Church ordered to pay $10.9 million for funeral protest

[Carlos]

BALTIMORE, Maryland (AP) -- A grieving father won a nearly $11 million verdict Wednesday against a fundamentalist Kansas church that pickets military funerals in the belief that the war in Iraq is a punishment for the nation's tolerance of homosexuality.

Albert Snyder of York, Pennsylvania, sued the Westboro Baptist Church for unspecified damages after members demonstrated at the March 2006 funeral of his son, Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq.

The jury first awarded $2.9 million in compensatory damages. It returned later in the afternoon with its decision to award $6 million in punitive damages for invasion of privacy and $2 million for causing emotional distress.

U.S. District Judge Richard Bennett noted the size of the award for compensating damages "far exceeds the net worth of the defendants," according to financial statements filed with the court.

Church members routinely picket funerals of military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, carrying signs such as "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "God hates fags."

A number of states have passed laws regarding funeral protests, and Congress has passed a law prohibiting such protests at federal cemeteries.

But the Maryland lawsuit is believed to be the first filed by the family of a fallen serviceman.

The church and three of its leaders -- the Rev. Fred Phelps and his two daughters, Shirley Phelps-Roper and Rebecca Phelps-Davis, 46 -- were found liable for invasion of privacy and intent to inflict emotional distress.

Snyder claimed the protests intruded upon what should have been a private ceremony and sullied his memory of the event.

The church members testified they are following their religious beliefs by spreading the message that the deaths of soldiers are due to the nation's tolerance of homosexuality.

Their attorneys argued in closing statements Tuesday that the burial was a public event and that even abhorrent points of view are protected by the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and religion.

The judge said the church's financial statements, sealed earlier, could be released to the plaintiffs.

Earlier, church members staged a demonstration outside the federal courthouse.

Church founder Fred Phelps held a sign reading "God is your enemy," while Shirley Phelps-Roper stood on an American flag and carried a sign that read "God hates fag enablers."

Members of the group sang "God Hates America" to the tune of "God Bless America."

Snyder sobbed when he heard the verdict, while members of the church greeted the news with tightlipped smiles.
_____________________________________________
sick people out there

[juppiter]

Much as I hate these psychos, this does infringe on their freedom of speech/religion, and I think it will be overturned.

[Jack]

Much as I hate these psychos, this does infringe on their freedom of speech/religion, and I think it will be overturned.

I don't see how it does really

its not like they were in the public square holding signs ... they were at funerals for goodness sakes

the freedom of speech does not protect slander

[fireweaver]

Much as I hate these psychos, this does infringe on their freedom of speech/religion, and I think it will be overturned.

These are the people involved (http://www.godhatesamerica.com/). You tell me just how far their freedom of speech goes.

[juppiter]

These are the people involved (http://www.godhatesamerica.com/). You tell me just how far their freedom of speech goes.

Are you from UK or US? Freedom of speech is seen differently in the US than in Europe.

I know all about the Westboro Baptists... God Hates Fags, God Hates America, God Hates You, etc. It's awful.

However, they're just expressing their opinions and practicing their religion. They're not threatening people.

[Jack]

Are you from UK or US? Freedom of speech is seen differently in the US than in Europe.

I know all about the Westboro Baptists... God Hates Fags, God Hates America, God Hates You, etc. It's awful.

However, they're just expressing their opinions and practicing their religion. They're not threatening people.

I think this another one of those cases that because it is not happening to you then you think it is ok

[Jack]

this is a hypothetical but would you object if Fireweaver and I stood just outside you property line and hurled insults at you?

after all, we are just expressing our opinions, we are not threatening you

[juppiter]

I think this another one of those cases that because it is not happening to you then you think it is ok

I don't think it's OK... I think it's sick and disgusting to picket a soldier's funeral and say God wanted him dead.

If a Nazi rally came through my city I would be pissed but the first amendment protects it... I don't like it but it does.

[Jack]

I don't think it's OK... I think it's sick and disgusting to picket a soldier's funeral and say God wanted him dead.

If a Nazi rally came through my city I would be pissed but the first amendment protects it... I don't like it but it does.

thats fine ... "a nazi rally" coming through the town is not the same thing

we had a KKK rally in a town nearby and I didn't like the idea of it

but the "nazi or KKK" rally was not at a funeral of a loved one

once again would it be okay for the nazis to sit right outside or YOUR property line with signs and what not, directing their efforts toward you?

If someone in your family was getting married and some social group was against it would it be okay for them to hang around the church with hate signs?

that is not the same as "a nazi rally coming through town"

[juppiter]

Again, no, but hate speech is still free speech unless a threat is implied, or if it's at a workplace/school/etc.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here.... I expect that this decision will be overturned. It was an emotional decision on the part of the judge, and such decisions almost never hold up in our legal system.

Didn't one of our founding fathers say something along the lines of, "I don't agree with what you are saying, but I will defend your right to say it"?

[Jack]

Again, no, but hate speech is still free speech unless a threat is implied, or if it's at a workplace/school/etc.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here.... I expect that this decision will be overturned. It was an emotional decision on the part of the judge, and such decisions almost never hold up in our legal system.

Didn't one of our founding fathers say something along the lines of, "I don't agree with what you are saying, but I will defend your right to say it"?

not that I know of

so I can stand right outside of your property line and hold up offending signs and call you names?
you have no problem with this ... ?

you either support this group's "right" or you don't

if you truly support it then you will have no problem with them or some group like them doing it to you

[jen.n]

There are laws against disturbing the peace.

[Jack]

There are laws against disturbing the peace.

true

alot of people will be quick to defend this group with the 1st amendment but if it was happening to them they would not feel that way

a nazi rally "coming through town" is not the same as this situation

[fireweaver]

I don't think it's OK... I think it's sick and disgusting to picket a soldier's funeral and say God wanted him dead.

If a Nazi rally came through my city I would be pissed but the first amendment protects it... I don't like it but it does.

I don't know if you have ever actually seem these "people" in action, but if you haven't, check out these for starters:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnMyP5ou6zs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWAawKFMYfs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhr96Imua8U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RusB4ZFKv-c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UMP3AK5jwo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UL67oUXFRRo <- must see (based on a investigative report that later became a court exhibit)

[fireweaver]

true

alot of people will be quick to defend this group with the 1st amendment but if it was happening to them they would not feel that way

a nazi rally "coming through town" is not the same as this situation

If it was my kid's funeral, I would have probably started something I'd later regret. But there would at least be one or two less of them.

[Jack]

If it was my kid's funeral, I would have probably started something I'd later regret. But there would at least be one or two less of them.

I fully agree Fireweaver:cheers:

[CarlD]

If these people hate gays so much, why don't they go protest gay peoples funerals ??

Homosexuality and these military funerals have NOTHING in common, but I guess it causes the most controversy and gets them on the news.

[Jack]

If these people hate gays so much, why don't they go protest gay peoples funerals ??

Homosexuality and these military funerals have NOTHING in common, but I guess it causes the most controversy and gets them on the news.

according to them the Iraq War is punishment for the county's tolerance of homosexuals

I don't understand that logic at all but thats what they believe

[fireweaver]

If these people hate gays so much, why don't they go protest gay peoples funerals ??

Homosexuality and these military funerals have NOTHING in common, but I guess it causes the most controversy and gets them on the news.

Protesting gay funerals is how they got started. About 20 years ago and ever since.

[jen.n]

according to them the Iraq War is punishment for the county's tolerance of homosexuals

I don't understand that logic at all but thats what they believe

The logic is that they get more bang for having no real ideas, by fusing two controversial topics together and making themselves a nuisance.

[BJR]

Didn't one of our founding fathers say something along the lines of, "I don't agree with what you are saying, but I will defend your right to say it"?

I think the wording is: I may not agree with what you have to say but I'll fight to the death that its your right to say it.

I may be incorrect.

[Jack]

it is actually from voltaire