I saw this on the Nightly News yesterday. Really loved the woman with the t-shirt reading "godhatesfags.com." Always classy, those Westboro Baptists. Now, one entire side of my family is Southern Baptist, so I've witnessed some intolerance that's nigh-on hate from some of my more close-minded distant relatives and their friends. But I guarantee you any one of them would come to blows with anyone who would "protest" at a funeral, much less a military funeral.

Church members believe that American deaths overseas are God's vengeance for our immorality, including the country's tolerance for gays.

So, nobody bought that it was the gays' fault for 9/11 and the South Asian tsunami (remember Thank God for 9/11 and Thank God for Dead Swedes?), so now it's the dead soldiers' blood on their hands. Awful, awful, awful.

I was actually watching this with my parents, and my mom had a great observation: what, precisely, are they protesting? Because they call themselves protesters. But the soldier is already dead and back on American soil. What are you expecting to happen? If you want to picket the dead, get your ass on a plane to Iraq and other countries where the soldiers are actually dying. See what happens. I dare you.

I'll add my apologies to the families of Snyder and others. I, too am grateful for your children's service to our country, and you absolutely do not deserve this.

> See what happens. I dare you.

Reynolds had a great post along these lines on Tuesday, about the importance of choosing the correct targets. Much of American life nowadays seems to be more about saying daring and outrageous things to the mommy and daddy figures in your life, which is not the same thing as courage.

A comedian used to make a joke about that... How pissminded PETA types would rather throw blood on the mink stoles of Beverly Hills matrons than the leather jackets of the Hell's Angels.

I saw an interesting write-up by some lawyer (didn't seem famous to me) about how the fourth circurit's ruling could really screw up some existing laws. Mainly it is harrassment laws. I cannot seem to google it up and my usual computer is down (I think I have a link saved).

The Faldwell v Hustler case hung on the fact that Faldwell was a publically recognised (religious celebrity) figure by his own choice and Hulter wanst harassing him but using him as a parody only after he had targeted the magazine.

Totally differnt situation.

Typo: I meant choosing the correct targets.

(There's a lot of good stuff in there, including Amy's continuing bondage to the foolishness of her age as regards sexuality, and some chat about the tendency of children to taunt each other, as in the Rutgers case last week.)

I found out a while back that the head of the Westboro church unsuccessfully ran for office several times--as a Democrat.

I'm not trying to tarnish Democrats with that statement. Both left and right are united in outrage of the Westboro actions. However, the group has consistently been portrayed as far-right, so I found the head's associations as interesting.

People should start 'protesting' at the funerals of family members of Fred Phelp's church goers. Might be the only thing that would bring them up short...

Disturbing peoples' events for the sake of disturbing someone should be akin to disturbing the peace.

People should start 'protesting' at the funerals of family members of Fred Phelp's church goers. Might be the only thing that would bring them up short...

Or it might not, but I like the idea!

Disturbing peoples' events for the sake of disturbing someone should be akin to disturbing the peace..

Yes and then that would bring the law into the situation. I agree that if this were the case, that the creeps picketing the funeral were disturbing the peace, and that becomes a valid ruling, then they should be arrested for just that. Court case, fines imposed, etc. There is no validity to picketing a funeral for any reason, and especially not to picket the funeral of someone you don't even know, in order to further your own hateful agenda. These people are sick.

Allow me to add my heartfelt condolences and apologies to the Snyders and other families who have been subjected to this madness. It has to stop.

I have been hearing about these people for a year or so and have such a loathing for them that I hope the supreme court sees it as some sort of harassment, or disturbing the peace, or some kind of charge. Just becausse they have the right to pull these stunts doesn't make it morally right. There are lots of places for people to make their opinions known, no matter how bigoted and stupid they may be; a funeral is not the place. Crella may be right, that the only thing to stop them would be a protest at a churchgoer's loved one's funeral. Unfortunately, that only brings people down to the level of the churchgoers.

I don't think that these people would be affected by a counter-protest at one-of-their-own's funeral. They will just enjoy the attention that they get from it. They are the worst kind of trolls and as long as people are paying attention to them, they will continue. The fact that this is getting all of this media play and getting interviews on NPR, they're going to keep it up.

It makes my blood boil that these pathetic hate-mongers get away with what they do. Ya... I get the free speech thing... Say what you want. It's your right.

