OOOOOOOOOH!!!!! I hope that The Boys From Westboro refuse to pay... Then they will be in contempt of court, and NOTHING can then save them (other than public, humble contrition, that is). There is nothing that the courts won't argue over, except contempt. If held in contempt by one court, there is no other court that is going to have any sympathy with you...

As I said, I hope hope hope that that stiff-necked buch of pecker-heads refuse to pay...

The fact that they see nothing wrong with doing that at a person's funeral both frightens and sickens me.

Pat Robertson says that the cremated may not see the ressurection,and that it's pagan and sinful.
This fanatic has not even taken into consideration all the "xtians"
incinerated in wars and fires.
The crematorium business should sue him.

Since you guys (atheists) as a majority are proponants of the seperation of church and state you probably feel it wwould be inapropriate for the judicial branch of the government to get invovled in this case.

"Pat Robertson says that the cremated may not see the ressurection,and that it's pagan and sinful."

Heh.. Imagine the panic of being resurrected but stuck 6 feet under ground in a solid hardwood casket.

I can see Pat's point though.. I mean.. If God can't regrow lost limbs, I doubt it could rebuild a whole body from ashes. There is no precedent is there? Oh wait! Adam!

"Since you guys (atheists) as a majority are proponants of the seperation of church and state you probably feel it wwould be inapropriate for the judicial branch of the government to get invovled in this case."

Kyle, That was actually wanted by everyone. No one wants a Government-run religion nor does anyone want a religion-run government. We keep the peace with a atheist government that makes all religions place nice in a nation.

Many of the pilgrims came to the America's to escape religious persecution ( and do their own persecuting) from the throne and established churches in England. They certainly liked the idea.

That was a short-lived notion. Once churches got established here and other religions started showing up, Christians immediately started to undermine the government to suppress others and enforce their own bigotry.

"Since you guys (atheists) as a majority are proponants of the seperation of church and state you probably feel it wwould be inapropriate for the judicial branch of the government to get invovled in this case."

First of all, not all of us here are atheists. Second, the few who are only differentiate from christian atheists by one god. Third, this really has nothing to do with religion. Look at the article, the charges are based on privacy and defament. Religion only enters into the discussion because of the basis for the bias and motive of the protestors. They still have to answer for their actions regardless of religion.

I was really just trying to be inflamtory. But since it has nothing to do with religion I find it odd that it would be posted on this website. Personally I thing that church is way out of line and deserves to be sued. Merry Christmas

Sorry for the spelling errors above.

The Westboro Church we should know by their actions that the are not a part of the Ecclesia which is the body of Christ, Christ the head of the bnody would not do such things, nor would those that know Him in a mature way which is spiritually. To bwe sure Jesus was a pacifist and did not condone war, but He was not a part lof this world's System...
Let the world go its way, and the believer should go the way of Christ. which is suffering, as they see the world destroying itself... Which can be clearly seem by a blind pewrson...

Be that as it may, and so it goes!

Anony 6:00--

News flash: The Westboro gang believe they are following "The Lord your God" with every ounce of conviction that you believe you are following "The Lord your God". Don't you flippin' get it? People interpret the bible the way they see fit, precisely because it IS OPEN to interpretation. So why don't you go hate your parents or take up some diamondback rattlers, or something "Jesus" inspired, like that.

"Be that as it may"? My ASS......go actually READ your bible for a change. Go on....beat it! Git!

I think anonymous at 6:00 and Celestials1938 are one in the same. Either that, or anonymous decided to use Celestials "...and so it goes" line for some additional flavoring to their own bland postings.

It is Celestials. And if he keeps it up, I'll post the emails he sent to me. I asked him to stop posting on the site and he let his anger show. He even sent me some vulgar images letting me know what he really thought of me.

Celestials is not a very nice Christian.

Ah, christian values. Two words that don't go together.

Whenever I read Celestials, or anonymous', postings, it reminds me of when I drained my first bottle of Jack Daniels!

