• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Anonymous takes on WBC again

#121
I applaud all those families showing their restraint. If it was one of my relatives at those funerals it would be on like donkey kong. Seriously though, feeling all that grief confusion and anger; these people want to martyrs. Their tactics are just so underhanded and dishonorable that they are infuriating.
 
#124
NWB said:
Just in case nobody here had heard of this one yet:



Grohl for President anyone?

Expanding on what I wrote earlier, I think it would be very encouraging if no business, I mean gas stations, motels, restaurants, etc. served the WBC members. That would make it quite difficult for them to operate.
Click to expand...


That's what happened when they protested at a funeral at a town here in oklahoma. Someone slashed all the tires on their vans, and no tire shop would service them. All the hotels turned them away too. :)
 
#125
Smokin' Toaster said:
I agree with you in principle, Lonesomedave, but I think funerals should have some kind of exception. Maybe the cemetery and surrounding blocks could be considered private property for the duration of the service or something of that nature. People need privacy and room and conditions to grieve.
Click to expand...

Generally this already exists.

Most cemeteries they're legally excluded from, and quite a few municipalities also include a buffer zone between the cemetery and the protest location.

Usually they're at least across the street, if not a couple blocks away from the funeral... and they ALWAYS have all the proper permits/approvals/etc.
 
#130
No it isn't. A little empathy can go a long way in these debates. Sometimes the cold stark view of justice and freedom isn't what we need. Humans aren't perfect and sometimes make some bad calls. But when you're truly considering the feelings of their loss it becomes pretty clear that the right to free speech just doesn't make sense here. During wartime our rights are often times reduced. It's not like it hasn't happened before.
 
#134
DaDrew2112 said:
No it isn't. A little empathy can go a long way in these debates. Sometimes the cold stark view of justice and freedom isn't what we need. Humans aren't perfect and sometimes make some bad calls. But when you're truly considering the feelings of their loss it becomes pretty clear that the right to free speech just doesn't make sense here. During wartime our rights are often times reduced. It's not like it hasn't happened before.
Click to expand...

Yes, it does; it's just applied in an appalling way.
 
#136
What happens when they provoke someone in a grief stricken state to make a poor emotion fueled choice? It well within the realms of possibility. And then what, imprison said person? People need to understand freedom of speech isn't a right, it's a responsibility. Turning a blind eye to these families forsakes the ideals our country is built on. The constitution is a living document to deal with these sort of things. We aren't being the "bigger men" by ignoring these scumbags, we're turning our back on children and heroes.
 
#138
DaDrew2112 said:
What happens when they provoke someone in a grief stricken state to make a poor emotion fueled choice? It well within the realms of possibility. And then what, imprison said person? People need to understand freedom of speech isn't a right, it's a responsibility. Turning a blind eye to these families forsakes the ideals our country is built on. The constitution is a living document to deal with these sort of things. We aren't being the "bigger men" by ignoring these scumbags, we're turning our back on children and heroes.
Click to expand...

I understand that Washington said it must be treated as a responsibility (I think it was him), and for 99.9999% of this country, it is viewed more or less that way. However, with that implied responsibility, one must understand that even horrendously unsavory and unpopular view points and opinions may be spoken.
 
#139
DaDrew2112 said:
What happens when they provoke someone in a grief stricken state to make a poor emotion fueled choice? It well within the realms of possibility. And then what, imprison said person? People need to understand freedom of speech isn't a right, it's a responsibility. Turning a blind eye to these families forsakes the ideals our country is built on. The constitution is a living document to deal with these sort of things. We aren't being the "bigger men" by ignoring these scumbags, we're turning our back on children and heroes.
Click to expand...

There was an argument over this when the KKK and the Neo-Nazis were gaining strength in the 80s, and I remember an interview with an FBI agent who said that allowing them to have freedom of speech and say all the hateful things they want is the best way to keep track of them, and they also believed it kept them from escalating to violence.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back