But the families of the fallen soldiers have a right not to be harassed, even at 1000 feet. They have a right to grieve in peace. Can we stop focusing on their first amendment rights and look a little harder at finding other laws that they are breaking that we can make stick on these skeezbags?

How can we not only remove the reward (publicity), while providing disincentives for them to do this. Can we stay within the law and make life miserable for these people?

We need to look at the money -- where they are getting it, what they are doing with it. I bet there's something in their finances that would stick.

These trolls are coming to Coeur D Alene in a few weeks to protest a play at our local college about Matthew Shepard. The police and local government are simply asking the locals to completely ignore them, no protesting.

Ignoring the Westboro fools might be a good plan. But I've enjoyed some of the recent mockery of them.

http://www.eatliver.com/i.php?n=5317

The First Amendment protects them from FEDERAL law. It does not protect them from State, County, City, or other local jurisdictions.

Far too many people have forgotten this.

Has anyone ever thought of putting up a great big "FRED PHELPS IS A FAG" billboard in Topeka? Heterosexual men are obsessed with women. Any adult man so pathologically obsessed with gay sex has got to be gay. Freedom can and should be used against those who abuse it.

The First Amendment protects them from FEDERAL law. It does not protect them from State, County, City, or other local jurisdictions.

It is also pretty binding on these jurisdictions, in case you haven't been paying attention. 14th Amendment, section 1.

It is also pretty binding on these jurisdictions, in case you haven't been paying attention. 14th Amendment, section 1.

I'm not very big on judicial precedent, because it sets us up for continuation of bad interpretations of the law. The 14th Amendment was never intended to force Federal limitations on the States.

In case I was not completely clear on that response, let me add:

The reason the First Amendment is particularly limited to the Federal Government is because it specifies so in its text, where it says, "Congress shall make no law...". This is different from other Amendments, such as the Second, where NO mention of the scope of said Amendment is mentioned anywhere in its text.

So put up a billboard that says "Fred Felps is a Fag*" in big letters & "this statement is an opinion only" in letters the size of those in books.

Or better yet put up a billboard that say "God hates the Fag Fred Phelps" with no disclaimer at all

Seems injecting god into a statement bypasses all libel laws.

Otherwise wouldnt the banners at these 'protests' be subject to liel laws?

You raise a good point, luj. Why the hell should those people get away with those kinds of statements on their signs if they're not true?

"In its decision, the Justices noted that it is "the central tenet of the First Amendment" that "the government must remain neutral in the marketplace of ideas.""

In fact I'd settle for this, bring the hateful fucking bigot up really really fast. To all those scratching their head and wondering if I've lost it here's why. Every time this flagrant bag of anal seepage and his used condom brigade shows up they get police protection. This is in fact a rather public sign that the government supports their view. Which is not covered by the 1st amendment. The government is not required to shield you from the consequences of your speech. They may not impose consequences of their own. They are required to keep the peace so that might be arguably a justification for protection.

Phelps is a braggart and a coward if he knew that no protection would be forth coming they'd stay home. One time he had to be rushed out of his own protest in a police van.

BTW anyone wonder why Larry Flint got crippled by a sniper and somehow no one has even taken a shot at Phelps?

> These trolls are coming to Coeur D Alene in a few
> weeks to protest a play at our local college about
> Matthew Shepard. The police and local
> government are simply asking the locals to
> completely ignore them, no protesting.

While I wish for no disorder in your community... The police are in the 'peace' business. We pay them for that. But it's maybe not the best possible outcome.

What we got is a band of people who're looking for settings in which they can be assholes without risking a response... Places like funerals, where people have other moods and responsibilities.

Just once –maybe not in CDA, but just once, somewhere– it would be neat for someone to turnaround and really live in the moment, y'know what I mean?

> Any adult man so pathologically obsessed
> with gay sex has got to be gay.

You're being too simplistic. There are all sorts of madness and all sorts of thoughtful criticism that attach to all sorts of people. But the world's not so tit-for-tat as you suggest. If it were, all the faults in your character would have been readily (and humiliatingly) mocked as well.

If anyone decided to put up an insulting billboard for Phelps, I'm in for $35. They say he's coming to Idaho....

