View Full Version : Fred Phelp's daughter arrested in Nebraska for allowing son to stomp on flag...
royalfan5
6/5/2007, 11:05 PM
at funeral.
http://journalstar.com/articles/2007/06/05/news/nebraska/doc4665eee506fbb358781751.txt
It will be interesting to see how big of a circus this turns into.
Tailwind
6/5/2007, 11:16 PM
Finally! I hope they can make it stick.
usmc-sooner
6/5/2007, 11:25 PM
deport their sorry asses
HskrGrl
6/5/2007, 11:28 PM
“Those rogue cops cooked up this scheme,” she said,
Since I personally know quite a few Bellevue police officers this makes me laugh. :D
Bets on how long it takes for the ACLU to pick up her case?
olevetonahill
6/6/2007, 12:12 AM
That biznatcho needs to learn a lil Law :eek:
If shes Convicted On this Charge , Her NEXT STEP IS NOT FEDARAL COURT:eek:
Shes Charged in City Court Rite ? . Next up County , Next St . ETC .:D
Won't stick. Unconstitutional. Protected free speech. But still it puts momma in jail for the night which is not a bad thing.
The Phelpses are pretty much the worst family alive.
olevetonahill
6/6/2007, 12:43 AM
Yall prey ( pun intended )
I think Im gonna Mosey up there and Join up with this bunch !:cool: :pop:
def_lazer_fc
6/6/2007, 01:15 AM
Since I personally know quite a few Bellevue police officers this makes me laugh. :D
Bets on how long it takes for the ACLU to pick up her case?
do you honestly think the aclu would touch this? seriously.
Frozen Sooner
6/6/2007, 01:49 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if they did. Flag desecration statutes are grossly violative of the First Amendment.
BajaOklahoma
6/6/2007, 02:41 AM
deport their sorry asses
LOL. When I saw this title, my first thought was send to Mexico as payback for the illegal aliens.
We'd all get what we deserve. :D
If they were all rounded up and executed, would anyone care?
But, we're in America. Damn it.
I say we put that whole 'gang' in a box and parachute them into the middle of Iran.
StoopTroup
6/6/2007, 06:43 AM
When they executed the Rosenbergs as traitors I felt maybe they should have put them in prison for the rest of their lives...
I'd like to see traitorous actions be prosecuted ASAP.
Disrespecting the Families of a War Veteran during a time of grief should be a traitorous act IMO.
TheHumanAlphabet
6/6/2007, 08:31 AM
Someone should Mace them, but then they would be arrested. I wonder if I could make the free-speech arguement if I maced them while they protested? Because I would be protesting their protesting. How the heck do they get money to go all around the country. The only people in their "church" is that family.
mikeelikee
6/6/2007, 08:36 AM
Human excrement. :mad:
Hatfield
6/6/2007, 08:59 AM
Won't stick. Unconstitutional. Protected free speech. But still it puts momma in jail for the night which is not a bad thing.
yep. on all counts....and it would be a terrible thing if she ends up suing the police dept. to fund more of their assinine protests.
Someone should Mace them, but then they would be arrested. I wonder if I could make the free-speech arguement if I maced them while they protested? Because I would be protesting their protesting. How the heck do they get money to go all around the country. The only people in their "church" is that family.
Fred has been maced before.
He laughed and got on TV.
Seriously.
Frozen Sooner
6/6/2007, 10:21 AM
Someone should Mace them, but then they would be arrested. I wonder if I could make the free-speech arguement if I maced them while they protested? Because I would be protesting their protesting. How the heck do they get money to go all around the country. The only people in their "church" is that family.
There's some precedent up here. A guy threw water on some nuns protesting the war in sub-freezing weather, then made the claim that he was protesting their protest.
The verdict came back that battery is not protected free speech.
sooner_born_1960
6/6/2007, 10:50 AM
IMHO expressing does not equal speech, but it'll probably take a new court to get that straightened out.
I read the thread title too fast. :O
Jeopardude
6/6/2007, 10:58 AM
Mike's right on this, dammit.
The Phelpses are the most repellent people in this country. They're hateful provocateurs and I would not shed a tear if they "disappeared." But that law has no way of standing up after the 1990 Supreme Court decision on flag burning.
I bet if you followed Fred Phelps for three months you'd be able to aqrrest him for domestic abuse, molestation, solicitation in parks or something. No way you get that bug eyed without some skeletons in your closet.
Hatfield
6/6/2007, 11:09 AM
IMHO expressing does not equal speech, but it'll probably take a new court to get that straightened out.
huh?
kind of harsh on those reliant on sign language. expression was the earliest form of "speech"
sooner_born_1960
6/6/2007, 11:13 AM
speech is but one form of expression.
Viking Kitten
6/6/2007, 11:33 AM
Art is another form of expression. So is music. So is the written word. So are you arguing those shouldn't be protected? Technically, they aren't "speech."
sooner_born_1960
6/6/2007, 11:39 AM
I'm arguing that the supreme court decided that stomping on a flag is protected speech. Another court could decide differently. And the state can restrict the volume of music, the places you are allowed to express yourself artistically, and where you can write your words.
SoonerStormchaser
6/6/2007, 11:46 AM
I support the death penalty for all members of Westboro Baptist Church.
imjebus
6/6/2007, 11:47 AM
When they executed the Rosenbergs as traitors I felt maybe they should have put them in prison for the rest of their lives...
I'd like to see traitorous actions be prosecuted ASAP.
Disrespecting the Families of a War Veteran during a time of grief should be a traitorous act IMO.
It's amazing to me that nobody cared about these people when they were only bothering the gay community. It should be illegal to protest at ANY funeral not just those of a War Vet.
sooner_born_1960
6/6/2007, 11:48 AM
I think somebody cared. Nobody cared about those that cared.
It's amazing to me that nobody cared about these people when they were only bothering the gay community. It should be illegal to protest at ANY funeral not just those of a War Vet.
Are you kidding? The community v. Phelps battles started way before the war funerals.
SicEmBaylor
6/6/2007, 11:53 AM
Is his daughter hittable?
Viking Kitten
6/6/2007, 11:54 AM
I'm arguing that the supreme court decided that stomping on a flag is protected speech. Another court could decide differently. And the state can restrict the volume of music, the places you are allowed to express yourself artistically, and where you can write your words.
Right, but the regulations you are describing are undeniably content neutral. When you are talking about regulations curtailing political speech (or expression), those laws are "strictly scrutinized" to ensure that our Constitutional freedoms are not being infringed upon, and most of time these laws are struck down. You'd be pretty unlikely to find a court willing to overturn that much case law, thanks to stare decisis and whatnot.
sooner_born_1960
6/6/2007, 11:58 AM
Can I sing my anti-war songs in a courtroom? How about write my anti-war slogans on the courthouse steps. Can I draw my pictures on public busses? It wouldn't be such a stretch to decide that I can't express myself by stomping a flag at a funeral.
def_lazer_fc
6/6/2007, 12:03 PM
Can I sing my anti-war songs in a courtroom? How about write my anti-war slogans on the courthouse steps. Can I draw my pictures on public busses? It wouldn't be such a stretch to decide that I can't express myself by stomping a flag at a funeral.
most of what you described is just vandalism.
sooner_born_1960
6/6/2007, 12:05 PM
Except the singing. So you're saying my expression can be limited when it violates a law? A constituational protection can be trumped by a silly old statute?
Except the singing. So you're saying my expression can be limited when it violates a law? A constituational protection can be trumped by a silly old statute?
when it violates a content-neutral law, yes. However, laws aimed at preventing people from desecrating a flag are certainly not content neutral, and thus require a great deal more scrutiny from the courts.
Now, if you simply wanted to extend the same laws that apply to courthouses to funerals, that would be a horse of a different color. :)
sooner_born_1960
6/6/2007, 12:24 PM
My point exactly. If by some chance I was allowed to enter the Suprem Court chambers during session, I would be allowed to sit quietly, and show the utmost respect for the court. I don't think I'd be allowed to tap dance on the flag. The would be nothing wrong with requiring the same decorum at a funeral.
Frozen Sooner
6/6/2007, 12:27 PM
So you'd be in support of a law that could imprison people for emotional outbursts at funerals? 'Cause that's sort of what would happen if you made it content-neutral.
