False Prophet Fred Phelps Has A New Bill to Pay
November 1, 2007 by Randy
Filed under Activism, Christianity, Culture War, Current Affairs, Homosexuality, People, Politics, War On Terror
My thoughts after the jump.
The Associated Press: $11M Verdict in Funeral Protesters Case
$11M Verdict in Funeral Protesters CaseBy ALEX DOMINGUEZ – 4 hours ago
BALTIMORE (AP) — Members of a fundamentalist Kansas church ordered to pay nearly $11 million in damages to a grieving father smiled as they walked out of the courtroom, vowing that the verdict would not deter them from protesting at military funerals.
"Absolutely, don’t you understand this was an act in futility?" said Shirley Phelps-Roper, whose father founded the Westboro Baptist Church.
Members promised to picket future funerals with placards bearing such slogans as "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "God hates fags."
They believe that U.S. deaths in the Iraq war are punishment for the nation’s tolerance of homosexuality. They say they are entitled to protest at funerals under the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and religion.
Albert Snyder sued the Topeka, Kan., church after a protest last year at the funeral of his son, Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq. He claimed the protests intruded upon what should have been a private ceremony and sullied his memory of the event.
A jury agreed. On Wednesday, the church and three of its leaders — Fred Phelps and his two daughters, Phelps-Roper and Rebekah Phelps-Davis — were found liable for invasion of privacy and intent to inflict emotional distress.
Jurors awarded Snyder $2.9 million in compensatory damages and $8 million in punitive damages.
It’s unclear whether Snyder will be able to collect the damages.
…
Snyder sobbed when he heard the verdict, while members of the church greeted the news with tightlipped smiles.
…
Earlier in the day, church members staged a demonstration outside the federal courthouse, while passing motorists honked and shouted insults.
Phelps held a sign emblazoned with "God is your enemy," while Phelps-Roper stood on an American flag as she carried a sign that proclaimed "God hates fag enablers." Members of the group also sang "God Hates America," to the tune of "God Bless America."
As I have mentioned before, I have no problem calling Fred Phelps a false prophet who preaches a false gospel. I don’t say that often or freely. I have only said that about two people publicly. With Phelps, I say it without hesitation.
They deserve the punishment they got and should face similar judgments from other families intentionally traumatized by this group. Their haughty eyes and prideful hearts are as "detestable" as anything someone struggling with homosexuality might do.
My only concern is that other groups will try to abuse this toward other protestors. I would be interested in analysis of what potential new precedents this might set.
My initial reaction is that this is justice served ( to some degree … there so much more that could be done ) and hopefully this will cut off their available travel funds and stop the blasphemy.
MORE: Michelle Malkin
Related posts (automatically generated)
As much as I absolutely find Fred Phelps’ actions abhorrant, I’m not real keen on this verdict. Jeremy over at G-A-Y I thought made a pretty good argument for why this verdict wasn’t a good one. Like I said, I find the actions of that clan to be beyond anything that is decent. But, if we curtail their rights to speak their mind how soon before that filters down to the right of groups like Exodus to speak their message…or any church for that matter. Obviously there is a line that must be drawn, but is that line subject to the whims of the majority that don’t like the message?
j.
I have similar concerns that is why I want to see legal analysis of the case on what potential precedents this might set. That’s why I stated,
It could be argued (maybe not well) that what Phelps did was abuse his civil liberties to assault the civil liberties of others. He tried to take away from the “freedom of assembly” and possibly even the expression of “freedom of religion” of the funeral attendees (I don’t know but would assume that it had some sort of religious element to the service.)
Freedom of assembly and religious expression are just as important as freedom of speech.
For peculiar situations like this, it is ok with me…. just as long as the peculiar situation isn’t used as precedent for everybody. As the old High school civics analogy goes, “you have freedom of speech but you cannot yell fire in a crowded theater if there isn’t one without penalty.”
But again, I am interested to see if this sets any bad precedents.
First of all, I think it’s the least of what the Phelps clan deserves. I don’t believe it’s their expression being punished–but the blatant harassment of violating a family’s private ceremony with their slanderous display. I hope this curtails their future efforts in a big way.
As for bad precedent, I think it’s a guarantee that some will try to abuse this verdict in their war against choice. Let’s face it, some people are so blinded in their views, they can’t or won’t recognize the mountainous difference between Westboro and Exodus. I believe those people are in the minority, though.
There’s a difference between free speech and harassment/incitement to violence. It’s my opinion that what the Phelps are doing is the latter.
I agree with you Mike. I think those folks are in the minority as well.
I agree with you to Ted :). I think it is amazing that their incitement to violence has not actually erupted into street brawls/riots yet. Maybe this decision will curb that from happening.
I remember the very first time I ever saw the Phelps clan in action. It was both frightening and a little bit humorous. I remember soon afterwards having a conversation with my dad about whether their approach was “christ-like” (he didn’t think so…by a mile). I saw a youtube post they’ve made where they are literally crowing about the publicity this brings them. That’s one of the ugly downsides as well. I guess I’m just leery when it comes to our protected speech. Where do we draw the line?
j.
I remember my first run in too. Phelps yelling at me… someone spat at my feet and daring me to walk on a gay pride flag covered with things I can’t describe. I walked around it … which caused more jeering.
I don’t think there is a line to be drawn aside from the Constitution and the application of it through executive, legislative and judicial branches. I don’t know that there is an all or nothing line. It seems like the line is as Ted aptly described as harassment with incitement to riot.