iraq
Newbie
Posts: 9
|
Post by iraq on Apr 1, 2010 7:00:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ForeverThere on Apr 3, 2010 18:08:24 GMT -5
Well, Bill O'Reilly has already sent $16,000 as a start for the potential payment. Individuals are sending what they can to!
What a sad shame for Father, Family and Friends . . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by gzippel on Apr 9, 2010 9:29:16 GMT -5
While on the surface it will piss off everyone, however if they were peacefully protesting then they have the protection of the first amendment.
...You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. - The American President
|
|
|
|
Post by vincegatto on Apr 9, 2010 10:44:41 GMT -5
While on the surface it will piss off everyone, however if they were peacefully protesting then they have the protection of the first amendment. ...You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. - The American President They don't Peacefully protest, I've had to deal with these a$$holes twice now. The difference with this group that questions their right to assemble and protest is the fact that this church group is not protesting against the war and those combatants that participate in it. They are protesting against homosexuality and blame the killing of American soldiers in war as God's wrath and revenge for American attitudes and laws that tolerate homosexuality. They have no apparent reason to disrupt the funerals of innocent and unrelated parties other than to draw attention to themselves and seek publicity. Further, they are far from peaceful and try to cause confrontations with the people attending the funerals in an attempt to intimidate them. From a legal standpoint, if they were a labor union, they would be forbidden by law to protest at soldier's funerals. It's called a "secondary boycott". For example, a union can strike and picket a store where they work but, they cannot picket a manufacturing plant that makes products that the store sells, - that's a "secondary boycott" and it's illegal. So, the right of freedom of speech, assembly and expression do not always carry over as far as a group wants to take them. It's a shame that the judge in this case did not draw the same parallel as Vince Gatto does regarding a "secondary boycott". But, then again, I'm not a lawyer or a judge, just a logical, reasonable person with an opinion. What's yours? legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Secondary+Boycott
At the Right Wing Hardware Store we used to carry only products "Made in American" and displaying the "Union Label". Then we found out that most of our right-wing customers were anti-union and we did away with the labels. Now we only sell products imported from countries with non-union workers. Sometimes you can't have it both ways. Life is confusing isn't it. |
|
