Father of US Marine killed in Iraq ordered to pay.

[MotoH]

If this doesn't make your blood boil, you've got something wrong with you.

Lawyers for the father of a Marine who died in Iraq and whose funeral was picketed by anti-gay protesters say a court has ordered him to pay the protesters' appeal costs.

On Friday, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ordered that Albert Snyder of York, Pa., pay costs associated with Fred Phelps' appeal. Phelps is the leader of the Westboro Baptist Church, which conducted protests at the funeral of Snyder's son, Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, in Westminster in 2006.

Lawyers for Snyder say the Court of Appeals has ordered him to pay $16,510.80 to Phelps for costs relating to the appeal, despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review the Court of Appeals' decision.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/carroll/bal-protest0329,0,3866909.story" [Broken]

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=355406162379&ref=mf"

The money will go to help pay for this cost, and for other families of fallen heroes.

Bill O'Reilly promised to pay all of the costs is Mr. Snyder does lose in the supreme court. http://video.foxnews.com/v/4130538/talking-points-330/?playlist_id=86923"


There is the freedom of speech, and then there is the abuse of this freedom. It is a shame that people are like this.

 

[Borek]

Either my English fails me or the story is not complete. Fred Phelps appealed, yes? What Mr. Snyder has to do with the appeal? He happened to stand close by? Or was his name first in the phone book?

 

[Dembadon]

While I agree that those protesters are off their rockers, I'd be circumspect about giving my money to a Facebook group.

I sincerely hope that Mr. Snyder's family receives the support they need to kill this order.

 

[MotoH]

Either my English fails me or the story is not complete. Fred Phelps appealed, yes? What Mr. Snyder has to do with the appeal? He happened to stand close by? Or was his name first in the phone book?

Mr. Snyder is the Father of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq. The Westboro Baptist "church" showed up at his sons funeral with very hateful signs, and yelled a lot of horrible things. Mr. Snyder then sued the WBC for causing mental anguish or something of the sort. Mr. Snyder won the first case. WBC then counter-sued and won the case, causing Mr. Snyder to have to pay all of their legal fees. Mr. Snyder has now appealed to the Supreme court in hopes of a just ruling.

 

[MotoH]

While I agree that those protesters are off their rockers, I'd be circumspect about giving my money to a Facebook group.

I sincerely hope that Mr. Snyder's family receives the support they need to kill this order.

http://www.matthewsnyder.org/" [Broken]

That is the actual website. The links were in the Information tab of the facebook page.

 

[Borek]

Mr. Snyder then sued the WBC for causing mental anguish or something of the sort. Mr. Snyder won the first case. WBC then counter-sued and won the case

OK, that's the part I was missing. It wasn't my English that failed, it was a journalist that failed in explaining the case.

 

[Evo]

Oh, don't even get me started. That they would be allowed to harrass the family at a private funeral is disgusting. What is wrong with this country? Do we have no sense of decency anymore?

 

[zomgwtf]

Oh, don't even get me started. That they would be allowed to harrass the family at a private funeral is disgusting. What is wrong with this country? Do we have no sense of decency anymore?

I agree completely, it would be horrible to commit such an act at any funeral the fact that it's a fallen soldiers funeral makes it just down right disgusting and disturbing.

What is wrong with people to go and do these types of things? What exactly is going through their minds to think that it's ok? What's wrong with the judicial system when it orders this man to pay these type of people?

In my opinion he should not even have to use any sort of reason (mental anguish etc.) to sue these people.

One thing I don't understand however is why they chose this Marines funeral? Was the Marine in question a homosexual or a gay rights activist? Not that it matters, I'm just trying to find some sort of cause that might cause nutcases to go do this at his funeral.

++Props to Bill O'Reilly and everyone who is supporting and helping this man take a stand.

 

[lisab]

If this doesn't make your blood boil, you've got something wrong with you.



http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=355406162379&ref=mf"

The money will go to help pay for this cost, and for other families of fallen heroes.

Bill O'Reilly promised to pay all of the costs is Mr. Snyder does lose in the supreme court. http://video.foxnews.com/v/4130538/talking-points-330/?playlist_id=86923"


There is the freedom of speech, and then there is the abuse of this freedom. It is a shame that people are like this.

Actually I disagree with you here (the bolded), MotoH, if you're implying that these people are abusing their freedom of speech.

These people are nutcases and are utterly without grace, and I strongly disagree with what they are saying, but I say let them talk. Let them spew. The vast, vast majority of people, regardless of political stripe, will see them for what they are.

If you restrict them they'll just play the martyr card. So let them show their true colors.

 

[zomgwtf]

Actually I disagree with you here (the bolded), MotoH, if you're implying that these people are abusing their freedom of speech.

These people are nutcases and are utterly without grace, and I strongly disagree with what they are saying, but I say let them talk. Let them spew. The vast, vast majority of people, regardless of political stripe, will see them for what they are.

If you restrict them they'll just play the martyr card. So let them show their true colors.

So if your child had died and you were having a private funeral and I came to protest yelling hatefull things and waving hateful slogans all over the place you wouldn't be effected the slightest bit. In fact you'd get up and say 'LOOK AT THOSE NUTCASES ROFLZ!' Then I assume you'd expect them to leave in shame and never protest again? Please.

If something is not done it will continue, this same Church and same organizer did this at Matthew Shepards funeral, he was murdered for being homosexual. AFAIK. No hate-crimes existed at the time though protecting gays.

Ignoring these people does not work to get rid of them and having the entire nation against them will not get rid of them either. This will continue to build a presedence that it's ok to commit these types of actions when it isn't. They didn't do anything to protect Matthew Sheppards family and I think it's about time they do something about this because it's just disgusting.

 

[rootX]

Is this full story? Why Snyder was counter sued?

 

[Evo]

Yes, this church has a history of abusing people. Harrassing private individuals is not a constitutional right, as a matter of fact, it is illegal. They were not protesting some public activity, this was a private family burial. They should have been arrested, but because they call themselves a "church" they weren't? So many things about this are wrong.

 

[Borek]

Wiki has some information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps#Lawsuit_against_Westboro_Baptist_Church

#include <your favorite disclaimer about wikipedia here>

 

[MotoH]

Actually I disagree with you here (the bolded), MotoH, if you're implying that these people are abusing their freedom of speech.

These people are nutcases and are utterly without grace, and I strongly disagree with what they are saying, but I say let them talk. Let them spew. The vast, vast majority of people, regardless of political stripe, will see them for what they are.

If you restrict them they'll just play the martyr card. So let them show their true colors.

Let them show their true colours at homosexuals and soldiers funerals? Not in a million years. I am all for protecting the freedom of speech. It is what makes this country great, but this is a whole different ball game.

They are trying to get a bill passed that makes it illegal to protests at funerals within a certain distance. I suggest that you send a letter or email to your congressperson asking that they vote this bill through, as it will protect countless families from having to go through the agony of this.

 

[elect_eng]

Actually I disagree with you here (the bolded), MotoH, if you're implying that these people are abusing their freedom of speech.

These people are nutcases and are utterly without grace, and I strongly disagree with what they are saying, but I say let them talk. Let them spew. The vast, vast majority of people, regardless of political stripe, will see them for what they are.

If you restrict them they'll just play the martyr card. So let them show their true colors.

I agree with you.

These zealots displayed their true character, and what they did is a disgrace to themselves. However, they were exercising their rights under the law, and the soldier we are talking about sacrificed his life in defense of those rights. We should respect his memory by respecting the right of inconsiderate people to speak their minds and demonstrate.

By allowing this abuse of rights by our citizens, we prevent a government from stopping citizens from exercising their rights in appropriate circumstances. That said, ... I'm very angry at these so-called Baptists.

 

[Office_Shredder]

Guys, the Westboro church makes their living going from funeral to funeral, then suing people who 'restrict their freedom of speech'. The dude's not representing himself because he doesn't like lawyers, he's representing himself so he can win the lawyer fees

 

[Evo]

I agree with you.

