Westboro Baptist Church coming to OSU!

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

When the Westboro baptist church interrupts "the speech" of events already going on, funerals and the like they seem to be free to do that.

While I agree with you that interrupting a funeral is in extremely poor taste, it's not speech. To the extent that it is, speech in opposition to other speech is not a crime either

I don't see how its different from the kids interrupting a church service as long as they aren't crossing onto private property (again besides the obvious idiot with a gun but that wasn't what they arrested the others for).

Well, to be clear, the constitution protects speech from government intervention, not private intervention. The enforcement of laws intended to let speakers have their pulpit are designed to encourage speech, and especially unpopular speech. Though, merely standing in opposition to a speaker is not arrestable.... assaulting the speaker with tomatoes is. (I didn't watch your vid, just sayin). If these people were arrested simply for being opposed, then it is an arrest that is unconstitutional. That is to say, one's right to speak does not weigh more than my right to speak out against it. That's precisely the sort of "debate" the clause is intent on encouraging (though political speech is truly at the heart).

We have a lot of values paramount to this country that we don't seem very committed to protecting, our current speaker of the house laughs at the constitution, people like Ron Paul who are strict constitutionalists get laughed at and called "radical". I'm not saying we shouldn't protect them, it's just amusing to look at how we go about picking and choosing

We don't go about picking and choosing, though. It is not fun to protect unpopular ideas. But, it is a principle upon which this nation stands. I may hate what you have to say, but I will protect your right to say it.

 

[JBaney45]

While I agree with you that interrupting a funeral is in extremely poor taste, it's not speech. To the extent that it is, speech in opposition to other speech is not a crime either

Well, to be clear, the constitution protects speech from government intervention, not private intervention. The enforcement of laws intended to let speakers have their pulpit are designed to encourage speech, and especially unpopular speech. Though, merely standing in opposition to a speaker is not arrestable.... assaulting the speaker with tomatoes is. (I didn't watch your vid, just sayin). If these people were arrested simply for being opposed, then it is an arrest that is unconstitutional. That is to say, one's right to speak does not weigh more than my right to speak out against it. That's precisely the sort of "debate" the clause is intent on encouraging (though political speech is truly at the heart).

We don't go about picking and choosing, though. It is not fun to protect unpopular ideas. But, it is a principle upon which this nation stands. I may hate what you have to say, but I will protect your right to say it.

The video states that 5 of the kids were arrested for riding by and "shouting obscenities" outside the mosque. There was one arrested for firing a gun which is obvious, but they stated that the other kids were arrested and charged with "disrupting a religious service". Hence my suggestion we are indeed picking and choosing or else the reporters did a piss poor job in making the entire situation clear as they don't state that the other kids arrested did anything but drive by and shout obscenities towards the mosque.

 

[Taosman]

I think nothing less than a Caligula like toga party will do!

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

The video states that 5 of the kids were arrested for riding by and "shouting obscenities" outside the mosque. There was one arrested for firing a gun which is obvious, but they stated that the other kids were arrested and charged with "disrupting a religious service". Hence my suggestion we are indeed picking and choosing or else the reporters did a piss poor job in making the entire situation clear as they don't state that the other kids arrested did anything but drive by and shout obscenities towards the mosque.

There's your most likely answer. It never ceases to amaze me the difference between what I know about a case, and what I read about it in the paper or hear on the news.

The kids may well have been arrested... hell... the may well have been charged with whatever. But, that doesn't make the arrests constitutional. There's a big difference. Your earlier post advocated a "law on the books" to divert the free exercise of religion, assembly, and or speech and... no matter how much I agree with you about these morons... I won't stand for shutting them down with law.

 

[JBaney45]

There's your most likely answer. It never ceases to amaze me the difference between what I know about a case, and what I read about it in the paper or hear on the news.

The kids may well have been arrested... hell... the may well have been charged with whatever. But, that doesn't make the arrests constitutional. There's a big difference. Your earlier post advocated a "law on the books" to divert the free exercise of religion, assembly, and or speech and... no matter how much I agree with you about these morons... I won't stand for shutting them down with law.

My point was that we're selective on what we enforce and protect in terms of laws/civil rights.

Simple ordinances like making allowances for funeral areas to be blocked off and held in peace (within a reasonable radius) seem like rather mild compared to the other ways the constitution is infringed upon on a daily basis.

In terms of them coming to OSU that sort of thing is fine, they are obviously allowed on the property, although what would be the ruling about them going into the school buildings and interrupting classes for instance? I don't know the specifics of the law but it doesn't seem like they would be allowed to do that? If classes in a public school are allotted private areas where they can operate without being disrupted then why can't funerals? I don't think that the idea that "one is indoors and one is outdoors" is a very good answer when it comes to enforcing the constitution, I don't think the founding fathers were only interested in people having rights when they are outside.

I'm certainly not saying that we should abolish the very principles of our country it just seems that laws have been designed for years to try to balance and accommodate the rights of individuals with the rights of others. For instance think about cities requiring permits for people to have demonstrative parades on the streets and what not. You can't just decide to gather a bunch of people and stand in the middle of a busy street in downtown NYC because its infringing on others ability to use the street, but what give the people driving down the street more of a right to be there then the people that want to demonstrate there? I just don't see where that would be different then keeping demonstrators a reasonable distance away from a funeral and I don't see why that radius can't be a big enough distance to keep them from being heard or seen by the families

 

[Deety]

Just bid them welcome and offer to show them the egress.

 

[Mac]

If they get their asses handed to them, OSUPD and CPD need to shrug their shoulders, think to themselves "Must be M!ch1g@n fans", and turn the other cheek.

 

[NFBuck]

I hope they get some blessed bottles broken over their heads.

 

[NFBuck]

Yeah, I figured.

But it would be epic if a hundred or so students came strolling through with loaded super soakers.

Just be inconspicuous...and add some, um, DNA matter to the water. It can be your own little inside joke.

 

[jlb1705]

Pitchfork

Foo Fighters provided some politically-charged pre-show entertainment before their set in Kansas City on Friday. After members of the controversial right-wing Westboro Baptist Church organized a picket line outside the Sprint Center, the alt-rock vets fired back with a counter-protest of their own.

Plugged in atop a flatbed parked across the street, the Foos donned wigs and false beards (the same as seen in their homoerotic tour announcement clip "Hot Buns") for a cheeky performance of "Keeping It Clean", a country strummer that makes good use of the phrase "man buns." Check out a clip of the clash below, replete with an ornery yet inspiring mid-song speech from frontbro Dave Grohl.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e5hRLbCaCs"]Foo Fighters - Keepin it Clean in KC - YouTube[/ame]