Is there a discussion on Fred Phelps going on here?

[leftyladyfrommo]

His case is going to the Supreme Court. This should be good.

Big article in the KC Star this morning.

Good ole Fred is the one that has been picketing funerals. First he picketed funerals of gay men that had died of Aids. Now its military deaths.

So just how far can you push the argument for free speech?

[SteppingRazor]

1. Well, it's already accepted law that you can't yell fire in a crowded theater...

so I guess my question is whether these protests are tantamount to doing just that. And given that there is YouTube video out there of Phelps and his crew just barely escaping a protest without being seriously hurt by irate funeral-goers, I think you could certainly make the case that these protests do not pass the test.

[leftyladyfrommo]

3. Well, and they are emotionally devastating to the families of these people.

Losing a family member for any reason is awful. Then to go to the funeral and have a bunch of crazies with horrible signs with things like "God Hates Fags" or whatever on them with those self same crazies yelling awful things on bullhorns. I just can't imagine.

The only thing that would be worse is going to have an abortion and being faced with these same crazy people screaming in your face.

I don't think Phelps is crazy at all. I think he is just plain hateful clear to his core.

[SteppingRazor]

9. I agree it's pretty damn horrific, but...

I don't know that that alone is reason for it not to be considered free speech. Think about all the other emotionally scarring stuff that passes for free speech -- your abortion reference, plus white-supremacist rallies and so on and so on. The emotional damage caused by the event hasn't been enough to quash free speech in the past, so I don't think the SCOTUS will buy an argument along those lines.

(Mind you, I say that with sincere sympathy for the families of all the soldiers, gay men and woman, and others whose funerals have been brutalized by these "people.")

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

6. The concern with yelling fire is not injury to the yeller

Arguing against speech because it might provoke people to hit the speaker is somewhat different.

In any event, there is no question here of whether Phelps is protected by the First Amendment.

He can do the protests.

The case involves a *civil suit* for damages.

[SteppingRazor]

10. Granted, but one could argue that Phelps protests are an incitement to riot.

That YouTube video looks like nothing but. And there's also the question of the various laws that have been passed specifically addressing the Phelps crowd. Several states have passed laws banning protests at the funerals of soldiers.

All that said, from what you say, none of these questions will necessarily be addressed by the court.


On edit: Just for fun, here's the language of New York state's Penal Law regarding incitement to riot, which is pretty similar to language in most states: "A person is guilty of inciting to riot when he urges ten or more persons to engage in tumultuous and violent conduct of a kind likely to create public alarm."

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

2. It isn't exactly about "the argument for free speech"

This case involves a civil lawsuit against Phelps. It has legal nuances about what you can sue people over and how that relates to some rights issues..

It it were a straightforward First Amendment case about a government ban on the Phelps protesters Phelps would win (And being a vanilla speech and assembly case the SCOTUS wouldn't bother hearing it.)

[Ian David]

4. Here, let me google that for you

Here, let me google that for you
http://tinyurl.com/ya5vehl

[HopeHoops]

5. There is now.

[annabanana]

7. They are welcome to their hate speech, as long as others are allowed

their MOCK speech:

[Turbineguy]

8. Phelps excercises his right to free speech.

The funeral goers should exercise their brass knuckles.

Actually as I've had it explained to me, the Constitution determines the citizens' relationship with the government. But this has been expanded to help Larry Flynt and people who run titty bars.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

11. OMG!

I didn't know how out of hand this free speech thing had gotten.

Something that is meant to determine a citizens' relationship with the government has been perverted to determine a citizens' (Larry Flynt) relationship with the Government (the government).

Thanks for sounding this needed alarm.

Bonus points for self-righteousness while encouraging commission of violent felonies.

[Turbineguy]

12. Sheesh!

I forgot the :sarcasm: smilie.

[NeedleCast]

13. I know you're being sarcastic

but that's exactly what the Phelps clan wants and why half of them are lawyers...they want to file suits. I really don't think Phelps family has any real religious ideology that isn't being used as a cover to be assholes, so they can file lawsuits and get paid. They've been doing that sort of thing a lot longer than they've been a religious cult.