I've been thinking about this ever since I found out about it this morning, and I'm not so sure we should be celebrating just yet (though it's sure nice to think of those bastards having to pay for their lack of common decency). I've written something about it here.

"Since you guys (atheists) as a majority are proponants of the seperation of church and state you probably feel it wwould be inapropriate for the judicial branch of the government to get invovled in this case."

Actually, that's just where First Amendment issues belong - in the courts. That said, this is a suit between a private citizen and a church, not the government and a church, so there is no conflict with the Establishment clause.

"In law, defamation is the communication of a statement that makes an express or implied factual claim that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, group, government or nation. Most jurisdictions provide legal actions, civil and/or criminal, to punish various kinds of defamation."

I'll try and be pleasant about this. If this loser Phelps and his crew get away with defamation. I would have no problem donating large sums of money to organizations to picket, at D.C., stating the Jewish Holocaust never happened :-)

Lets see how this comes out :-) A few deaths, and a little revolt is healthy in a democracy :-) Lets see how far we can go with this, perhaps, defamation of the President of the U.S.? How about a little picketting, Jesus was a cock sucker in front of a few churches around the U.S.

Shall we incite a little rioting, using some racial slurring :-) Let me know when someone figures out the results of this, I will plant the Judge's name on a sign and defame the shit out of him on public domain, after personally buying a high end server and a little software :-) How about the Judge's wife/mother sucked my cock on Januray 3, 1989, on a picket sign, while standing outside the courthouse :-)

Perhaps, we could make bumper stickers :-) Better yet, the federal law enforcement is so incompetent, a mass mail-out of letters with a few flyers about the Judge, and some high profile politicians would probably make a stink - and there has been a precedence of their incompetence to catch those who use mail as their delivery device to make statements.

Oh, I'm just being sarcastic :-)

The Westboro clan is America's best example of tolerance. Why do I say this? Ask yourself: "Why do the majority of Christians stick together like GLUE? Why do they support any activity just because someone proclaims doing it in the name of the LORD?" Phelps says he HATES FAGS because Jesus hates gays---thus, he can public display his protest anywhere, yet hardly any chruches disagree. I'm one of the gays he hates, and I say SUE the jerk! If everyone brought suit who were pubicly affected by his hatred, then his organization would become penniless--and we all know that snake handling red neck kansas folk aren't equippted to support their pot habits, much less a law suit!

If every responsible party to the funeral arrangments of said picketed funeral actually brought suit against the Westboro IDOL-WORSHIPING MEDIA WHORES ---then perhaps their $$$ would dwindle to zero? Phelps is to America what Bin Lauden is to the middle east, a terrorist! Why do Americans tolerate "Christian" Terrorist but publically vilify other religions?

Hey guys,

Isn't it amazing that christians who post here - with their indoctrinated programming - never have good spelling??? I don't read a ton of comments, but the ones that I have read which were from christians (and they are almost always anonymous) spell worth a shit. As if they are so dimwitted that they cannot spell correctly. How can anyone take something serious when they can't even spell simple words correctly, or don't have the mental fortitude to actually go back and check their own shit. Incredible! This just goes to show what christianity does to the mind of its victims.

John

I duz luv Jebus, I wheel preyt fort utoo. I iz all sew a bye-bill scalor.

What amazes me is that nobody has tried so far to empty a couple of clips into the Phelps clan.

They have honor guards at those funerals, don´t they? There are military men there who have seen combat, maybe even the same combat that killed the person they are honoring.

Don´t they ever get the urge to fire the 21-gun salute not in the air but at these subhuman wastrels?

"In law, defamation is the communication of a statement that makes an express or implied factual claim that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, group, government or nation. Most jurisdictions provide legal actions, civil and/or criminal, to punish various kinds of defamation."

"Phelps" with his "god hates fags" comments.

One can only wonder what the people in his town are like, to allow this piece of human trash to walk around polluting the environment, and represent them.

And I mean, represent them in all ways, down to the sheer bigotry and all.

The lawyers of that state, as well as all of their politicians are obviously rubes, and lackeys, but that is expected I suppose from such a place that allows Phelps to breed like a roach.

There needs to be a non-religious representation in this case, to slam Phelp's ass, while forcing the court to create precedence where god can be used against evangelicals. For instance, a prosecutor with a few brain cells, and with a little less "bigotry" would be able to ask some basic question, with our miscreant Phelps on the stand.

1) Do you believe god is real?
2) So you believe god is in "fact" a being who can declare facts?
3) Therefore, the comments you post, are "factually" based?
4) Thus, the comment "god hates fags", is a factual statement, you present to denigrate homosexuals and their ill-repute?

If all answers are "yes", the fucker gets toasted. Else, he must admit his "god" is not a "fact" or a basis for "factual truth". Now, perhaps, I am a little slow on this, but how fucking hard is it to slam this fucker?

The ACLU is going to support this? Here's what's on their site as some of the protections they seek for American citizens.

"Your First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state."

If you fucking lie in court, its called perjury - "NOT" freedom of speech. Wonder how the ACLU views, lying and "freedom of speech". One citizen in the U.S. can not "forcibly" take the liberty from another, by defamation, else no one truly has freedom and liberty to live a life in peace.

The only argument this dip-shit Phelps could make would be that the liberty of the dead member is "not" affected.

However, any prosecutor with a fucking IQ of 50 or better, can make a case on behalf of the member's "estate" - that includes the negative flaming by proxy the family, the military, and the nation will receive as an affect.

Each time, this filth and his followers plan one of these events, it's a inchoate offense. If his intent is to present the facts, and then follow it up by his opinion, then, that's okay.

And, if a fucking nation didn't have a society, who predominately believed god was a fucking "fact", then he could probably be brushed off as one who has homophobia, because of his latent sexual insecurities, but... this is not the case, in America. A child, family, or much of that state is being told by this filth to believe that a "god", in "fact", has selectively chosen to condemn a fallen soldier, and "all" people who have such a lifestyle, that they are scum, degenerate, and heading for the worst place imaginable to them - "hell", and "that" is defamation.

I don't have a problem protecting the freedom of speech held by our nation, I do have a problem protecting a "liar" who has no other intent, but to hurt as many people as he can, because he feels he has been given som "factual" authority by a god to do such.

If he wants "freedom of speech" and to spew hatred all over the place, force him to "own" up to the comments as a man/citizen, not hide behind some magical figure that he believes gives him "factual" credibility.

The court may not be able to openly bridge the gap between religion and state, but they can sure force that "fuck" to state his case as a public leader and authority figure.

The court can challenge his "authority"..., if he pulls out the god card, that isn't a get out of jail card, because the court doesn't recognize a "god" as an authority figure - or, perhaps it takes a court case to make that point.

To John Blatt,

"How can anyone take something serious when they can't even spell simple words correctly?"

I agree. It is very hard to take those people seriously; almost as hard as it is to take those who litter their posts with profanity seriously.

Well Kyle, since you have said "nothing" in response to Phelps’ actions, it appears you personally have nothing to add to this thread, therefore, you comment has less value than anyone else, who has the capability to communicate, even if venting while writing.

Kyle: "Since you guys (atheists) as a majority are proponants of the seperation of church and state you probably feel it wwould be inapropriate for the judicial branch of the government to get invovled in this case."

Kyle, it appears you like to focus on the superficial outer picture, than the meaning behind the intelligible words. When someone can't communicate, both the underlying meaning, and the outer picture are distorted.

So, if you can become a little more mature, you too would be able to read the properly communicated words, and find the deeper meaning. However, for those who have to endure the sheer unintelligible words thrown together, that is not possible.

Here's an example of Kyle's writing, flipped to make it more Christian centric;

"Since you guys (Christians) as a majority are proponents of the freedom to evangelize, you probably feel it would be inappropriate for any portion of the state or federal government to get involved, in any case dealing with evangelical restriction - no matter what the cost to other people they intentionally hurt."