The Goddess writes: The tiny hatebag church led by Fred Phelps most odiously pickets dead soldiers' funerals, like that of Marine Matthew Snyder -- and they're rightly protected by the First Amendment (though there's a Supreme Court case questioning this).

"Most odiously"? Oh, is that so? Is that the most odious thing he does?

Phelps has been picketing the funerals of gay people and gay events since years before the death of Matthew Shepard, and the gay community has endured his presence and pickets this whole time with nary an objection from the heterosexual community or the government.

Now, all of a sudden, we have to laws in place that prohibit him from approaching funerals within a certain radius, and now it comes down to an examination of First Amendment rights, because he started showing up at the funerals of our dead soldiers!

Too bad for the faggots, putting up with Phelps' over the top bullshit for decades now, but now we're up in arms because our soldiers' funerals are being disrupted.

Yeah, I feel bad for the families. I really do. But thanks a lot for showing just how much the lives and families of gay citizens truly mean to you.

"Yeah, I feel bad for the families. I really do. But thanks a lot for showing just how much the lives and families of gay citizens truly mean to you."

Someone killed in the service of their country has earned a greater respect than a civilian regardless of gender or orientation. Hence why those many who are not supporters of the wiccan religion did not object to wiccan symbols at Arlington.

"But thanks a lot for showing just how much the lives and families of gay citizens truly mean to you." Don't be such a drama queen. If heteros didn't give a shit about the gay community equal marriage rights wouldn't be a blip on the radar.

Patrick, I see your point, but the problem with people like me who aren't tapped in to all the news, all the time is that we can only comment on what's being reported. I think that's the bigger issue here: the picketing of funerals and gay events goes largely unreported by the media. I equate it to reports of inner-city violence versus suburban violence: it's come to be expected in one of those areas, no matter how horrible it is for everyone involved. Frankly, it's not as surprising to see that Phelps and company picket gay funerals, even though it's every bit as awful as this story.

Personally, I think Fred Phelps is an irredeemable human being, and I say that about very few people. Hating homosexuals is awful enough, but the extent to which Phelps and his acolytes take it is horrific. Someone with that much hate in his heart can't be any sort of contributor to society.

And again I ask, what the hell are they protesting? They call themselves protesters, but the only thing they're getting out of picketing funerals is exposure, so why haven't the followers seen that? Are they actually expecting the families of these soldiers and/or gay men and women to stand up and say "You know what, you're right. God does hate fags, so I'll just skip along and kill a few for you." I doubt it.

> But thanks a lot for showing just how much
> the lives and families of gay citizens truly
> mean to you.

You're incapable of expressing yourself without reversion to sarcasm. Gays seeking progress undermine their own best interests through these habits; they'd rather be pouty and infantile than righteous. I suspect this is why there's no such thing as your "gay community": There are plenty of mature, thoughtful, strong-willed homosexuals... Men and women who'd happily confront these Phelpsian offenders, both in the courts and in the streets. But they don't want to be associated with childish whiners any more than they want to stand aside guys in leather chaps at the parade.

As a rule, when populations are as diverse as lefties want them to be, they're not going to be "communities" anymore anyway. (See also: Feminism, America's urban centers, etc.)

> this is a blog item, not a novel by Tolstoy, so
> I stuck to the topic.

This will be the third time I've quoted this passage from Lileks here:

And now: for the last time: I am aware of the history of the United States. The myriad deficiencies that arise from it being composed of human beings, not Swiss robots. I am well versed in these things.

I’m getting bored with having to proclaim I’m not Jumping Jimmy Jingo because I take pride in the good this country offers , and I don't immediately append a 30-minute codicil putting it the context of our atrocities of the Phillippine war. If this bothers anyone, I’m sorry.

Translation: not sorry at all.

PS— I've always admired the way topics here are allowed to drift... Any thing less is lecture, not conversation.

This hits incredibly close to home. My son died in service to his country. Like the Snyder’s, the Westboro nuts showed up at his funeral too. So how did that play out? Well, I never actually saw them since they came and left while I was in the building. Mention was made during the service in the context of how sad it was they exercised their free speech in that fashion, but that was one of the rights my son (and a host of other active and former military in the room) had put on the uniform to defend. Now, several years later, I barely think about the Westboro folks. Frankly, they were rather pathetic in their attempt. They did not and do not determine how I remember and honor my son.