Frozen Sooner
6/6/2007, 12:28 PM
Mike's right on this, dammit.
The Phelpses are the most repellent people in this country. They're hateful provocateurs and I would not shed a tear if they "disappeared." But that law has no way of standing up after the 1990 Supreme Court decision on flag burning.
I bet if you followed Fred Phelps for three months you'd be able to aqrrest him for domestic abuse, molestation, solicitation in parks or something. No way you get that bug eyed without some skeletons in your closet.
I may not agree with what you say.
What you say and how you say it may disgust me beyond words.
I will defend to the death your right to say it.
(Though not here. 'Cause this is a privately-owned message board, not the public square.)
Viking Kitten
6/6/2007, 12:31 PM
I may not agree with what you say.
What you say and how you say it may disgust me beyond words.
I will defend to the death your right to say it.
(Though not here. 'Cause this is a privately-owned message board, not the public square.)
Bull****. We all know you hate America.
SicEmBaylor
6/6/2007, 12:31 PM
No pics of his daughter?
SicEmBaylor
6/6/2007, 12:32 PM
OUT
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9a/Shirleyphelpsmug.jpg
soonerboy_odanorth
6/6/2007, 12:33 PM
Flag desecration statutes are grossly violative of the First Amendment.
I think you grossly exaggerate. Time was that the Supreme Court upheld anti-desecration statutes. Not to mention that 1990 decision upholding burning only did so by the narrowest vote possible for the Supreme Court, 5-4. Factor in numerous successful approvals of anti-desecration Constitutional Amendment proposals in the House which have met with quite narrow defeat in the Senate.
The First Amendment protects speech, not the right to incite riot. Remember it is the right to peaceably assemble. And IMO flag burning is simply (pardon the pun) too inflammatory, especially done in the faces of veterans and their families.
(Oh, and sidebar since the thread was locked and I never got a chance to respond: ERA and most of the other things you listed on the neg original? Pandering to special interests is hardly original. The Mortgage Disclosure Act was about the only thing you mentioned that had universal utility for the nation... again, just my opinion.)
Frozen Sooner
6/6/2007, 12:38 PM
That's a reasonable line of discussion regarding flag desecration statutes-but I could easily counter by stating that statutes against incitement to riot are already on the books and are not violative of the First. Why? Because they're content-neutral. However, the charge wasn't incitement to riot, was it? It was desecration of the flag. It seems that the Congress agrees that such statutes are unconstitutional, otherwise they wouldn't be introducing bills to amend the Constitution to allow them.
As for your second point-I guess if you're going to play that game, most of what you consider "original thought" by the conservatives was pandering as well. Just my opinion, of course.
Viking Kitten
6/6/2007, 12:39 PM
Just a side note to the whole debate, you know those flag print boxer shorts and swim suits that really patriotic guys wear? I've always wondered how it's not considered desecration to put one's stinky ball sweat all over the flag.
sooner_born_1960
6/6/2007, 12:40 PM
Mine isn't stinky.
Frozen Sooner
6/6/2007, 12:41 PM
Just a side note to the whole debate, you know those flag print boxer shorts and swim suits that really patriotic guys wear? I've always wondered how it's not considered desecration to put one's stinky ball sweat all over the flag.
It is, actually. The American Legion publishes a big long guide to things that should and shouldn't be done to the flag, and making it into clothing is one of them.
Though they do prescribe one method for disposal-burning. ;) And yes, I know, that's totally different than burning a flag as a method of expressing displeasure over something. It just makes me chuckle a little when I see that.
SicEmBaylor
6/6/2007, 12:42 PM
How many real riots have been incited from flag burning? I'm not sure there are really that many, and is there really an epidemic of flag burnings around the country? It's disgusting free speech but free speech nonetheless.
Scott D
6/6/2007, 12:44 PM
I'm pretty sure the Branch Davidians would be going strong if David Koresh had followed the Fred Phelps formula of keeping a cult going for over 50 years.
SicEmBaylor
6/6/2007, 12:47 PM
I'm pretty sure the Branch Davidians would be going strong if David Koresh had followed the Fred Phelps formula of keeping a cult going for over 50 years.