So, Kyle, are you and Phelps of the same mindset, its obvious where he stands in the "moral" debate. You have the audacity to make a comment about morality, and your religious affiliation has Phelps’ as your mascot.

Interesting you totally overlooked the immorality of Phelps’, but I'll give him one thing. At least he is literate enough to display his hatred and dissent openly - perhaps, you should take lessons, as you have yet to state anything of value that could be discussed here. Are you ready to make a statement, or does that observation pretty much hit the mark for you?

I thank the WM for posting this article, it allows me to vent and look for intelligent conversation on a topic that is obviously at the heart of the American community - citizen rights.

It's great to vent, and I do prefer to take legal action instead of venting when the time is right. I'm glad this family has taken the opportunity to sue Phelps, and his evangelical followers who feel they have an inalienable right to disseminate hate speech in the hope they hurt others.

In my "personal" opinion, I am extremely liberal in personal autonomy and believe a person has the right to do whatever it is that gives them peace. However, I am extremely conservative when it comes to a person, using their liberality to attack others using lies, hate, and everything else they can find, because they feel they have that right based on religious authority.

Kyle oh, Kyle - where art thou, what say you? Shall you not opine, and give erudition to this thread. Your deafening silence bespeaks the cogency of your thoughts.

Moral observer,

You should change your name to "moral can't see five feet in front of his face". At the top of the page I said that this church is way out of line and should be sued.

Kyle: "You should change your name to "moral can't see five feet in front of his face". At the top of the page I said that this church is way out of line and should be sued."

Let's see who can't see beyond their nose.

Kyle: "I was really just trying to be inflamtory."

Yes, you were. That is an immature act, unless there is something behind it, but at least you realize your myopic tendencies which lead nowhere.

Kyle: "But since it has nothing to do with religion I find it odd that it would be posted on this website."

Phelps picketing at a funeral, using religious comments like "god hates fags", etc, has nothing to do with religion? You must have a short nose.

Kyle: "Personally I thing that church is way out of line and deserves to be sued. Merry Christmas"

Other than your myopic vision, which obviously impairs your ability to spell correctly, you make a comment about a church the next sentence - right after you say that religion is not really part of the discussion. Your ability to move from one sentence to another is obviously a challenge for you - unless, once again, you are just trying to be "inflammatory".

Kyle, if this is your eruditious response, to be inflammatory, and attempt to criticize others for your lack of communications ability - consider your message heard, loud and clear. Thanks, and have a Merry Solstice.

Okay, lesson learned here. Sue Phelps and all evangelicals who use "god" as their authority, using the protocol mentioned earlier :-) Do you have any problems with that Kyle?

Kyle: "moral can't see five feet in front of his face"

And, Kyle, just because we are now focusing on your inability to think rationally, what makes you believe I am a "he"? Is your method the same one Christians use to determine that "god" is a male? No response necessary, we know your ability to think rationally and communicate. And, again - Merry Solstice.

To Moral Observer,

Usually the male impersonal is used in this kind of speech. The female is used in rare situations, like if your talking about a ship. Since you gave no indication as to your gender I made an assumption. But if you can be described as a several hundred ton vessel than fine. I'll use the female inpersonals.

Kyle: Usually the male impersonal is used in this kind of speech."

An "impersonal", means you are talking about an non-human object. Do you assume I am not a person?

And, if you are talking about me as an object, why suggest the male dominant speech is the "right" speech - that's stereotypical.

Kyle: "The female is used in rare situations, like if your talking about a ship."

Sort of like in an affectionate way, like one who is beautiful or motherly - like a ship for instance, who cares for its crew. Still, I am an inhuman object - thanks.

Kyle: "Since you gave no indication as to your gender I made an assumption."

Fair enough. You used a majority Atheist assumption earlier, why wouldn't it be consistent for you to use the male speech dominance assumption, while treating me like an inhuman object.

Kyle: "But if you can be described as a several hundred ton vessel than fine."

If I am to be privileged to receive an effeminate consideration in your verse - I must accept the pejorative that I am "big" and "heavy"? You now associate the impersonal/inhuman object's massive weight, to me as a person as a means to bridge your faux pas?
Kyle: "I'll use the female inpersonals."

