If I was President of the United States, Fred Phelps would be in trouble.

In addition to seizing Phelps' church and the grounds upon which it is built, I would have it bulldozed and cleansed, meaning purged of the evil energy that Phelps has generated over the years by a Catholic priest performing an exorcism. Then I would have it converted into a park, the Matthew Shepard National Memorial Park.

 

Are you really 37? Because you're talking like a pissed off 14-year-old...

 

Zorba, at least in your country, Canada, legal action can be taken against people like Phelps if they openly or subtlely advocate violence against people whom he hates due to their "difference" from him, whether it's being gay or Jewish or black. Your nation has freedom of speech, but also recognizes that with that freedom comes responsibility for the actions that may result from that expression.

I believe in freedom of speech, but one must also take responsibility that other peoples' rights are not violated. If I started preaching anti-Semitism in the same vitreolic manner as Phelps preaches homophobia and someone who was listening to that speech acts on it and assaults or kills a Jewish person, would I not bear some responsibility for what I said in that my speech may have encouraged that person to act with violence?

Yes, I am 37, and am a gay man. That's why I have such a stance against Fred Phelps. He wants me dead for no other reason than because I'm gay. He's like Adolf Hitler, but doesn't have the political power that Hitler had. I also think Phelps is a pedophile because he's a cult leader and many cult leaders seem to have pedophilia in common.

 

My nation does not have freedom of speech, because the government has decided it has the right to choose what constitutes responsible use of that privilege.

No, you wouldn't. What that person does is their own responsibility.

So, like I said, you have an axe to grind. Not the kind of person who should be making the laws. There are groups and ideologies I disagree with and don't like too -- but if I were making the laws, I wouldn't try to take away their freedom of speech. There's no excuse for that.

And by the way, assuming he's a paedophile because other cult leaders are is retarded. Again, you clearly have an axe to grind with the guy. Not that he's not an asshole, but really...

 

I've never researched it personally, but some very convincing people claim that Phelps and family really care nothing about religion or politics- they're only in it for the money (suing people who assault them) so they can have good steady income without working. The offensive slogans are mere bait, while the offended are the actual prey.

 

Zorba for President anyway? :groupwave:

Lol,

I agree. Freedom of speech is far too fundermental to give any Goverment the right to pick and choose who and what can said.

I know little of Fred Phelps, but of what I do know, I thoroughly dislike. I'm sorry that you are being attacked in this way by his words and his followers, but taking away a fundermental freedom can't be the answer?

But I do feel like we have a duty to try and offer alternatives to these people. Most of the followers are more than likely to be confused about what they believe. Under-educated and surrounded in propaganda... locking all these people up wouldn't make the problem go away... If it exists now, then are holes in society which need patching, to stop the need for people to have needless and unexplainable hate towards certain religous / sexuality / nationality groups etc.

The social Balance is never completely perfect, but I think... because of freedom of speech, democracy, freedom of belief and other basic rights.. we are beginning to move towards some sort of middle ground.. and of course we have a long way to go, but taking anyones right away to say what's on your mind, because you don't like or agree with it is a huge step backwards.

Understand *why* it exists.

 

Actually, Phelps could conceivably be charged with trying to incite a riot and breaching the peace. Disrupting a funeral or other private gathering violates the rights of those people at the funeral. If they protested my lesbian sister's funeral with their vulgar talk and un-christian posters that Jesus would hurl His lunch at, I would consider that to be a violation of mine and my family's right to peacably assemble.

It is this kind of extreme fundamental (and bone-headed) monotheism that causes terrorism and hate crimes. Just watch CAPRICA and you'll see what I mean.

 

Actually, what I would want to do if president would actually be a violation of the Constitution's ban on "bills of attainder". A bill of attainder is an act which declares a person or an organization guilty of a crime without the legal proceedings of a trial. So technically, the United States president's authority to declare a person or an organization as "terrorist" is definitely unconstitutional because one has to be charged with a crime, tried and convicted of it before being declared an "outlaw" with rights and privileges limited or lost.

 

*standing ovation*





Johnny Bravo - Phelps hates gays, and thinks their ways should be banned - even though they do not harm others.
You hate Westboro Baptist, and think their ways should be banned - even though they do not harm others.

What is the difference, please explain that to me.

 

op: you seem like a very emotional thinker. as much as you don't like the Westboro Baptist Church, what you suggest violates the 1st amendment.

edit: dnr.

 

What really pisses me off about Fred Phelps is that he only wants 1st Amendment rights for himself, not others. If I led a picket outside his church holding signs accusing him of pedophilia, he and his gang would be calling the cops on me and suing me for slander (due to the fact I have no proof of him being a pedophile, only suspicions), but it's okay for him to hold signs at a soldier's funeral accusing him and his family of being gay or being a "fag enabler" and slander the soldier's family when Phelps has no proof of such a position.

 

More likely than you think.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/carroll/bal-md.protest30mar30,0,5037470.story

I was listening to the father of the marine today on local talk radio. He said this could end up costing him over $100,000.00 in court costs if the westboro baptist "church" wins all of their appeals.

 

And salt the earth so nothing will ever grow there again.

Actually that's not a bad idea :3

 

Phelps obviously has an intense desire to be a pickle puffer.

 

Both are wrong. Calling someone a paedophile is a serious accusation, and I wouldn't blame Phelps for suing your for slander. Then again, I don't blame the Snyder guy for suing Phelps either. They're both dick moves.