I am conflicted in this. Although they are barely a footnote in my situation, they may have caused true pain for the Snyder family. If a legal way exists to prevent this in the future, then great. I have my doubts, however. Yes, people should show respect, but can they be legally required to do so? We can put boundaries around events, but how far is enough? 1000 yards? Two miles? Do we wind up with free speech zones like some colleges have tried?

I am passionate about free speech (so was my son). Inoffensive speech does not generally need to be protected. But lots of speech can offend someone. Maybe something I believe in and speak about might be deemed painful or offensive to someone, and vice versa. Which one of us should be made to be silent? And who decides? I can rally to silence Fred Phelps and company today, but what defense will I use when someone is trying to silence me tomorrow? Free speech for me but not for thee?

Drawing the line is difficult, but I would err on letting the obnoxious speak before trying to silence people. And make no mistake – we are wanting to silence them because their opinions and their tactics are offensive. I have seen lots of protestors that I found offensive in their beliefs and tactics, but they have that right. Democracy is ugly and beautiful at the same time.

Beautiful Just a Guy, thank you. Thank you for you and your son's sacrifice on my behalf. May God bless you and your family.

A couple of years ago, a young man in our community was killed in service in Iraq. His family was not active in the community, and they did not belong to any church. However, they called our church (a rather regular sized Methodist church in a residential area) and asked if we would host the funeral. Our church turned out to do all the food, the flowers, direct parking, host the reception, etc. I ran a video of pictures of his life. We were also afraid that the Westboro bunch would show up. But who showed up instead was every single "patriotic" organization - VFWs, bikers, peace and pro-war protestors who instead set that aside and stood quietly together - and tons of regular citizens. They lined the streets all around our church and from our church to the cemetery. It was beautiful and moving and meant a lot to the family.

I intellectually support the protestors but I am so happy that their obnoxiousness brought out the decency in our city. Westboro did not show up, but if they had, I believe no one would have been able to see or hear them - they'd be lost in the overwhelming public support of the soldier's family.

JustAGuy, that was very eloquently said. Thank you.

.... and speaking of jerks - turns out there is more to the Clementi-Rutgers suicide than first met the eye....

Clementi knew he was being taped, it had happened before... he posted quite calm messages about going to the dorm RA and complaining.

So something else happened - not the Classic PC Victim Narrative.

I would like to know how this happened to this country. It just goes back to people being rude and greedy about their "rights." Forgive me if I'm wrong, but Baptists are Christians, right? How does any true Christian do things like this in good conscience? I have heard the passage "Judge not lest ye be judged," and I think that applies here to these people. If they truly believe in the Bible and it's teachings, you would think they would be God-fearing enough to shut up and discuss their opinions on some extremist blog, church, or a pamphlet. Leave these poor dead boys and their families alone. As was said above, these men died defending the Westboro church's right to freedom of speech and to show their thanks for that, they should have enough sense to show restraint in these situations, no matter how strongly they feel about it.

So, vlad thinks it's perfectly appropriate not to become outraged at the shenanigans of Phelps and company until they start picketing the funeral of soldiers.

Apparently, he's from a country where democracy is unheard of.

Deserving of more respect? Perhaps, but that's a matter of opinion. Deserving of more protection under the law? They are not, and that's just the law.

Crid thinks the gays haven't opposed this because those gays who are willing to fight in court don't wish to be associated with gays who are whiners.

Quite frankly, the shame belongs with those who pursue this vendetta. They're the whiners, to be blunt. In this country, we have what's called "free speech." Perhaps you've heard of it? For the unenlightened, let me explain it to you. Free speech means that a person is entitled to their opinion, and they're entitled to express it. This would include the opinion that out dead soldiers are in hell, detestable as that may seem to some.

If freedom of speech doesn't protect speech that you find offensive, there's no point in having free speech! Speech that everyone likes or agrees with doesn't need protection.

Quite frankly, Phelps is absolutely right. He does have the right to picket funerals. As cemeteries are privately owned, the owners have the right to bar him from the property, which should keep him at a comfortable distance away.

Gays have been enduring his harassment for decades, and never felt the need to lobby for laws curtailing freedom of speech. On one occasion, as he was picketing a funeral, the choir of a nearby MCC dressed up as angels with gigantic wings and surrounded the Phelps clan. No one could see them.

When picketing a Gay Pride event, the gays decided to have some fun and surrounded Phelps and clan carrying signs in his style saying things like "New in town, Sailor?" And "WE'RE CLOSETED!"

Some have even used his pickets to raise money for gay charities and AIDS research. Local businesses pledge a certain amount of money per minute of Phelps' pickets. So, their pickets are timed, and the pledges are collected and a worthy cause now has a donation.

This tactic particularly sticks in Phelps' craw...as he wrote about it on his website, "How Fags Can Make Money!"

Contrary to being whiners, Crid, gays have demonstrated great courage and creativity enduring Phelps' tackiness. The whiners are those who think that they have recourse in the law. They do not. Regardless of what the courts rules, this is protected speech. Any ruling to the contrary will be unconstitutional.

And while I sympathize with the loss, imagining you're entitled to some kind of financial compensation because Phelps upset you at your son's funeral is outrageous.

My only point is that the determination to silence Phelps is unAmerican. The whining, Crid, is on the part of those who want to silence him, and want laws the erect "free speech zones."

You could learn something from the "whiners" in the gay community, Crid. Like courage and creativity in the face of adversity. Not sobbing for unconstitutional laws because someone said something you don't like.

"Or it might not, but I like the idea! "

Find some biblical tie-in for the deceased's cause of death or use some of their 'they deserved it' crap against them....'somebody must have done something bad for *****to happen'.That'd be cruel though, and stooping to their level. It's tempting though, anyone who causes additional grief at a funeral seriously pisses me off. The total lack of logic with which they blame was deaths on 'god hates gays' is just mind-blowing. How do you come to the conclusion that men die in battle to punish gays back in the US?

"Phelps has been picketing the funerals of gay people and gay events since years before the death of Matthew Shepard, and the gay community has endured his presence and pickets this whole time with nary an objection from the heterosexual community or the government."

I wasn't aware of this. Did anyone go to news outlets or call the cops on them? Was it covered?

> gays have demonstrated great courage and
> creativity enduring Phelps' tackiness.

For creativity, I care not a whit; and if the offense is mere "tackiness", it's hard to see why you're concerned that the world has forsaken your "lives".

>> Just once –maybe not in CDA, but just once, somewhere– it would be neat for someone to turnaround and really live in the moment, y'know what I mean?

You ask me Crid. You task me, and I shall have him.

Amy, thank you so much for posting this. I attended the funeral of a soldier that was protested by this "church". Since the soldier was from Topeka (where the WBC is located), the church was out in full force. It was truly, truly an awful thing to witness. I will never forget the widow, Brandy, greeting mourners as the WBC chanted, "Brandy ought to join him!" How the hell is that "speech about issues of public concern"?

Just A Guy: thank you for your sacrifice. I am so sorry for your loss...

Eric, if I was close enough to drive over and bail you out, you'd get the assignment. But I'm so far away I can't offer to participate in anything but an offensive billboard fund.

Listen, people have been talking about this guy for a couple years now, but the only times I ever hear about Phelps are when I'm on blogs... Kinda like Glen Beck and people like that. So as I understand it, he and his church people show up at funerals and do stupid things. Right?

So maybe one time, some easily-agitated brother-in-law of the deceased (gay, military, whatever) will march over to the Phelps people and take one of them out with a right cross... A couple of lost teeth, swelling & bruising, etc. (Maybe one of the women, just to give our narrative some pepper and garlic.)

(And the broken skin on Ricky's knuckles responds well to a topical anti-infectant cream that Aunt Mildred happens to be carrying in her famously large purse.)

So then there's a trial, and the deceased's mother (frail; face a mask of sorrow and torment; dressed in somber colors) testifies weepingly about the horror of having protesters at the services... And she says that while cousin Ricky can be a little hot-headed sometimes, the Phelps people were instigating an intolerable intrusion, and something had to be done.

The jury thinks it over and decides that Phelp's use of "fighting words" mitigates his free speech protection to some indeterminate degree. The judge fines cousin Richard $350 (waived), sentences him to an afternoon in jail (suspended), and directs him to attend a single anger-management counseling session at his own expense ($125, maybe $140). Phelps appeals and loses, and can't even get court costs.

And this goes away.

I mean, why doesn't this happen?

Am I wrong, or aren't we talking about Americans here? I bet at least ten percent of the commenters here would go violently apeshit if the funeral of a loved one were mocked by protesters. (I'm not sure which percentile I'd be in, or which would be more shame-inducing.)


Or is this story some sort of cable-news, mainstream-media manipulation? Something that isn't what it seems to be, like so much reality television?

Crid, "tackiness" is how I describe Phelps' antics, regardless of who he's doing it to. He has picketed the funerals of gays, yes. Same as he is doing to servicemen. The only difference is, he's been targeting gays a lot longer.

Is he obnoxious? Is he a dickhead? Is he a total asshole? Yes, yes, and yes.

Is he breaking the law? No, he isn't.

Would it be unconstitutional to criminalize his activities? Uh-huh. Very much so.

The entire family is made up of lawyers by the way. Phelps himself has been disbarred. Those who seek to redress in the courtrooms will have a difficult time. And I don't support the erosion of constitutional rights.

> Is he obnoxious? Is he a dickhead? Is he a
> total asshole? Yes, yes, and yes.

Are you hosting yourself on your own private talk show?

Does Crid make a pompous bore out of himself when he would prefer not to address the points and has nothing sensible or witty to say? Yes.

What points? You're (repetitively) chattering about free speech... I'm concerned only with practicalities. If I bore you, don't read... Not a problem. Meanwhile, my sensible wit is a source of continuing delight for all others who visit here.

Hateful people like this cause a lot of the mostly useless laws that wouldn't be needed if people were just decent to each other.

I'm so sorry that this is happening to these good families who lost brave soldiers who were willing to give the ultimate sacrifice.

It's rather strange but I just don't see this being a constitutional case (freedom of speech). The government is not punishing Phelps and his clan for their opinions and actions. It's a tort case (involving intentional infliction of emotional distress and a few other tort-based actions) that should be decided under Maryland law.

Crid, as far as someone taking a shot at Phelps goes, it's been done. Near as I hear it (and my knowledge is third-hand at best, so go easy on me), lawsuits is how the Westboro gang get a good portion of their funding. They sue the shit out of people, and purposely go to events where an outbreak of violence is more than likely. You lay a hand on one of them, and they call up the courts faster than your head can spin. Supposedly, this was the primary reason they picketed Ronnie James Dio's funeral a few months ago; they thought a bunch of metal heads wouldn't be able to stop themselves from laying 'em out. I never heard if anything actually happened, tho.

Them being lawyers makes sense - I figure in order to win these suits, they most know the ins and outs pretty well.

Another point of interest for those new to hearing of Phelps and his ilk is that the "church" is made up almost entirely of his family.

Patrick, I always like to read about the counter-protests at Phelps' expense. When he threatened to come to my town to protest a high school play (seriously, he pickets high school plays, dudes), the school tapped the Alumni Network and the newspaper and held a counter-protest (and a bake sale, I think). Westboro no-showed, but quite a few people showed up for the counter-protest!

And Westboro also tried to show up at this year's ComicCon. That was a big oops. They were overwhelmed and outshouted within an hour, I believe. They had about 4 protesters. I believe the rough count for the counter was 200 (?). And the signs... oh, my geeks are clever. My personal favorite was a Trekkie holding a sign that says "God Hates Jedi". Awesome.

I forget the name of the group now, but there is a motorcycle "club" (it's not nearly that organized though) that show up at funerals where Phelps and his shitball family are "protesting" and drown them out with the sound of screaming V-Twin engines.

This has been effective enough for them to simply close up shop when they hear the thunder coming.

@Patrick - I've complained that someone needs to pop a cap in Phelps' ass since I've known about him, and that was over 10 years ago.

And it's not that I give a flying fuck about gays (I don't care about them more than I do any other group of people I don't know). It's because Phelps is a flaming sack of shit that needs to drink a quart of Shut The Fuck Up.

You really need to stop taking every perceived slight so personally. It might give you some insight into why so many people don't tolerate gays.

Brian, it's not a perceived slight. Nor was it directed at anyone on this blog, per se. And how would that possibly explain, much less justify an intolerance of gays?

