Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 115 of 115

Thread: 8-0 SCOTUS Free Speech Win

  1. #111
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,501

    Re: 8-0 SCOTUS Free Speech Win

    Quote Originally Posted by Tangmo View Post
    Not only do you not know whether you are coming or going but you just met yourself on the way back.

    You said it was an event. I corrected you to say Scotus considered it a "private matter." Then you said I considered it an event which makes me wrong. Then you said again it wuz an event. This is but one instance of your complete confusion and chaos.

    You'll know and acknowledge the elephant in the room but only after it sits on you.

    Conservatives are the most confounded and muddled people I know. Call 'em to account and the only thing that happens is that their heads explode.
    You need to learn to read I said specifically that a funeral is a private event. Which it is.
    You don't know what you are talking about because you are trying to hard to be right.

    Funeral aside his case was about a government agency squashing free speech because some people might get offended.
    The SCOTUS said they were 100% wrong as they should have.

    Now if you want to argue that go ahead but you are going to have a hard time doing it.

    This decision confirms previous decisions in this case.

  2. #112
    Sage
    Tangmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Seaview Tower 5 Condo 2602
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    6,934

    Re: 8-0 SCOTUS Free Speech Win

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    Drivel is what that is. No case was lost. The case was won by the people that filed it as it should have been.



    Just more blathering nonsense because you can't deal with the argument presented.
    Nothing was debunked the case was 8-0 in favor of the people that filed the suit.
    Free speech wins SJW lose.



    You said this 8-0 Scotus decision is the same as the Larry Flint case -- you know, the one with Woody Harrelson throwing his ripe opinions around the courtroom but at the judge especially. The case Edward Norton won bless him. You however fail to specify the particulars of how you believe the Westboro Baptist Church Hate Congregation resembles in legal terms the Flint Case. Until you specify, your belief is a basket full of fog and nothing more. A flying basket of fog besides. Mush.


    In the meanwhile, here is why the trial jury awarded the family of the deceased U S Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder killed in the line of duty $3 million in damages and $8 million in punishment of Westboro Baptist Church....


    "The “content” of Westboro’s signs plainly relates to broad issues of interest to society at large, rather than matters of “purely private concern.” The placards read “God Hates the USA/Thank God for 9/11,”
    “America is Doomed,”
    “Don’t Pray for the USA,”
    “Thank God for IEDs,”
    “Fag Troops,”
    “Semper Fi Fags,”
    “God Hates Fags,”
    “Maryland Taliban,”
    “Fags Doom Nations,”
    “Not Blessed Just Cursed,”
    “Thank God for Dead Soldiers,”
    “Pope in Hell,” “Priests Rape Boys,”
    “You ’re Going to Hell,” and “God Hates You.”
    While these messages may fall short of refined social or political commentary, the issues they highlight—the political and moral conduct of the United States and its citizens, the fate of our Nation, homosexuality in the military, and scandals involving the Catholic clergy—are matters of public import. The signs certainly convey Westboro’s position on those issues, in a manner designed, unlike the private speech in Dun & Bradstreet, to reach as broad a public audience as possible. And even
    if a few of the signs—such as “You’re Going to Hell” and “God Hates You”—were viewed as containing messages related to Matthew Snyder or the Snyders specifically, that would not change the fact that the overall thrust and dominant theme of Westboro’s demonstration spoke to broader public issues."



    Here is from the minority opinion of Justice Alito....


    "In this case, respondents implemented the Westboro Baptist Church’s publicity-seeking strategy. Their press release stated that they were going “to picket the funeral of Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder” because “God Almighty killed Lance Cpl. Snyder. He died in shame, not honor — for a fag nation cursed by God. Now in Hell—sine die.”

    Petitioner Albert Snyder is not a public figure. He is simply a parent whose son, Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, was killed in Iraq. Mr. Snyder wanted what is surely the right of any parent who experiences such an incalculable loss: to bury his son in peace. But respondents, members of the Westboro Baptist Church, deprived him of that elementary right. They first issued a press release and thus turned Matthew’s funeral into a tumultuous media event. They then appeared at the church,
    approached as closely as they could without trespassing, and launched a malevolent verbal attack on Matthew and his family at a time of acute emotional vulnerability. As a result, Albert Snyder suffered severe and lasting emotional injury. 1 The Court now holds that the First Amendment protected respondents’ right to brutalize Mr. Snyder. I cannot agree."