The word is "impersonal", and suggesting you will continue to treat me like an object is demeaning, to say the least.

Phelps uses that kind of thinking as well. He says "God hates fags", but it's not personal, he's just talking about the dead objects in a box, being buried, right?

Let's visit an online therapist to better understand Phelps’s and your words, shall we.

http://www.asktheinternettherapist.com/counselingarchive_narcissistic_personality_disorder.asp

Narcissistic Personality Disorder
By Jef Gazley, M.S., LMFT, DCC

"In moderate to severe, the hallmark of the disorder is that they see other people as objects and not live people. Therefore, you can’t really have a friendship with them. It is a difficult problem to fix because of the early developmental origin of the problem and usually motivation is limited. A person suffering with personality disorders often needs to be seen for years."

Until very recently, for instance, the pronoun "he" stood for everyone, men and women. No one consciously saw the pronoun as male, but subconsciously everyone was given to understand that the universal was male. -- Alice Fulton

When I was in school, I was taught to use the male pronoun he when the gender of the person was unknown, or if the writing intended to be inclusive. I was only to use the pronoun she if the gender was known to be female or if the topic only included women.

My formal education is from the 60's and 70's. I still write for a living, so I'm quite aware of the style changes of the last decade or so.

My point here, is people would be wise to refrain from too quickly reading prejudice into English writing style usage. The rules of a living language change all the time, and not everyone has the opportunity or need to keep up with it. And, not everyone adheres to the same English style guide, and there are many different authorities on style usage, and they all disagree with each other on various points.

Those who write for a living are generally required to adopt the style that has been chosen by the employer, and that style may vary considerably from the style learned in school, or the style used at a previous place of employment.

So, let's put this English usage discussion to bed and get back on topic.

I still say the Westboro Church people are true Christians because they trumpet the WORD of the LORD that everyone who is not a True Christian™ is going straight to hell.

And I hope they get sued again, and again, and again.

Phelps is a stain on the common decency of society. Her behavior was likely the result of poor upbringing. I can only hope that she is sued, over and over.

Kyle, just so this pedagogical tutorial doesn't go by as wasted bandwidth, I'd like to make a few points, regarding my method of instruction.

You were called out for inability to communicate/spell correctly. You attempted to normalize your deficiency by equivocation. You equivocated by comparing poor grammatical/spelling skills and literary style. Literary style, as the WM points out, is like art, the beauty is in the eye of the beholder/employer. Therefore, your attempt to use someone else's post as an excuse for your inability to communicate effectively was nothing less than equivocation. Just suck up the criticism and use spell check, or just responsibly accept the criticism without comment.

More ironically, you then choose to use your preferred "style", using "his" as a gender normative. Ironic, because your equivocation on style (curse words) vs. grammatical skill, is absurd. But, after the absurdity, you start using your own "style" as if it is somehow more cogent.

I only say this, to ensure I wasn't being misread on my intent - which was to show the absurdity of your illogical post. Mea culpa that I was not more direct, I can assure you, I will be much more succinct and direct as to observations, consider school out.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Phelps...

"Before gaining notoriety and provoking public anger for disrespecting slain soldiers and their families, the group was known for picketing the funerals of gay people or those they perceived to be gay. In 1998, WBC congregants set off an angry reaction when they showed up at the funeral of gay murder victim Matthew Shepard, and held up signs reading "No Fags in Heaven" and "God Hates Fags." According to the WBC Web site, they have staged "over 22,000" protests across the nation and around the world since 1991."

Phelps the coward, uses god as his authority to engage in his hate campaigns.

"While WBC has picketed the gay community at hundreds of events nationwide, most of the individuals protested by the Church are not homosexual. In fact, WBC most often targets people it mistakenly claims are gay or those it believes to be encouraging homosexuality."

In short, Phelps hates everyone who is affiliated with gay rights. As a matter of fact, Phelps attacks all types of citizens and their rights, using what he considers to be his unregulatable/unrestrictable freedom of speech clause.

"WBC congregants believe that "God's hatred is one of His holy attributes." What appears to be anti-gay rhetoric is often a vehicle for WBC's anti-Semitism, hatred of other Christians, and even racism, though in the 1980s Fred Phelps received awards from the Greater Kansas City Chapter of Blacks in Government and the Bonner Springs branch of the NAACP for his work on behalf of Black clients."

Simply amazing, minority groups are supporting racism, under the guise of religious hatred. The ACLU is just another toy for Phelps to use.

"The formal complaint against Phelps charged that he misrepresented the truth in a motion for a new trial in a case he had brought, and that he held the defendant in the case up to "unnecessary public ridicule for which there is no basis in fact."

It appears that Phelps has a history of lying, and misrepresenting the truth. Again, he needs to be sued for defamation, and his "authority" figure (his god) needs to be pulled into court and challenged, so that he loses his ability to hide his hate behind his Christian god. He needs to grow up, be a man, and accept the responsibility for his actions - not pawn them off on a god, who hates everyone, except him, and his chosen family/church members.

"Following his disbarment from Kansas State courts, Phelps continued to practice law in Federal courts. In 1985, nine Federal court judges filed a disciplinary complaint charging him and six of his family members, all attorneys, with making false accusations against them."

Again, a history of lying, and misrepresenting the truth. His entire life and those around them are habitual liars. They lie about everything, from having a god who hates everyone on their side of truth, to using god as a tool to demean everyone they can find that doesn't agree with them. Phelps is the modern day Paul of the Christian faith.

"The Phelpses fought the complaint but lost. In 1989, Fred Phelps agreed to surrender his license to practice law in Federal court in exchange for the Federal judges allowing the other members of his family to continue practicing in Federal court."
http://www.adl.org/special_reports/wbc/default.asp

In other words, they kicked out the source of the lies, a Christian Pastor, and chose to allow his family to attempt to represent court cases, if they can refrain from lying on a continual basis.

Many courts have "stated" their views on what weight should be given to "god" or the "bible" in a court of law. Phelps is no different, and should be challenged every time he brings religion into a court room. He is guilty of defamation, at a minimum, and his religious practices need to be challenged relentlessly.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Supreme Court Rejects Jurors’ Death Sentence

The Colorado Supreme Court Monday refused to reinstate a jury’s death verdict in the case of Robert Harlan, convicted of the brutal rape and murder of Rhonda Maloney. The trial court had thrown out the death sentence after trial when it was learned that jurors had brought a bible into their deliberations and quoted passages from it aloud to each other — passages like, “an eye for an eye.” Harlan will now serve life in prison without the possibility of parole.

“The Supreme Court finds that it can no longer say the death penalty verdict was not influenced by passion, prejudice or any other arbitrary factor,” the court said in a 47-page ruling. The court said Bible passages, including the verse that commands “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” could lead jurors to vote for death. Harlan’s attorneys challenged the sentence after discovering five jurors had looked up Bible verses, copied some of them down and then talked about them behind closed doors.

5280’s background on the case is here. Denver’s CBS legal analyst Andrew Cohen provided this cogent analysis in May, 2003 when Adams County District Court Judge John Vigil first threw out the death sentence."
http://www.5280.com/blog/?m=200503

Yes, "arbitrary factor" in this case is the "bible" and ultimately "god". The bible, god, and all "non-prejudicial" factors are removed for a reason. The bible and god are "arbitrary" factors, which have no validity in the court of reason. If Phelps wants to hate people, he needs to be sued, and his religious scripture and position need to be held accountable for inciting hatred in a nation, where all citizens have a right to freedom from religious oppression.

Phelps is trying to oppress citizens with his "god", and the "bible", by defamation. He has brought religion into his argument as a defense, his defense needs to be removed, and he needs to be sued to the point that he is imprisoned for his irrational behavior. The other alternative is to challenge his mental stability, and place him in a mental institution for the irrational acts he imposes in society.