Koresh had more sense than Phelps though. At least Koresh kept to himself; that's really all he and his followers wanted. They didn't go out and do the kind of nutty *** crap that Phelps does, Koresh had the sense to keep that crap behind closed doors!
Pricetag
6/6/2007, 12:58 PM
OUT
Did you read the article? It said she was 49. No pic necessary.
def_lazer_fc
6/6/2007, 01:04 PM
No pics of his daughter?
his daughter is busted.
Scott D
6/6/2007, 01:06 PM
Koresh had more sense than Phelps though. At least Koresh kept to himself; that's really all he and his followers wanted. They didn't go out and do the kind of nutty *** crap that Phelps does, Koresh had the sense to keep that crap behind closed doors!
perhaps but so far as we know Phelps doesn't have some arsenal hidden in the compound known as the area surrounding the WBC.
SicEmBaylor
6/6/2007, 01:12 PM
perhaps but so far as we know Phelps doesn't have some arsenal hidden in the compound known as the area surrounding the WBC.
Well, that in and of itself I don't have a problem with. I know a couple of people with enough guns, ammo, explosives, and supplies to keep the 3rd ID at bay for a year.
It is, actually. The American Legion publishes a big long guide to things that should and shouldn't be done to the flag, and making it into clothing is one of them.
Do the communist Chinese who make all our flags adhere to the Legion's flag handling rules?
def_lazer_fc
6/6/2007, 01:21 PM
i just want to know if its proper for me to use an american flag as a cape.
Jeopardude
6/6/2007, 01:25 PM
Is his daughter hittable?
No, but she's serve as her maid of honor-able.
def_lazer_fc
6/6/2007, 01:27 PM
i know a lot of you probably despise michael moore, but on his old show he had the funniest encounter with these people ever. the sodomobile. poor fred never looked so uncomfortable.
Hatfield
6/6/2007, 01:41 PM
No pics of his daughter?
you don't want that....you really really don't.
Hatfield
6/6/2007, 01:43 PM
That's a reasonable line of discussion regarding flag desecration statutes-but I could easily counter by stating that statutes against incitement to riot are already on the books and are not violative of the First. Why? Because they're content-neutral. However, the charge wasn't incitement to riot, was it? It was desecration of the flag. It seems that the Congress agrees that such statutes are unconstitutional, otherwise they wouldn't be introducing bills to amend the Constitution to allow them.
As for your second point-I guess if you're going to play that game, most of what you consider "original thought" by the conservatives was pandering as well. Just my opinion, of course.
not to nit-pick here but the actual charge was contributing to the delinquency of a minor...by allowing him to violate the stat. (which is soon to be repealed i am sure)..which makes this whole fiasco all the more strange
royalfan5
6/6/2007, 02:02 PM
not to nit-pick here but the actual charge was contributing to the delinquency of a minor...by allowing him to violate the stat. (which is soon to be repealed i am sure)..which makes this whole fiasco all the more strange
Here in Nebraska we just make up the law as we go along. I'm sure they will offer her a disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace charge to get it over with, but if not our AG has no qualms about ****ing away tax dollars on something that won't pass constituional muster, especially since he is announcing his Senate campaign for Hagel's seat tomorrow.
Scott D
6/6/2007, 02:11 PM
you know...Phelps reminds me of the preacher from Porky's.
HskrGrl
6/6/2007, 02:43 PM
In all seriousness....
Should I cancel my order for these?
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f3/jessisfarks/flagshoes.jpg
and these?
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f3/jessisfarks/flagkickballs.jpg
Scott D
6/6/2007, 02:45 PM
depends...if we say yes, will you dress up like Zap from American Gladiators?
SicEmBaylor
6/6/2007, 03:33 PM
Flip flops are the debil. Everyone walking around showing off their nasty *** feet...ugh.
(I wore flip flops yesterday)
soonerboy_odanorth
6/6/2007, 05:38 PM
As for your second point-I guess if you're going to play that game, most of what you consider "original thought" by the conservatives was pandering as well. Just my opinion, of course.
Touche'. :cool:
olevetonahill
6/6/2007, 05:45 PM
I always thot the folks here Cared about each other.
And Not a one has asked How Flag is doing .
Or if he was hurt .:D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.