedshirt wrote: Phelps himself is a disbarred lawyer, at least in certain jurisdictions (e.g., Kansas). And as part of a settlement, he agreed to stop practicing in Federal court. "The family's law firm continues to operate. Of Phelps' children, all adults, at least 11 are lawyers, and several work for the family firm." http://www.nndb.com/people/908/000025833/ Some of the following may be out of date, but it does indicate that many of the Phelps do have / have had regular jobs. As I recall, the Theroux documentary had a segment with one daughter talking about her day job. Father: Fred Wade Phelps (railroad security officer, d. 14-Oct-1977) Mother: Catherine Idalette Johnston (housewife, d. 3-Sep-1935) Mother: Olive Briggs (stepmother, m. 1944, d. 29-June-1985) Sister: Martha Jean Capron (retired missionary, estranged from Phelps family) Wife: Margie Marie Simms (m. 15-May-1952, thirteen children) Son: Fred Phelps, Jr. (lawyer, employed by Kansas Department of Corrections) Son: Mark Phelps (business executive, estranged from Phelps family) Daughter: Katherine Phelps (lawyer, license to practice law suspended, estranged from Phelps family) Daughter: Margie Phelps (lawyer, employed by Kansas Department of Corrections) Daughter: Shirley Phelps-Roper (lawyer) Son: Nathan Phelps ("Nate", gay rights and atheist activist, estranged from Phelps family) Son: Jonathon B. Phelps (lawyer) Daughter: Rebekah Phelps-Davis (lawyer) Daughter: Elizabeth Phelps (lawyer, works at homeless shelter) Son: Timothy Phelps (lawyer, employed by Shawnee County Department of Corrections) Daughter: Dorotha Bird (lawyer, estranged from Phelps family) Daughter: Rachel Phelps (lawyer) Daughter: Abigail Phelps (lawyer)
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
|
|||||||||
MagicSanta Inner circle Northern Nevada 5841 Posts |
They hate Ireland? What an odd group. They think God hates the US and thus kills servicemen and women because gays exist? At least ol' Nate seems rational.
|
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-10-22 15:43, landmark wrote: Lol, stupid phone auto correct spelling.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
Chrystal Inner circle Canada/France 1552 Posts |
These guys neutralize the haters. They now have 100,000 members and are being asked by families to attend funerals. They shield the families with flags and block the views of the Phelps family by standing shoulder to shoulder.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwigMTjup70&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwigMTjup70&feature=related |
|||||||||
hou_dini Regular user 103 Posts |
OK, I'm gonna take a hit for this----Phelps and his ilk have the right to express their opinion(s). That's guaranteed in the Constitution. Legal? Yes. Moral? Many think not. For the record, I find Phelps and his actions to be abhorrent. But I defend his right to say what he says. As for the Patriot Guard, this group bothers me in that they seek to prevent certain groups from the exercise of free speech. Take away anyone's right to free speech and you take away mine.
That's why earlier I stated that the best way to deal with Phelps is to igniore him and his actions. Do not give him a forum, audience, publicity, or platform to spread his brand of hate. Once there is no attention, press, interest, etc. these and their ilk tend to slowly evaporate. It workred in Skokie IL with the KKK, it can work against Phelps also. By the way, I am a combat veteran and everyone can come party at my funeral. I won't be physically there to care. |
|||||||||
Chrystal Inner circle Canada/France 1552 Posts |
Hi Houdini,
I have to disagree with you as the Patriot Guards aren't all all preventing the Phelps from free speech at all. They are still there spewing their hate but the families at funerals are shielded from seeing them or hearing them. Regarding your funeral Houdini, you may not be there , but your Mama would be. She doesn't need any more pain or hear things screamed at her by hate mongers. In a way, this isn't the outcome the Phelps family wanted - soldiers, bikers and civilians turning their back against them and standing united. I think that's poetic justice. The families are inviting the Patriot Guards to attend the funerals. I may not believe in the war, nor am I American but I'm still appalled at their behavior and signage. However, the focus in now on the fallen soldier and paying respects and not the Phelps. On another note, one news story recently said that the father of the first funeral the Phelps family interrupted has successfully sued for 10.4 million. They also have to keep a certain distance away from other funerals. |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-10-22 17:27, hou_dini wrote: The question isn't whether they have a right to express their opinion; it's where and when they have the right to express it. Does your support extend to letting them come into your house whenever they want to hold forth on their views?
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-10-22 18:36, LobowolfXXX wrote: They have a right to say what they want, but they don't have a right to BE where they want, when it comes to private property.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
Micheal Leath Inner circle 1048 Posts |
Yes they have the right to say whatever they want. They are however complete morons. I'm an atheist, but if I believed in hell, then that is where I would hope they burned for eternity.
The Patriot Guards are not infringing on their free speech because the Patriot Guards are not a part of the government. It would only be a free speech violation if it was the government stopping them. Though even if the government tried to stop them, then I'm not sure it should be a violation of free speech. Freedom of speech does have it's limitations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_......f_speech |
|||||||||
critter Inner circle Spokane, WA 2653 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-10-22 17:27, hou_dini wrote: The KKK lost most of their steam in Idaho after a huge property seizure and other legal actions taken by a government NOT ignoring them. And the supreme court has ruled in other KKK related cases that hate speech that can be considered "fighting words" is not protected by the first amendment. So, no, Westboro does not have the right to show up on the private property where a funeral is held carrying a sign that says "YOUR SON IS IN HELL" (that is an actual sign they use,) because "Them's fightin' words!" However, as others have noted, the Patriot Guard Riders do not stop any protesters from expressing their opinion, they just provide the barricade to protect the families from having to see that in their time of grief. Such intent to cause emotional distress could easily be classified as "verbal assault" as well, because they sing hate songs and chant in addition to their printed signs (libel? Not sure on that one.)
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-10-22 19:18, Micheal Leath wrote: You know, the idea of "limitation on freedom of speech" all ways bugged me. Especially when they try to cite what is being called the "harm principle." From wikipedia: "However, [John Stuart] Mill also introduced what is known as the harm principle, in placing the following limitation on free expression: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others." I would argue that is being taken out of context to support infringing on one's speech. Placing the quote in context at least shows the principle Mill was starting with. "That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant." Now, Mill himself did try to extend this to speech, essentially pertaining to "inciting" others. This is, however, fallacious. "He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right... The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign." If this is to be considered true, and a person is considered to have absolute sovereignty over him(her)self, then how can another be blamed for his actions? This is exactly what they attempt to do by arguing that a limit can be placed on free speech based upon incitement. It is to blame the speaker for the actions of the mob. This is, as I said, to hold one liable for the sovereign actions of another, which is in direct conflict with what is initially being argued. At least that's my opinion.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-10-22 21:48, gdw wrote: I agree.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Westboro: Why you gotta' be hatin'? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |