On Nov 3, 10:33 am, Junior Mints <sms...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Nov 1, 5:07 pm, Fr=AAnk P=AAnu=A9=A9I? <ZOO...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Modemac wrote:
> > >Besides, Phelps' family manage their own law firm, and they know how
>
> > to use the legal system.
>
> > ...and that's exactly what they've been doing. The Phelps' family
> > income of the last few years has substantially been gotten through the
> > use of lawsuits. They provoke grieving family members at funerals to
> > assault them. They sue, using Phelps' legal machine. They settle,
> > frequently for large amounts. The Phelps organization is held by some
> > to more resemble a gypsy scam than a church protest. Lemme see if I
can
> > hunt up a link....
>
> > The Intent of Fred
Phelpshttp://www.blackfive.net/main/2005/08/the_inte=
nt_of_f.html
>
> > Excerpt:
> > >>The Clarksville (Tennessee) Leaf Chronicle has an editorial about
> > Fred Phelps protesting military funerals. This is something that
we've
> > discussed here before (see link for how police have countered Phelps
in
> > Massachusetts).
>
> > What the Tennessee Editorial misses is that the intent of the hateful,
> > ignorant Fred Phelps and his "church" is to get funds from filing law
> > suits against anyone who assaults him or his followers. His wife is
his
> > attorney.<<
>
> >
____________________www.frankpanucci.comhttp://reperkussionz.blogspot.c=
om/
>
> This is one legal problem, no matter what you really want from the
> defendant the only thing your gonna get is money, filthy lucre,
> buckolas. The legal community has tried other stuff in its infancy
> and it just doesn't work. With bucks you know when you have collected
> enough, just count the bucks and check court do***ents.
>
> Now there is the Court of Chancery that can accept one party actions
> and theoretically rule just about anything. The only problem is that
> the Court over the millenia has decided to do rather simple things
> like wills, trusts and estates, etc were there is one person who is
> quite dead and a bunch of crying, greedy people who want the bucks.
> You could sue these feaks in Chancery but it wouldn't work.
>
> Legally, if you set out to do a great wrong, the court will hang you
> out to dry. Don't screw with the court.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Really, I don't this this case is as revolutionary as it might seem.
I too at first though "uh oh, what will this do to my first
amendment?" but then I realized that my making obscene jokes and
controversial political statements really isn't affected by any of
this. Yes, maybe if I went to a funeral and started screaming obscene
jokes into people's ears then there be rammifications, but there
should be rammifications anyway! Being sued for $11 million seems a
tad much, but the reasonable thing to do would be to physically remove
their ***** from the event (which they have prevented through their
own lawsuits).
Besides, isn't one of the limitations of the 1st amendment when the
speech involves "fighting words?" (this knowledge comes from 10th
grade civics class so correct me if I'm wrong) It seems to me that
screaming at someone's funeral that they are going to Hell because god
hates them could fall into that category.
I'm sure the Phelps' arn't the only one's who have been sucessfully
sued for being gigantic pricks. It's just one of the few times it's
been well publicized.
|
