US House votes to restrict protests at military funerals

[Charlie Brown]

http://www.sovo.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=6765

The U.S. House voted Tuesday to restrict demonstrations at military funerals, a measure aimed at a Kansas church group that has carried its anti-gay message to the last rites for those killed in Iraq.

"We will not allow the repugnant acts of a few to define who we are as Americans," said Veterans' Affairs Committee Chair Steve Buyer (R-Ind.) before the 408-3 vote on the "Respect for America's Fallen Heroes Act." Buyer spoke at a news conference joined by motorcyclists who attend military funerals to shield families from the anti-gay protesters.

Protesters, led by Rev. Fred Phelps of Topeka, Kan., claim that U.S. military deaths in Iraq are a sign of divine punishment for America's tolerance of homosexuals.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chief sponsor of the bill, said he took up the issue after attending a military funeral in his home state where mourners where greeted by "chants and taunting and some of the most vile things I have ever heard."

Under the legislation, unapproved demonstrations would be banned at Arlington National Cemetery and other federal burial grounds. It also bars protests within 500 feet of a military cemetery from 60 minutes before to 60 minutes after a funeral if those protests involve disruptive noises or other disturbances

[lumpy]

1. All right.

Been waiting for some action on this despicable pracrice.

[atreides1]

8. Yes it is a despicable practice

But as someone who honors the US Constitution, I would still defend their right to Freedom of Speech.

I may not like what they say but it is the duty of all true Americans to defend their right to say it.

What other rights will you be willing to surrender, just because you find something to be despicable?

If they can do this to the Phelps cult, then they can do it to us as well, just remember that.

[High Plains]

2. Hmmm...I wonder if this is constitutional. Doesn't seem like it, but

that hasn't stopped Congress before.

Frankly, I think we have more than enough laws already.

[Charlie Brown]

3. Yes, I agree

This bill is no more constitutional than the "free speech zones," and if you think about it, could prohibit anti-war demonstrations at Arlington and elsewhere. And, of course, the "disruptive noises" part is ridiculously vague.

I sympathize with these families, but the answer to Phelps is not to ban him, it's to ignore him. Banning him will only destroy more of our rights.

[MockSwede]

5. Ditto

And the riders do a great job, actually. So, no, not constitutional, and, no, not necessary. But fittering away time in Congress isn't a crime, is it?

[Up2Late]

4. I just hope the ACLU let's this one slide, Challenging this...

...would only result in ridiculously bad press for them.

[homaffectional]

6. Too late...

they've already signed on board with helping Phelps

[atreides1]

9. Maybe they should let other cases slide as we.

Maybe the ACLU will other cases slide as well, just because they're worried about bad press.

I hate Phelps and his inbred minions, but if those here on DU are willing to spew the same claptrap as the clowns on FR, then we have to go back and look at what Democracy is all about.

No matter what the ACLU does, it will be bad press for them, look at how some here raked them over the coals for going to Limpball's defense and I'm sure that some here remember their defense of the Nazis and Skokie Illinois.

How about those "Free Speech Zones" that DUers were screaming about? Freedom of Speech is exactly that, and if some here condone the action of Congress to take away that right, then what will you do when they attempt to pass a similar law against sites like this one?

I may not like what Phelps says, but I will defend his right to say it!!!!

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

7. As if they'll even allow any of their people to get close enough

to a military funeral in the first place...

It would mean having an official controlling presence at all military funerals, which is something they have fastidiously avoided up to now. Ain't gonna happen. No way, nohow.

[teknomanzer]

10. They should ban protests from ALL funerals...

but then again, couldn't funeral protesters be arrested on a charge of disturbing the peace?

I don't think this a matter of freedom of speech. If you want to protest fine, but demonstrating at someones funeral is lower than low. Its the most distasteful dispicable disgusting thing I have heard of yet. Let people greive in peace Phelps, you foul fuck! Have you no shame! Phelps has done this to civilians. Only now that he's had the audacity to appear at military funerals does someone speak up. I see a kind of hypocrisy in that.