    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-751.pdf


    The Constitution was not intended or designed to do as Justice Alitio says the Court believes. There is no benefit to the general welfare or to the public good to torture a family at a time of its greatest grief. Or to try to dishonor a fallen member of the armed forces killed in the line of duty.
    All Enemies Foreign and Domestic

  3. #113
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,501

    Re: 8-0 SCOTUS Free Speech Win

    Quote Originally Posted by Tangmo View Post



    You said this 8-0 Scotus decision is the same as the Larry Flint case -- you know, the one with Woody Harrelson throwing his ripe opinions around the courtroom but at the judge especially. The case Edward Norton won bless him. You however fail to specify the particulars of how you believe the Westboro Baptist Church Hate Congregation resembles in legal terms the Flint Case. Until you specify, your belief is a basket full of fog and nothing more. A flying basket of fog besides. Mush.


    In the meanwhile, here is why the trial jury awarded the family of the deceased U S Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder killed in the line of duty $3 million in damages and $8 million in punishment of Westboro Baptist Church....


    "The “content” of Westboro’s signs plainly relates to broad issues of interest to society at large, rather than matters of “purely private concern.” The placards read “God Hates the USA/Thank God for 9/11,”
    “America is Doomed,”
    “Don’t Pray for the USA,”
    “Thank God for IEDs,”
    “Fag Troops,”
    “Semper Fi Fags,”
    “God Hates Fags,”
    “Maryland Taliban,”
    “Fags Doom Nations,”
    “Not Blessed Just Cursed,”
    “Thank God for Dead Soldiers,”
    “Pope in Hell,” “Priests Rape Boys,”
    “You ’re Going to Hell,” and “God Hates You.”
    While these messages may fall short of refined social or political commentary, the issues they highlight—the political and moral conduct of the United States and its citizens, the fate of our Nation, homosexuality in the military, and scandals involving the Catholic clergy—are matters of public import. The signs certainly convey Westboro’s position on those issues, in a manner designed, unlike the private speech in Dun & Bradstreet, to reach as broad a public audience as possible. And even
    if a few of the signs—such as “You’re Going to Hell” and “God Hates You”—were viewed as containing messages related to Matthew Snyder or the Snyders specifically, that would not change the fact that the overall thrust and dominant theme of Westboro’s demonstration spoke to broader public issues."



    Here is from the minority opinion of Justice Alito....


    "In this case, respondents implemented the Westboro Baptist Church’s publicity-seeking strategy. Their press release stated that they were going “to picket the funeral of Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder” because “God Almighty killed Lance Cpl. Snyder. He died in shame, not honor — for a fag nation cursed by God. Now in Hell—sine die.”

    Petitioner Albert Snyder is not a public figure. He is simply a parent whose son, Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, was killed in Iraq. Mr. Snyder wanted what is surely the right of any parent who experiences such an incalculable loss: to bury his son in peace. But respondents, members of the Westboro Baptist Church, deprived him of that elementary right. They first issued a press release and thus turned Matthew’s funeral into a tumultuous media event. They then appeared at the church,
    approached as closely as they could without trespassing, and launched a malevolent verbal attack on Matthew and his family at a time of acute emotional vulnerability. As a result, Albert Snyder suffered severe and lasting emotional injury. 1 The Court now holds that the First Amendment protected respondents’ right to brutalize Mr. Snyder. I cannot agree."


    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-751.pdf


    The Constitution was not intended or designed to do as Justice Alitio says the Court believes. There is no benefit to the general welfare or to the public good to torture a family at a time of its greatest grief. Or to try to dishonor a fallen member of the armed forces killed in the line of duty.
    this case is similar to people vs flynt and the constitution won.

    you are attempting to compare apples to oranges.

    the funeral case was lost over merit the guy couldn't see or hear the protestors he admitted it in court. he only saw it on the news and very briefly for a second on the way there.
    alito is consistent that private events are different from public ones.

    you really should just stop. the fact is the this case is 8-0 and affirms what we all knew that again had to have the court say in open court.

  4. #114
    Guru
    ThoughtEx.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    North America
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,015

    Re: 8-0 SCOTUS Free Speech Win

    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    If you can make money out of a restaurant called Fur Burger then more power to you.
    How could you not make money with a restaurant called Fur Burgers?

  5. #115
    Sage
    Tangmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Seaview Tower 5 Condo 2602
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    6,934

    Re: 8-0 SCOTUS Free Speech Win

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    You need to learn to read I said specifically that a funeral is a private event. Which it is.
    You don't know what you are talking about because you are trying to hard to be right.

    Funeral aside his case was about a government agency squashing free speech because some people might get offended.
    The SCOTUS said they were 100% wrong as they should have.

    Now if you want to argue that go ahead but you are going to have a hard time doing it.

    This decision confirms previous decisions in this case.

    You make no arguments.

    You instead issue forth pronouncements, declarations, assertions.

    The posts are vacuous.
    All Enemies Foreign and Domestic

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •