| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| ACLU suit challenges Kentucky's funeral protest law |
| 2006-05-02 |
| The ACLU and Fred Phelps. Teaming up to spit on America's war dead... FRANKFORT, Ky. -- Parts of a new state law intended to prevent protesters from disrupting funerals are unconstitutional, the American Civil Liberties Union said in a federal lawsuit filed yesterday. The ACLU filed suit in U.S. District Court in Frankfort, challenging sections of the law that the group claims go too far in limiting freedom of speech and expression. The lawsuit puts the ACLU, which has handled discrimination cases involving gays and lesbians, on the same side as Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., which is known for its anti-gay protests. The law, which also applies to memorial services, wakes and burials, was aimed at members of that church who have toured the country protesting at military funerals including in Kentucky. Church members claim the soldiers' deaths are a sign of God punishing America for tolerating homosexuality. The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of Bart McQueary, a Mercer County man who protested with church members three times. McQueary couldn't be reached for comment. The ACLU has asked U.S. District Judge Karen Caldwell to grant a preliminary injunction to allow funeral protests to continue. "Mr. McQueary clearly has the right to express his message in a nondisruptive manner, even if others disagree with him," said Lili S. Lutgens, a lawyer for the ACLU in Louisville. Under the law, which Gov. Ernie Fletcher signed in March, protesters within 300 feet of any funeral services would be guilty of first-degree disorderly conduct, punishable by up to a year in jail. The law also prevents protesters from using bullhorns. Fletcher spokesman Brett Hall said yesterday the governor hasn't yet seen the lawsuit. "The public should respect their dignity in a very difficult time," Hall said. "That's why this law was passed. It's inconceivable why anyone would want to protest at a military funeral while family members are there." He's obviously never seen Fred Phelps. And, as always, thank you, ACLU... |
| Posted by:tu3031 |
| #11 Isn't it "traditional" Kentucky custom (which must be respected under multiculturalism) to take tree branches and beat the bejesus out of funeral protestors and their legal consul? Run em out of town tarred and feathered. Sure there's precidence somewhere... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-05-02 22:54 |
| #10 And none of y'all caught the irony in a man named Mr. McQue |
| Posted by: BA 2006-05-02 22:35 |
| #9 I also don't believe the ACLU really cares about the Law. What they have here is a chance to poke the Military in the eye and if some families gat hurt, tough noogies. The ACLU, the Enemy of the State. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2006-05-02 20:00 |
| #8 These nutballs DISRUPTING The funerals of Soldiers are very bad. This kind of insulting demonstration of ignorance and intolerance at a person's funeral are degenerate. At the least one should point a firehose at them. I think if they looked harder the ACLU might be persuaded that in fact, the sick-minded protesters are violating the religious freedoms of the relations and friends of the service person, by disrupting and insulting the dignity of the religious observation of the funeral. |
| Posted by: jim#6 2006-05-02 19:57 |
| #7 ACLU supporting a group whose message is "God Hates Fags"? I'm coming to th conclusion that the ACLU doenst care about civility or the law, all it wants is to allow the worst elements of society free reign, while 2facedly suppressing tons of others. They block the 10 commandments but want peopel to be able to use bullhorns to yell "God Hates Fags" at a soldier's funeral? How would they handle it if Phelps group went to every AIDs death funeral and did the same thing? I dare Phelps to show up in San Fran and start hassling AIDs funerals with their bullhorns and chants. They'd get a whipping there the likes of which they never imagined, and I doubt you could frind 12 people in SF that would convict them. |
| Posted by: Oldspook 2006-05-02 19:53 |
| #6 NAMBLA.... what a sad, sad commentary on America. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-05-02 19:42 |
| #5 When will the ACLU grasp that there is difference between "opinion" and "informed opinion"? They seem to insist not on the freedom of expressing an idiotic opinion, but the acceptance that such opinion is correct. That nutbars whose "feelings" have been hurt are victims who must be heard and obeyed? Reduced to this - sounds like the UN. Time's up. No useful purpose served here. |
| Posted by: Thinemp Whimble2412 2006-05-02 19:05 |
| #4 I can hardly wait till they announce a victory they've secured for NAMBLA. |
| Posted by: Desert Blondie 2006-05-02 19:00 |
| #3 I can't think of a more worthy target than the ACLU. I would personally gladly run over anyone working for that bag of sleeze artists. Why we tolerate this cancerous group is beyond me. They should all be sent one-way to Saudi Arabia as Jewish "financial advisors". |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2006-05-02 18:44 |
| #2 It's inconceivable why anyone would want to protest at a military funeral while family members are there." Indeed it is "inconceivable" and yet another new low for the lefties and the ACLU. These protest people should suffer a good Texas horse whipping. I suspect that would put an end to it. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-05-02 18:35 |
| #1 Mr. McQueary clearly has the right to express his message in a nondisruptive manner... He does have that right. The problem is, he wasn't doing it in a nondisruptive manner. That is the problem. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2006-05-02 17:43 |