|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 3:51 pm
I'm not so much asking if you agree with their views on Christianity (partially because, considering their stance on wrestling, it would be conflicting ideals), but more so on the issue of free speech. The WBC is very outspoken and volatile and are mostly famous for boycotting funerals of military men (especially gay military men) and churches they disagree with. While these people are pretty much the scum of the earth, their freedom of speech is covered by the US Constitution. What are your views on this?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 3:57 pm
They have the right to say whatever they please.
That same right is given to me to call Phelps "Cuntsworth ********".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 4:10 pm
Dion Necurat They have the right to say whatever they please.
That same right is given to me to call Phelps "Cuntsworth ******** class="clear"> While I agree that they're to have an open forum to express their views, I do question the legality of them being allowed to inflict several emotional distress on the loved ones of deceased service men and women and for interrupting church services over a "my imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend" dispute. And it comes down to a conflict of rights. We have the right to the freedom of speech and public assembly, yes, but we also have the right to choose and practice our own religion without persecution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 6:29 pm
As long as they don't bug me, I don't give a crap. Freedom of speech is freedom, nothing can be done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:14 pm
kevin3485 Dion Necurat They have the right to say whatever they please.
That same right is given to me to call Phelps "Cuntsworth ******** class="clear"> While I agree that they're to have an open forum to express their views, I do question the legality of them being allowed to inflict several emotional distress on the loved ones of deceased service men and women and for interrupting church services over a "my imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend" dispute. And it comes down to a conflict of rights. We have the right to the freedom of speech and public assembly, yes, but we also have the right to choose and practice our own religion without persecution. People do have the right to a private funeral, yes; however, there is no right defending people from getting their feelings hurt. Hell, its why Hogan hasn't been taken off the air; he makes us feel bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:30 pm
Dion Necurat kevin3485 Dion Necurat They have the right to say whatever they please.
That same right is given to me to call Phelps "Cuntsworth ******** class="clear"> While I agree that they're to have an open forum to express their views, I do question the legality of them being allowed to inflict several emotional distress on the loved ones of deceased service men and women and for interrupting church services over a "my imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend" dispute. And it comes down to a conflict of rights. We have the right to the freedom of speech and public assembly, yes, but we also have the right to choose and practice our own religion without persecution. People do have the right to a private funeral, yes; however, there is no right defending people from getting their feelings hurt. Hell, its why Hogan hasn't been taken off the air; he makes us feel bad. Still, since the major majority of funeral processions are religious in nature, it is technically infringing upon their right to practice their own religion without persecution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:32 pm
kevin3485 Dion Necurat kevin3485 Dion Necurat They have the right to say whatever they please.
That same right is given to me to call Phelps "Cuntsworth ******** class="clear"> While I agree that they're to have an open forum to express their views, I do question the legality of them being allowed to inflict several emotional distress on the loved ones of deceased service men and women and for interrupting church services over a "my imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend" dispute. And it comes down to a conflict of rights. We have the right to the freedom of speech and public assembly, yes, but we also have the right to choose and practice our own religion without persecution. People do have the right to a private funeral, yes; however, there is no right defending people from getting their feelings hurt. Hell, its why Hogan hasn't been taken off the air; he makes us feel bad. Still, since the major majority of funeral processions are religious in nature, it is technically infringing upon their right to practice their own religion without persecution. That would be the case if WBC were targeting their religious viewpoints as opposed to simply protesting the war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:45 pm
Dion Necurat kevin3485 Dion Necurat kevin3485 Dion Necurat They have the right to say whatever they please.
That same right is given to me to call Phelps "Cuntsworth ******** class="clear"> While I agree that they're to have an open forum to express their views, I do question the legality of them being allowed to inflict several emotional distress on the loved ones of deceased service men and women and for interrupting church services over a "my imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend" dispute. And it comes down to a conflict of rights. We have the right to the freedom of speech and public assembly, yes, but we also have the right to choose and practice our own religion without persecution. People do have the right to a private funeral, yes; however, there is no right defending people from getting their feelings hurt. Hell, its why Hogan hasn't been taken off the air; he makes us feel bad. Still, since the major majority of funeral processions are religious in nature, it is technically infringing upon their right to practice their own religion without persecution. That would be the case if WBC were targeting their religious viewpoints as opposed to simply protesting the war. Protesting the war is understandable, but this isn't protesting the war, at least not in its practice. Targeting funerals and churches does nothing to stop the war...especially when they're encouraging the deaths of more soldiers. The entire thing is religious based, and while they have the right to practice their religion, they don't have the right to persecute others for theirs (which they are).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:58 pm
kevin3485 Dion Necurat kevin3485 Dion Necurat kevin3485 Dion Necurat They have the right to say whatever they please.
That same right is given to me to call Phelps "Cuntsworth ******** class="clear"> While I agree that they're to have an open forum to express their views, I do question the legality of them being allowed to inflict several emotional distress on the loved ones of deceased service men and women and for interrupting church services over a "my imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend" dispute. And it comes down to a conflict of rights. We have the right to the freedom of speech and public assembly, yes, but we also have the right to choose and practice our own religion without persecution. People do have the right to a private funeral, yes; however, there is no right defending people from getting their feelings hurt. Hell, its why Hogan hasn't been taken off the air; he makes us feel bad. Still, since the major majority of funeral processions are religious in nature, it is technically infringing upon their right to practice their own religion without persecution. That would be the case if WBC were targeting their religious viewpoints as opposed to simply protesting the war. Protesting the war is understandable, but this isn't protesting the war, at least not in its practice. Targeting funerals and churches does nothing to stop the war...especially when they're encouraging the deaths of more soldiers. The entire thing is religious based, and while they have the right to practice their religion, they don't have the right to persecute others for theirs (which they are). To be fair, they aren't a religion. They are a church by name alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:00 pm
Dion Necurat kevin3485 Dion Necurat kevin3485 Dion Necurat People do have the right to a private funeral, yes; however, there is no right defending people from getting their feelings hurt. Hell, its why Hogan hasn't been taken off the air; he makes us feel bad. Still, since the major majority of funeral processions are religious in nature, it is technically infringing upon their right to practice their own religion without persecution. That would be the case if WBC were targeting their religious viewpoints as opposed to simply protesting the war. Protesting the war is understandable, but this isn't protesting the war, at least not in its practice. Targeting funerals and churches does nothing to stop the war...especially when they're encouraging the deaths of more soldiers. The entire thing is religious based, and while they have the right to practice their religion, they don't have the right to persecute others for theirs (which they are). To be fair, they aren't a religion. They are a church by name alone. Honestly, I say all churches are cults anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