These zealots displayed their true character, and what they did is a disgrace to themselves. However, they were exercising their rights under the law, and the soldier we are talking about sacrificed his life in defense of those rights. We should respect his memory by respecting the right of inconsiderate people to speak their minds and demonstrate.

By allowing this abuse of rights by our citizens, we prevent a government from stopping citizens from exercising their rights in appropriate circumstances. That said, ... I'm very angry at these so-called Baptists.

Do you really think that harrassment during a private funeral is ok?

This was a personal attack on a grieving family during a funeral. You are ok with this? This has nothing to do with constitutioanl rights, this comes under local law, which is where this poor person was deflected. This is disgusting that he had to even take this up, these morons should have been arrested on the spot.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Do you really think that harrassment during a private funeral is ok?

No, but it's constitutional? You start making judgment calls on the constitution and you no longer have one.

 

[zomgwtf]

No, but it's constitutional? You start making judgment calls on the constitution and you no longer have one.

This is just an absurd thought and I think in order to make this claim you have to back it up. How does restricting people from protesting and making extremely offensive comments towards the dead blatantly attempting to hurt people mean that we no longer have a constitution?

You do realize that they didn't just protest, they wrote everywhere they could and they spread their message about this SPECIFIC marine where ever they could.

 

[elect_eng]

Do you really think that harrassment during a private funeral is ok?

First, I dont' think harrassing people at a funeral (public or private) is OK morally. Not at all. But, that is not the question at issue. I don't want my freedoms messed with. Restrictions create slippery slopes. You make one exception, and then others are more easy to make. First, the law is passed that you can't protest within a certain distance of a funeral. Later, the law is changed so that you can't protest near a funeral home or a graveyard. Then other exceptions are made. In the end, you lose too many freedoms.

This was a personal attack on a grieving family during a funeral. You are ok with this? This has nothing to do with constitutioanl rights, this comes under local law, which is where this poor person was deflected. This is disgusting that he had to even take this up, these morons should have been arrested on the spot.

Was it an attack? Did they tresspass on private property? Did they break any laws? If so, then you are correct, but if not, then you are overreacting. I don't know all the details, so feel free to present any detailed facts in this area. I might change my opinion.

I agree it is very disgusting. I also agree they are morons. But, they should only be arrested if they break the law. Did that happen?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

This is just an absurd thought and I think in order to make this claim you have to back it up. How does restricting people from protesting and making extremely offensive comments towards the dead blatantly attempting to hurt people mean that we no longer have a constitution?

You do realize that they didn't just protest, they wrote everywhere they could and they spread their message about this SPECIFIC marine where ever they could.

That is not protected by freedom of speech? I am asking, I don't know.

I think the pressure and justice should come from the public, not the government in this case.

edit: I see it's under Bill of Rights, not Constitution.

 

[Evo]

I don't know if they were on private property or if they were on public land. If they were on private cemetary property, they would have needed approval by the cemetary to harrass the family, which I doubt would have been granted. This raises the question, were they on public property?

They may have proceeded against the obvious fact that they were in violation of local laws.

If my neighbors were to gather and shout out and post signs defaming me, they would be arrested. Is it because they claim religious exemption that they are excluded from arrest?

 

[elect_eng]

If my neighbors were to gather and shout out and post signs defaming me, they would be arrested.

Is that true? What law would they be breaking? Surely they can't come on your property, but if they do it on public property, what law will stop them?

Of course, if they tell lies, then you can sue them for slander, but that takes time.

 

[Evo]

Is that true? What law would they be breaking? Surely they can't come on your property, but if they do it on public property, what law will stop them?

Of course, if they tell lies, then you can sue them for slander, but that takes time.

There are laws against disturbing the peace.

 

[MotoH]

Slander is the biggest thing that the good guys have going for them IMO.

Also, isn't it required that you need a permit to have a gathering on public ground? Since the police were there enforcing a barricade, it shows that WBO most likely had a permit. Why in Gods name would a town give these loonies a permit to protest?

 

[elect_eng]

There are laws against disturbing the peace.

True, that will work in some places and at some times, depending on the particular actions taken by your protestors. Still, it's not always going to work, and you can't use that law to stop protesting in general. People can stay quiet and hold signs, and stay away from a residence. Do you want your government to stop you from protesting on those grounds? Protesting, by it's very nature, will disturb the peace of somebody.

