Wesboro maggots get to keep thier livelihood

[Jess from VA]

This decision is probably what it should be.  The First amendment is important, and carving out an exception is an uphill battle.  PGR will remain in business.

8-1 (with Alito dissenting).

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_FUNERAL_PROTESTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-03-02-10-27-23

[old2soon]

   just bcuz the highest court in the land says it's o-k don't mean i have to accept this. They also said it's o-k to burn the american flag-YOU REALLY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT AROUND ME. Nuff said.  Ride Safe.

[Jack]

Lotta bad feelings toward this but I agree with freedom of speech.  To me, what they are doing is just as bad, if not worse, than using the infamous N-word or calling other names to folk.  It still calls for a arse whooping.

[R J]

Yeah but these so called ass whompin's is how they keep $$$$$ in their pocket.

[Bobbo]

   just bcuz the highest court in the land says it's o-k don't mean i have to accept this. They also said it's o-k to burn the american flag-YOU REALLY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT AROUND ME. Nuff said.  Ride Safe.

The ruling doesn't mean our highest court encourages this behavior, just that they are protected from prosecution under our Constitution.

If you are offended, and puff your chest in opposition, you are only playing into their hand and feeding their desire to continue this attention-getting charade.

Once they realize that no one is listening, and they have no legal or monetary gain from these protests, then they will stop.

[R J]

   just bcuz the highest court in the land says it's o-k don't mean i have to accept this. They also said it's o-k to burn the american flag-YOU REALLY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT AROUND ME. Nuff said.  Ride Safe.

The ruling doesn't mean our highest court encourages this behavior, just that they are protected from prosecution under our Constitution.

If you are offended, and puff your chest in opposition, you are only playing into their hand and feeding their desire to continue this attention-getting charade.

Once they realize that no one is listening, and they have no legal or monetary gain from these protests, then they will stop.

Keep dreaming Bobbo.   The PGR in Iowa has ignored them now for a year.  Same goes for the families and the press.   They still show up in hopes of pissing someone off so they can sue them.  That is how they make their living.

[Bobbo]

   just bcuz the highest court in the land says it's o-k don't mean i have to accept this. They also said it's o-k to burn the american flag-YOU REALLY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT AROUND ME. Nuff said.  Ride Safe.

The ruling doesn't mean our highest court encourages this behavior, just that they are protected from prosecution under our Constitution.

If you are offended, and puff your chest in opposition, you are only playing into their hand and feeding their desire to continue this attention-getting charade.

Once they realize that no one is listening, and they have no legal or monetary gain from these protests, then they will stop.

Keep dreaming Bobbo.   The PGR in Iowa has ignored them now for a year.  Same goes for the families and the press.   They still show up in hopes of pissing someone off so they can sue them.  That is how they make their living.

How will they make money if no one is "pissed off"?

[Bob E.]

I have no problems with freedom of speech and I have no problems with this crazy church holding protests.  But I do have a problem with them creating a disturbance at what should be a private gathering of mourners.  I read an article a while back about this where there was a ruling that funerals were considered public events and this is why their right to protest at funerals could not be infringed upon.  I just do not agree with that ruling.  Funerals should be considered private ceremonies and therefore uninvited/unwelcome "guests" should be asked to leave, and forced to leave with legal penalties upon refusal. There is a difference between freedom of speech and harassment/intimidation.  If they want to protest the gays, war and the US gov't, then they should hold their protests at more appropriate locations.

[Bobbo]

I have no problems with freedom of speech and I have no problems with this crazy church holding protests.  But I do have a problem with them creating a disturbance at what should be a private gathering of mourners.  I read an article a while back about this where there was a ruling that funerals were considered public events and this is why their right to protest at funerals could not be infringed upon.  I just do not agree with that ruling.  Funerals should be considered private ceremonies and therefore uninvited/unwelcome "guests" should be asked to leave, and forced to leave with legal penalties upon refusal. There is a difference between freedom of speech and harassment/intimidation.  If they want to protest the gays, war and the US gov't, then they should hold their protests at more appropriate locations.

I don't think the ruling had as much to do with funerals being public events, as it did with allowing them to protest on public land.  Harassment has to be specific, not general statements as WBC is careful to make. 

[Chrisj CMA]

Think about it people.........If they can "legally" stop these whackos.  I dont say that lightly they are whack jobs them westboro folks, then none of us could participate in things like the TEA party.  Or even ABATE organizing on the capitol steps without someone suing to stop us.  Kinda like gun control, you try to ban what MAYBE a good intentioned lawmaker thought was a dangerous assault rifle, and the end result is a massive gun ban and registration/confiscation wave across the country.

Let the weirdos have their say, its what makes our country great.  YOU CAN SAY WHAT YOU WANT