If you read the law that Bush passed - it prevents Reverend Phelps from protesting at soldiers funerals...
He is a perverted, disgusting, gothic figure who hold signs saying that people are going to hell at their funerals while their loved ones are trying to grieve in peace...
Why could Bush not have authored a law that prevents him from protesting at ALL funerals?
Don't ALL people deserve the right to a little peace and quiet when someone they love has died?
2007-02-20 07:12:44 · 16 answers · asked by rabble rouser 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Mark J - here's one link of many...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard
now you can't say you have never heard of it...
2007-02-20 07:28:15 · update #1
The anti-gay Fred Phelps of Kansas and his supporters picketed Shepard's funeral as well as the trial of his assailants.[20][21] They displayed signs of their protests, with slogans such as "Matt Shepard rots in Hell", "AIDS Kills F@ggs Dead" and "God Hates F@ggs".[22] When the Wyoming Supreme Court ruled that it was legal to display any sort of religious message on city property if it was legal for Casper's Ten Commandments display to remain, Phelps made attempts to gain city permits in Cheyenne and Casper to build a monument "of marble or granite 5 or 6 feet in height" on which will be a bronze plaque bearing Shepard's picture and the words: "MATTHEW SHEPARD, Entered Hell October 12, 1998, in Defiance of God's Warning.
2007-02-20 07:33:20 · update #2
Butterbar Bob, how can you say that this slight is imagined????
Do you not watch the national news on any station?
2007-02-20 07:39:24 · update #3
Reverend Phelps is the same one protesting at BOTH soldiers AND gay peoples funerals....
He hates gays AND America....
That is why the issue is sensitive that Bush and the state of Missouri chose only to protect the soldiers rights...
Gays have been petitioning to stop Phelps harrassment for a decade or more...
Bush did nothing about it until they went so far as to protest the soldiers...
Hate will always turn around to bite the hand that feeds it...
2007-02-20 07:43:03 · update #4
Bush doesn't care for gay people, simple as...
Being from Britain, I've noticed how strong the homophobic presence is in the Christian right, pretty disgusting really.
Just another tick on my long list of reasons to hate Bush.
2007-02-20 07:18:02 · answer #1 · answered by callum828 2 · 7⤊ 5⤋
Well I don't see many protests at gay funerals. You are using a wrong reverse logic here, this is not an anti gay law, this is a pro soldier law. Discriminatory? some people may say; but it's not anti gay, It's just pro soldiers.
The right question should be "Why is it illegal to protest at a soldiers funeral but not at a civilian persons funeral?"
Besides everything is political in this country and is sad to see a family in pain while some people try to take advantage of someone death for political reasons.
Laws are made to solve or prevent a problem, and right now the problem is people using the funerals of soldiers for their own benefit. If tomorrow people start using the funeral of civilians for their own benefit, then laws should be made to prevent that.
Of course a funeral is not a place for a protest; no matter if you are a: soldier, civil, white, black, straight or gay person.
2007-02-20 07:37:46 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I haven't heard of any protests at gay funerals, but if this is true, then you need to provide links. I can see why it's illegal to protest at soldier's funerals. It's disrespectful and shows no regards to the person who died serving this country so we have the right to do these things. It should be illegal to protest at any funeral. These protesters wouldn't like it either if someone was protesting at their loved one's funeral and saying they died for no reason. People are mourning the loss of their loved ones, the last thing they need right now is someone to further upset them. Especially someone that didn't know their loved one personally.
2007-02-20 07:21:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Its too undesirable how human beings enable hatred to take the gospel of love away and replace it with hatred. those each physique isn't Christians. God loves gay human beings as much as He loves each physique else. John 3:sixteen sums all of it up. God so enjoyed the international that He gave His in basic terms begotten son. Now the be conscious international represents each physique with no one skipped over. quite of attempting to unfold the gospel they're attempting to tell human beings to stay there demented way which makes them a cult and extremely risky. so some distance as gay rights are in contact, they are in a position to have as many as I do yet none better than I even have. Double standards do no longer artwork. in spite of the reality that i do in comparison to how little ones are being taught on the subject of the existence form interior the way that they do. i'm sorry yet while my baby tells me that he or she is gay, i visit tell them that i admire them and consistently will. I do exactly no longer choose somebody from college telling my baby that he or she may be gay or influencing them with some form of recent liberal schedule that I even have not been mentioned of. yet those each physique is purely basic extraordinary and can be watched. they must be sued for slander.
2016-10-16 02:51:18 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would STRONGLY prefer that this hateful man steer clear of ALL funerals.
It's possible that the fact that military personnel are involved gives the President the jusridictional "hook" he needs to make it a federal law.
Civilians may have to be covered by a state law.
It's just a hunch. But people who are concerned with Bush exceeding his legal authority should be happy with him if this is the reason.
2007-02-20 07:21:15 · answer #5 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Isn't protesting like that against other laws, not just the one he had passed? Like laws against disturbing the peace, etc.?
Anyway, to refresh your memory from civics class, the executive branch is not responsible for authoring laws . . . the legislative branch is. So blame Congress for not representing your point of view. Have a nice day!
2007-02-20 07:33:35 · answer #6 · answered by anonymous 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Our soldiers die for our freedom. They deserve all the respect we can give them. President Bush understands that. If you don't understand that then you don't deserve to be an American.
Someone did something good for others that deserve good things. Why do you have to invent a false agenda to pretend that there was some evil intent to exclude someone else?
You seem to be more concerned with who someone wants to have sex with than what role they play in society.
Does the President have the power to pass a law?
2007-02-20 07:29:37 · answer #7 · answered by Automation Wizard 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
This is because the federal law only pertains to NATIONAL cemetaries. The federal government has no authority over other funerals. That is up to the several states to pass laws.
That's why.
There was no need to fabricate some imagined slight towards homosexuals.
--------------------
Duuuuude, get a grip. The slight I was referring to was the imaginary slight of homosexuals by Bush and the GOP. There was no slight.
And perhaps you need to stop being a drama queen and listen. The federal government has jurisdiction over National cemetaries ONLY. It is up to the states to craft laws regarding other funerals, not the federal government. So, stop belly-aching about the slight you think exists only because you don't comprehend federalism.
2007-02-20 07:36:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
The man should not be allowed to protest at funerals. That is not only hurtful and disrespectful. Hopefully when he dies he'll get what punishment he deserves for this.
2007-02-20 08:00:22 · answer #9 · answered by missgigglebunny 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
i believe that Bush only has authority to protect soldiers... otherwise it would DEFINITELY be affecting someone's freedom of speech.
Don't get me wrong, this guy is a total jackass who should be taken out and shot, but he is exercising his right to free speech and protest. The president does not have the authority to blanket-ban such protestation.
2007-02-20 07:20:07 · answer #10 · answered by Goose&Tonic 6 · 3⤊ 4⤋