What I am finding ironic is that gays have endured Phelps and company for decades now. There was no creation of special laws, a la President "Free Speech Zone" Bush, to bar protesters within a certain radius of funerals. (Silly me! I thought the whole country was a free-speech zone...little did I realize that George Bush the hypersensitive would come along and see fit to ban dissenters from his sight during public appearances.) And gays relied about their own wits and creativity to deal with Phelps.

Now, all of a sudden, he shows his obnoxious self at the funerals of fallen soldiers... "What??? Oh, my God! Why, we need to make LAWS! LAWS that ban him from being within 1000 feet of a funeral!"

Stop whining, America, and grow the fuck up. You need to find effective ways of dealing with nasty people who say things you don't like. You have no recourse in the law.

And unless Snyder can prove that the "emotional distress" caused him some financial hardship, like a note from a licensed psychiatrist that says he's unfit to go to work due to the "emotional distress," he's not entitled to a damn dime from Phelps.

> This has been effective enough for them to
> simply close up shop when they hear the
> thunder coming.

Yeah, see, personal intimidation has so many textures for us to explore. Americans are not a uniformly patient people. Eventually some spirited person is going to let fly, and the jury is going to be sympathetic. Truly gifted lawyers don't let themselves get disbarred.

Again, I suspect the reason this has gone on as long as it has is that the media love a photogenic asshole. (That presumes that when these "protests" are made, local television stations are unable to resist adding to the dust of the scrum by standing nearby with tripods, boom mics and microwave booms. A safe bet, because I used to direct TV news: These were my people. Taste, even at funerals, was not a consideration. Every reporter talks about the first time an editor remanded them to the home of the teenager who'd been hit by a drunk driver to demand a graduation photo from the mother of the decedent.)

It's difficult to square this:

> But thanks a lot for showing just how much
> the lives and families of gay citizens truly
> mean to you.

with this:

> gays have demonstrated great courage and
> creativity enduring Phelps' tackiness.

and this:

> Stop whining, America, and grow the fuck up. You
> need to find effective ways of dealing with
> nasty people

Is it courageous and creative to mock third parties when making allowances –as you so eagerly to affirm that you do– for the 1st amendment rights of second parties? If you're cool with Phelps, why are you harshing Amy?

If I had a god, he would have more important things to worry about than who was sticking what into whom.

Crid, I am not harshing Amy, and never was. Perhaps I should have been clear, but my "thanks a lot" comment was not directed to Amy. It was directed to the government and population in general that was perfectly fine for two decades while Phelps was trolling funerals of gays (or parents of gays, such as the late Sonny Bono or those who didn't demonize gays sufficiently, such as Jerry Falwell), but now are up in arms when Phelps is targeting our dead soldiers.

A democracy means no special privileges for anyone. It smacks of favoritism to ignore Phelps for two decades while he targets gays (and he did make the news when he showed up with his clan at Matthew Shepard's funeral), then suddenly shrieking indignantly when our dead soldiers funerals are being trolled, then enacting special laws to protect them. It is also rather foolishly capitulating to Phelps' obvious desire for media air time.

And I am not "okay" with Phelps. But I'm even less "okay" with enacting special laws to curtail freedom of speech. No laws to prohibit Phelps with 1000 ft. You'll just have to find effective ways to counter him. And no civil suits for outrageous awards, unless you can prove that Phelps caused you emotional distress which hurt you financially.

Snyder will have to show me lost wages and a bill from a psychiatrist, a psychiatrist that will assert that these financial losses were a direct result of Fred Phelps' activity.

@cornerdemon that's what I've heard too -- they deliberately show up and TRY to get people to lash out against them, and then sue (b/c a good number of the family are lawyers).

I think the most effective counter-protest I've heard of against these guys is a group of people who wear white robes and GIANT angel wings. They form a human chain around the Phelps group and block them from funeral goers' view.

Anyway, I'm just waiting for the family to all die off.

"Meanwhile, my sensible wit is a source of continuing delight for all others who visit here."

As was true for your description of college, for some, as a "festival of cleavage". Heh.

Read first the decision of the Court of Appeals which reversed the District Court's grant of damages to the Snyder family.

Quote: "It was undisputed at trial that Defendants complied with local ordinances and police directions with respect to being a certain distance from the church. Furthermore, it was established at trial that Snyder did not actually see the signs until he saw a television program later that day with footage of the Phelps family at his sons funeral."