# Supreme Court rules in favor of Westboro protests **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 2, 2011, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222 "2011-03-02T16:15:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/101 "2011-03-03T16:46:53Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > The Hells Angels threat was cowardly and deserves no respect at all. I see that you never did get around to that “reading for comprehension” attempt… ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/102 "2011-03-03T16:47:11Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > The Hells Angels did not threaten him. Read the post again, this time for comprehension: I comprehended just fine. It really is effectively the same thing. Otherwise, why would they bother to state it in public and to the Phelps people? If anything, it’s worse, because it’s a “let’s you and him fight” kind of thing. “No, I’m not saying _I_ would hit you, but some other guy who’s bigger than you and less willing to be concerned about the consequences might hit you.” It’s weaselly bullshit, and to me it’s no better than a direct threat. I’ll continue to call it a direct threat for the sake of shorthand, because that’s what it really was. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/103 "2011-03-03T16:48:36Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > I comprehended just fine. It really is effectively the same thing. Nonsense. By this “reasoning” selling fire insurance is solicitation to commit arson as long as you’re clever enough not to get caught (since it’s an offer to pay you money for doing so). In this case, given the Phelps well-known _modus operandi_ of trolling for frivolous lawsuits in order to finance themselves, it is clearly an offer to insure anyone attempting to enforce the legal buffer zone against expenses occurred in defense against such harassment. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/104 "2011-03-03T16:52:34Z")
Ah, so the Hells Angels were offering to pay the _Phelpses’_ legal bills if someone hit them? Of course they weren’t. They were clearly inviting, indeed, encouraging, people to harm the Phelpses by offering to cover their legal expenses. And they were clearly suggesting to the Phelpses that they would offer assistance to people who did harm them. If they weren’t, there was absolutely no reason for them to say anything about it. It was a threat of violence, plain and simple. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/105 "2011-03-03T17:21:15Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > It was a threat of violence, plain and simple. Nonsense. The Phelps _modus operandi_ is to file frivolous lawsuits. Ergo, they would be expected to file a frivolous lawsuit against anyone who had the effrontery to shoo them back into the area beyond the legally-mandated buffer zone. Hence, the offer to provide insurance against this harassment so that people would not be subject to financial risk for upholding the law (and to prevent the Phelpses from winning such a suit via deeper pockets despite the non-merits of their case). (I assume that the next move is to ask for a “cite” that the Phelpses support themselves by abusing the legal system. :rolleyes:) ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/106 "2011-03-03T17:23:13Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > It was a threat of violence, plain and simple. If it was, and I don’t think it is by any means certain it was, I am not going to lose a great deal of sleep over it. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/107 "2011-03-03T17:27:22Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Ergo, they would be expected to file a frivolous lawsuit against anyone who had the effrontery to shoo them back into the area beyond the legally-mandated buffer zone. Actually, if the person doing the “shooing” were not a member of law enforcement or the authorities, and if the shooing were in any way physical, i’m not sure that the lawsuit would be frivolous. If a buffer law requires that i keep, for example, 1000 feet away from a given place or event, and i stray within that zone but am still on public property, you can point out to me that i’m inside the zone, and you can suggest that i move back, but you don’t get to “shoo” me back in any physical way. That’s the job of law enforcement and the authorities. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/108 "2011-03-03T17:27:25Z")
> [@villa](#): > > If it was, and I don’t think it is by any means certain it was, I am not going to lose a great deal of sleep over it. That’s a mighty slippery slope, man. First they came for the Phelps trolls… ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/109 "2011-03-03T17:30:39Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That’s a mighty slippery slope, man. I mean, next thing you know, there will be companies selling police departments insurance against police-brutality judgments, thereby providing (by **acsenray** ’s argument) wink-and-nudge endorsement of the nightstick and taser as replacements for the judge and jury. What’s that? You, in the back? There **are** such insurance policies being sold? :eek: ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/110 "2011-03-03T17:32:25Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That’s a mighty slippery slope, man. > > First they came for the Phelps trolls… Absolutely. If it were the government, and if I was suggesting they shouldn’t be legally liable. But if someone kicks the crap out of Phelps, I am not going to apologize for raising a glass to them. Back home, both the Anti-Nazi League and Anti Fascist Action had their place in the fight against the Neo-Nazis. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/111 "2011-03-03T17:34:49Z")
The Phelps’ aren’t attacking anybody. If you respond to speech with violence, you are always wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/112 "2011-03-03T17:37:49Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That’s a mighty slippery slope, man. > > First they came for the Phelps trolls… It really isn’t. If I told someone their recently deceased kid was burning in hell, I’d expect to be punched in the face. Them’s [fightin’ words](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words#Chaplinsky_decision). ETA: That’s not to say I don’t agree with the ruling. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/113 "2011-03-03T17:39:00Z")
Not every person met by the AFA was personally responsible for racist violence, but were part of a movement which condoned and encouraged racist violence. The Phelps are part of a movement that condones and encourages homophobic violence. Whether they themselves have gotten their hands dirty doesn’t strike me as a matter of great concern. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/114 "2011-03-03T17:41:59Z")
That’s a bit of a stretch. Have the Phelpses ever actually advocated violence against gays? ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/115 "2011-03-03T17:43:42Z")
Not to my knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/116 "2011-03-03T17:46:44Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It really isn’t. If I told someone their recently deceased kid was burning in hell, I’d expect to be punched in the face. Them’s [fightin’ words](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words#Chaplinsky_decision). We’re talking about the Hell’s Angels volunteering to do the punching, and “fighting words” are not a legal justification for violence in any case. The Supreme Court has said that certain kinds of very narrowly defined speech can be restricted (and the definition has become so narrowed as to be almost non-existent), not that they can justify retaliatory violence. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/117 "2011-03-03T17:49:29Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > We’re talking about the Hell’s Angels volunteering to do the punching Again: objection – asserted fact not in evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/118 "2011-03-03T17:50:29Z")
No, but common sense can. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Nader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Darth\_Nader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Nader)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/119 "2011-03-06T16:18:48Z")
Just watched the daughter on tv. She _really_ brought the crazy in. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Nader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Darth\_Nader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Nader)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222/120 "2011-03-06T16:26:43Z")
[Link](http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/06/fox-hosts-hate/). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-westboro-protests/573222.md?page=7)