If they are not conducting the protest under the guidelines as defined by law, and are not on the cemetery property, how can we stop them?
Do we then also limit protests at any time around cemeteries? Or only when funeral services are being held? What if there was a protest near a cemetery that was aimed at something that was NOT the funeral service, would that count as 'invading the privacy'? These are just a few point I cam up with in about 30 seconds, I can imagine what others who are more smarter than I will come up with when given several hours or days. On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Eric Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > Not really...it is just saying that you have these right, but you cannot > interrupt funeral services while exercising it. It's further defining the > right and delineating limitations. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 1:35 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: _Speaking_of_the_Supreme_Court:_Marine's_father_ord_ere > d_to_pay_court_costs_to_Westboro_Baptist_Churc > > > it's tempting...... but it's one less right. Yanno? > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Eric Roberts > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> And that is what I am talking about...a very narrow restriction. No >> protesting funerary services. Be very clear and concise about it so that > it >> cannot be construed as anything but. >> >> Eric >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: G Money [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 10:27 AM >> To: cf-community >> Subject: Re: _Speaking_of_the_Supreme_Court:_Marine's_father_ord_ere >> d_to_pay_court_costs_to_Westboro_Baptist_Churc >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Eric Roberts < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Doesn't matter...it is a legal precedence, which makes it the law of the >>> land. Their right to free speech ends where the family's right to > privacy >>> begins. When someone is shouting slurs and other obscenities while you >> are >>> trying to mourn the death of child...yes that does get in the way. >> Freedom >>> is not without restrictions. It has restrictions because people cannot > be >>> trusted to use common sense and common courtesy...like these fucktards. >> If >>> it wasn't for people like these, we wouldn't need laws that restrict our >>> freedoms and define where there are boundaries. For most of us, those >>> boundaries are common sense boundaries. >>> >> >> The only limits on our free speech are for safety reasons, including: >> >> - Can't threaten or incite violence >> - Can't intentionally set off a panic on a false pretense where resulting >> injury is likely >> >> The westboro idiots violate every aspect of respect and good taste and >> common sense...you'll get no argument about that here...but they are very >> careful to keep their signs and speech within the limits of our freedoms. >> You are proposing a NEW limit on one of our most cherished >> freedoms....something not to consider lightly. >> >> You hinted at an argument that their brand of speech and protest could be > a >> danger to them and their surrounding communities because the likelihood of >> future violence is almost assured. There might be a valid argument for >> limiting them to be made along those lines. >> >> -- >> Everybody knows the war is over >> Everybody knows the good guys lost >> >> >> >> >> > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:314485 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
