Comments on: Off Topic — But Worth a Mention (Opinion)

By: Leonard E. Sienko, J

Leonard E. Sienko, J — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:11:16 +0000

Just for the record, the Phelps family church has absolutely nothing to do with any anti-war position. They are a radical Biblical fundamentalist, homophobic group, which has used the method of protesting at the funerals of fallen service personnel to attract the maximum attention to their hate-filled doctrines.

By: john steele

john steele — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 01:02:01 +0000

So by Mr. Bennett's thinking, anyone can picket any event regardless of what the subject is, and there is no such thing as a standard of decency. I assume any attorney understands there are limits to the 1st Amendment. The founding fathers or anyone who was remotely affiliated with the creation of this country did not intend for the first Amendment to protect these losers. Con Law 101.

By: Zale

Zale — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 17:04:02 +0000

Amen! Preach on! The Constitution is not a license to inflict heart ache and distress on others, especially when its all due to a political opinion!

By: Richard Georges

Richard Georges — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 15:44:38 +0000

Hear, hear. Soldiers are not responsible for wars; soldiers fight them, and die in them. They deserve our respect. The protestors do not help their cause by actions such as these.

By: PT-LawMom

PT-LawMom — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:59:00 +0000

I agree. How are their actions helpful? As much as I disagree with the war, these men and women are putting their lives on the line because our president tells them to and we should be grateful that they are willing to do that for us, whether their efforts are working or not. As for the free speech, okay, protect their right to say it but do they have to say it there? I completely agree with the court's decision to find them liable for intent to inflict emotional distress.

By: Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:42:35 +0000

Grant,
I'm inclined to agree, except then I remember the First Amendment.