There are many things in life that are not fair, and this is one of them. People have fought wars, lost limbs, lost loved ones and sacrificed their life (case in point) for the freedoms we have. If, at some point, I have to endure someone disturbing my peace for rediculous reasons, that is a much smaller price to pay. I'm sure I'll complain about it and get mad and take any legal action within my rights, but I'll also know that it is better than other alternatives.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Slander is the biggest thing that the good guys have going for them IMO.

I don't know. So they call him a fag. Well he was gay. Is that slander?

 

[turbo]

People here in Maine have taken on the role of troop-greeters quite enthusiastically. Troop transports routinely stop here in Bangor for refueling, and last week, our greeters met their 1 millionth returning service-person since Desert Storm. The Westboro Baptist "church" ought to come to Bangor and stage one of their hate-driven protests when the troops come home. By the time our citizens, including vets from Viet Nam, Korea, WWII and Desert Storm, were done "discussing" things with the jerks, they would probably elect to choose some softer targets. Some older vets, like my father, are in their mid-80s or older, yet they will climb out of bed at all hours to meet troop planes landing at perhaps 2-4am. They take gifts for the troops and their families and treat them to a VIP line of handshakes, hugs and thank-yous.

 

[elect_eng]

I don't know. So they call him a fag. Well he was gay. Is that slander?

No it's not slander if it's true that he was gay. However, I'm not clear about laws about using hateful terms to describe a person. It's certainly disturbing and if I were on site, I would protest their choice of language rather strongly.

Again, it gets back to them revealing their true colors. They claim to be religious Baptists and yet they use such hateful language. Who are they fooling? Why get upset over it? Yes, it's hard to ignore, but ignoring them would be the most powerful weapon against them. They are unworthy of notice, and you would put them out of business.

 

[MotoH]

I don't know. So they call him a fag. Well he was gay. Is that slander?

Really?

And where did you get the information that Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder was a homosexual?

Have you seen all of the signs that WBO has used in their protests? They are sickening.

There should be a case of public indecency filed against them also. You have no right to expose children to such retched words and phrases.

 

[Evo]

I don't know. So they call him a fag. Well he was gay. Is that slander?

Do they have the right to disrupt a private funeral?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Do they have the right to disrupt a private funeral?

I am uncertain of the circumstances of the protest. Were they protesting inside during the wake, on the public cemetery grounds during burial, or outside on the sidewalk yelling?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

And where did you get the information that Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder was a homosexual?

Have you seen all of the signs that WBO has used in their protests? They are sickening.

There should be a case of public indecency filed against them also. You have no right to expose children to such retched words and phrases.

I just assumed since the organization does the protests for gay soldiers. Perhaps he is not. Don't assume I am defending them as I deplore them.

 

[russ_watters]

Outside...where they were, exactly, I don't know, but I wouldn't think it matters. If their intent is to harass the people at the funeral, all that really matters is that they succeeded. They were there because of the funeral and doing what they were doing in order to harass the people at the funeral. They were not doing an unconnected demonstration that just so happened to annoy people at a funteral.

It seems like an obvious case of harassment to me and one that would not be protected. I would bet money that the father will get the legal help he needs and the leaders of the Westboro Baptist Church will eventually see fines and possibly even jail time over this.

...they protest/harass soldiers and gays. Separate (usually) purposes.

 

[Evo]

Here is the information.

The basic facts of the case are clear enough. Marine Lance Corporal Matthew A. Snyder was killed in Iraq in the line of duty. His funeral, held in Westminster, Maryland, was picketed by the Westboro Baptist Church. The church held signs that read, “You are going to hell,” “God hates you,” “Thank God for dead soldiers,” and “Semper fi fags.” Following the funeral, the church posted on its website (godhatesfags.com) an “epic” entitled “The Burden of Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder.” Matthew’s burden, as the church saw it, was that he had been “raised for the devil” and “taught to defy God.”

http://www.pennstatelawreview.org/a...-phelps-and-the-limits-of-religious-advocacy/