Click here to view Winona Area Weather
Home > Jerome > Story
 Advertisement 

SECTION SPONSORS


Published - Thursday, November 08, 2007
POST COMMENT | READ COMMENTS (25 comment(s))

Pastor has the right to spew his nonsense

.
I’ve been told that if I can’t say something good about someone I shouldn’t say anything at all.

OK then, the Rev. Fred Phelps appears to have acceptable personal hygiene habits and may be assumed to change his underwear regularly. Beyond that, I’d say he’s pretty much a turd in life’s punchbowl.
Fred Phelps — you’ve heard of him — is the pastor of Westboro Baptist Church, total estimated membership, 10 — who’s made it his mission to travel coast-to-coast preaching that we’re all going to Hell in a handcart because God is supremely annoyed with America’s growing tolerance toward people whose sexual orientation may have strayed from the straight and narrow.

“God hates fags,” he preaches, claiming that the war in Iraq is divine retribution for the popularity of “Will and Grace,” and that the righteous — he and the other nine folks he seems to expect to be populating Heaven — ought to rejoice with the Lord over every dead U.S. soldier.

Preaching that within sight and earshot of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder’s funeral just cost him $11 million, or so said a Maryland jury.

Phelps may stand in relation to your pastor as Josef Mengele would to your family doctor, but that was a bad verdict. A very bad verdict.

Now don’t get me wrong, if the earth itself were to split open and swallow him up, I wouldn’t feel the least bit bad for Phelps. God has every right and reason to shut him up. Not so an American court.

The Snyder family won its case arguing it had suffered “an invasion of privacy and infliction of emotional distress” due to the rantings of Phelps and his foul little flock. That’s a dangerous precedent.

Because if the court can shut up Fred Phelps for protesting in what it deems inappropriate content, manner and place so as to cause “emotional distress,” who will be next?

The family Phelps shouted their slogans and waved their signs from public streets and sidewalks. It was a public protest of public policy intended to influence public opinion. No matter what they were shouting, the Constitution says they have the right to shout it.

Let us review: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The Founders didn’t write in any exceptions. There’s no second paragraph to the First Amendment qualifying those guarantees in the case that a citizen’s words would embarrass the president, demoralize the troops, cast aspersions on the honor of elected officials, defame the dignity of the nation or cause emotional distress.

There is no constitutional protection against being offended. On the contrary, the Constitution’s authors clearly presumed that our fellow citizens’ exercise of those First Amendment rights would leave us offended. It relies upon our collective sense of outrage at injustice, civic stupidity and power abused to set matters aright when they threaten to go wrong.

As citizens, it is our right, our obligation, to be offended, to be made uncomfortable. There are the times when we need to be prodded to examine our assumptions of right and wrong, to be told that black is white and be challenged to rise up and argue otherwise.

Thomas Paine, William Lloyd Garrison, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Eugene Debs, Margaret Sanger, Martin Luther King: They made people uncomfortable, caused emotional distress. Some people were offended by the things they said and wanted them silenced. But they were Americans; their words, albeit imperfectly, were protected. Their voices were heard.

But for every Martin Luther King there is a Father Coughlin, a George Lincoln Rockwell, Joe McCarthy or Fred Phelps. Like it or not, it’s their Constitution too.

If that Maryland court can fine Fred Phelps $11 million, who is next? The priest who accuses an abortionist of murder or the parishioner who wears a rainbow sash to Mass?

Will peace marchers be sued for annoying the president, for displaying graphic photos of dead Iraqis that may disturb his sleep or his wife’s? What about the citizen who asks too many pointed questions of the city council or the school board? The guy who paces with a cardboard sign to protest the local porn store?

There may be nothing good to be said of Fred Phelps, but if there were, no court should threaten your right to say it.

Not in this country.

Contact Jerome Christenson at (507) 453-3522 or jchristenson@winonadailynews.com.
.



Advertisement
 Tell us what you think...

 Comments »

cewoodford wrote on Nov 12, 2007 3:37 PM:

" This Rev. certainly has his right to free speech..just as I have my right as well. I guess if I find myself in the sad and unfortunate circumstance of having to grieve for one of our fallen heroes, I best bring some bail money because my freedoms will be stifling his speech with a extreme prejudice and swift violence...it will be Gods will....The Lord has spoken to me... "

Doc wrote on Nov 10, 2007 9:23 PM:

" I believe this scum sucking Rev has the right to say these God awful things about our bravest fathers, sons, mothers, and daughters. Personally I would really like to shove their vile words right back down their throats. I say God bless the bikers that show up at any of these funeral, to block these cretins from hell. "

Billy Bob wrote on Nov 10, 2007 4:43 PM:

" Wow JC you really went out on a limb going after the crazy preacher. How many seriously whacked things here in town to you refuse to comment on so you can write your little stories about nothing. "

Troller wrote on Nov 9, 2007 12:55 PM:

" AMEN! "

Jerome Christenson, WDN Online Editor wrote on Nov 9, 2007 10:29 AM:

" Gentlemen, you have no idea just how creepy that would be ... "

CT Rock wrote on Nov 9, 2007 10:25 AM:

" I wouldn't put it past either one of them! "

sanfi74 wrote on Nov 9, 2007 9:52 AM:

" What if Troller actually WAS Jerome? Now that would be REALLY creepy. "

CT Rock wrote on Nov 8, 2007 12:59 PM:

" I think Troller has an unhealthy obsession over Jerome. It's creepy. "

Troller wrote on Nov 7, 2007 4:20 PM:

" Now here's a laugh. My last post was censored when I used the very word Jerome used in his Op-ed which was a derogatory term for gay people. So I changed the word to fogs. I think some things really should be censored. I bet 11 Million goes a long way in keeping private funeral private. "

Troller wrote on Nov 7, 2007 4:16 PM:

" Now this Phelps has managed pull off something pretty remarkable. He protested like a far left wing liberal while holding the banner of far right zealot. So which offended you more Jerome ( I mean besides the verdict) Phelps' right wing, I speak for God against fogs, or his left wing anti-war rant? Maybe both? But future lawsuits isn't what your article was about. Was it? It's about an anti-war protester getting the kick in the nads financially isn't it? Freedom of speech is safe and sound. As for the other amendments, does Darrell know you're in favor of gun ownership? Take care old buddy, it's been fun. Best to the wife and kids. "

Troller wrote on Nov 7, 2007 4:03 PM:

" Jerome says, "The Snyder family won its case arguing it had suffered “an invasion of privacy and infliction of emotional distress” due to the rantings of Phelps and his foul little flock. That’s a dangerous precedent." My dear friend, It's a precedent which has been set before by Hollywood. And continues to be enacted when guys like John Kerry use the legal system to shut up the Swift Boat veterans. Where was the outrage then? Of course these are liberals, so the double standard must apply. To be continued.... "

Troller wrote on Nov 7, 2007 3:57 PM:

" Jerome says, "We will not post reader comments containing racial, religious or personal attacks, slander, profanity." The WDN edits posts on all these boards. Jerome now states we should have the right to say whatever, to whomever, whenever. It seems the WDN, (like most liberal venues) subscribes to, "Do as I say, not as I do." The Supreme Court has ruled that your rights end at my nose. Recently, the WDN reported about some bad choices made by a few college kids who wore black face. Were you outraged when they were punished for expressing themselves? Can you legally yell "Fire!" and a crowed theater? To be continued.. "

Troller wrote on Nov 7, 2007 3:49 PM:

" It seems what we have hear is pick and chose. Jerome says, "Will peace marchers be sued for annoying the president, for displaying graphic photos of dead Iraqis that may disturb his sleep or his wife’s? " There's your Bush attack, even if you don't see it. This statement is very disingenuous! You also know nothing like this is ever going to happen because public figures have a much higher threshold to meet when bringing cases against virtually anybody. The Enquirer relies on this and even though the Enquirer has lost suits, it still profits more than it loses. To be continued... "

Troller wrote on Nov 7, 2007 3:42 PM:

" Jerome. What statute has been enacted prohibiting this individual's right to free speech? All cases which go to court are heard by government officials in some capacity. Jerome says,"There is no constitutional protection against being offended. On the contrary, the Constitution’s authors clearly presumed that our fellow citizens’ exercise of those First Amendment rights would leave us offended. It relies upon our collective sense of outrage at injustice, civic stupidity and power abused to set matters aright when they threaten to go wrong." So how is this law suit different? To be continued. "

CT Rock wrote on Nov 7, 2007 1:48 PM:

" It's never a good idea to go to someone's funeral and condemn the dead person to hell in front of everyone they know. It's only a matter of time before someone who is already grieving and emotional decides to target all their anger and frustration towards Rev Fred Phelps and his croonies. I sure wouldn't get in the way to break up the struggle thats for sure. "

Demosthenes wrote on Nov 7, 2007 1:22 PM:

" I wouldn't be all that suprised if this guy gets shot at one of these funerals soon. "the right of the people peaceably to assemble"...The definition of "peaceable" is "not argumentative or hostile", and it certainly appears that this guy is being pretty hostile, thus he has violated his First Ammendment rights in my views, and chances are that is how the court looked at it as well. Phelps deserves the fine. However, I do not believe it should go solely to the family, but towards a charity for the soldiers, or something of that sort. "

Nok wrote on Nov 7, 2007 11:35 AM:

" If this ruling is upheld, I am suing a few of the users on WinonaDailyNews.com for daily affronts and aggravation. But the first amendment needs to be applied to everyone. Even Fred Phelps, and even you guys. You know who you are. So I expect, and hope, that this will be overturned. Fred Phelps is one of my least favorite people in America, but he can say whatever he wants. "

sanfi74 wrote on Nov 7, 2007 11:27 AM:

" CT Rock: Sort of hard to walk away from your child's funeral, don't you think? "

CT Rock wrote on Nov 7, 2007 10:28 AM:

" Freedom of speech. That's the bottom line. If you feel offended or dislike it, walk away, turn it off, and agree to disagree. That's that. End of discussion. "

kb wrote on Nov 7, 2007 9:58 AM:

" troller once again reading what he wants into the article....too funny. "

sanfi74 wrote on Nov 7, 2007 9:49 AM:

" Jerome makes a strong argument, I just really have a hard time accepting this. I'm not sure what the laws are, but is the KKK allowed to peacefully assemble, in their robes and stupid pointy hats? Can an assembly of people shout out curse words in public, like F*ck, or is there a decency issue there? What about N*gger? F*ggot? There are laws against saying certain things, like yelling "fire" in a theater. I understand the slippery slope argument, and am fearful of where this decision could lead, I just feel so damn bad for the family mourning the loss of their son who had to endure this twisted old freak and his minions, spouting out hate at this brave, young man. Does the family have a right to formally mourn without disruption? It's tricky. ... "

Jerome Christenson, WDN Online Editor wrote on Nov 7, 2007 9:10 AM:

" Note to Troller: The trial was held in U.S. District Court, a branch of the federal government, and the verdict will be enforced by the court. For the case to proceed to trial, the court had to rule that the plaintiff's case had merit or it would have been dismissed. An $11 million penalty is punishment sustained enforced by the federal government -- until and unless overturned on appeal. And, yes, I am this passionate about the 2nd and 4th Amendments - as well as the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th , 13th, 14th, 15th, 19th, 21st, and 26th. I have to confess to second thoughts about the 16th every April. "

returntosanity wrote on Nov 7, 2007 9:01 AM:

" I am impressed Jerome. It is not often I agree with you but today is one of those times. Troller reread the article for once Jerome was not bashing the Bush administration. Give credit where credit is due or we become like those we seek to teach. "

El Uno wrote on Nov 7, 2007 8:13 AM:

" I agree, Jerome. We forget that stupid people have the right to say their stupid things, and that is what makes this country great. Troller, I didn't take anythign said in the article as an attack on Bush's admin. I saw it more as an "attack" on society and it's need for political correctness in a country that was build on the premise of not being politically correct. "

Troller wrote on Nov 7, 2007 7:07 AM:

" Let us review: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Looks like instructions for interaction between the government and it's citizens, not between citizen to citizen. Are you this passionate about the 2nd Amendment Jerome? Or the 4th? I come away from this article with, "As long as it's designed to embarrass the Bush Administration, it's A-Okay". So far no government body has said this nut can't say what he wants, he just has to accept responsibility. "


The comments above are from readers. In no way do they represent the views of the Winona Daily News.

 Post a comment (150 word limit) »

Click here to report offensive or inappropriate comments. Please identify the comment you're concerned about, the story to which the comment was attached, the date of the comment and the person who made the post. Send comments to jerome.christenson@lee.net

We reserve the right not to post reader comments containing racial, religious or personal attacks, slander, profanity, e-mail addresses, mailing addresses, phone numbers or Web site addresses that are for personal or promotional gain.
Log In - If you have already signed up with winonadailynews.com, please sign in now!
*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Sign Up - To encourage intelligent and meaningful conversation, winonadailynews.com requires all commenters to register before posting comments. It's quick, it's easy, and it's free! Just fill in the information below to get started!

**Your Member ID and password will be required to log in. Your comments will appear under your user name.

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

*Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
*E-mail Address:
*Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

*First Name:
*Last Name:
Company:
Home Phone:
Business Phone:
*Address:
*City:
*State:
*Zip Code:
 

NEWSPAPER ADS

WINONA JOBS

TOP HOMES

HomeSeller
Top Homes


 
 
Dailies
La Crosse Tribune
Winona Daily News

Weeklies
Coulee News
Courier Life News
The Chronicle
Houston County News
Tomah Journal
Vernon Broadcaster
Westby Times

Regional
Inside Preps
My LIVE! Entertainment
Best of River Valley
Business Report
Healthy Living Today
Strictly Golf
River Valley Bike Trails
River Valley Blogs
River Valley Outdoors

Shoppers
Tri-County Foxxy

Marketplace
Newspaper Ads
Local Website Directory
7 Rivers Rentals
HomeSeller
Wheels Website
Outdoor Motors
Jobs

Portals
La Crosse NET
Winona NET

Classifieds
River Valley Classifieds

Links
Lee Enterprises
Minnesota Farm Guide

About Us | Classifieds | Contact Us | Terms of Use | F.A.Q. | Privacy Policy | Requests | Search | RSS | Videos | Advertiser Directory | Add to My Yahoo!
Copyright © 1997 - 2009 The Winona Daily News. All rights reserved.
Material from this site may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed. A Lee Enterprises subsidiary.