[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
The solution to that problem is discrimination. This is the duty of the citizen. They may WANT attention, but I bet they don’t want to have to drive 100 miles away to buy gasoline and food because people reserve the right to refuse to serve them. I bet they don’t want to be ostracized by their community for being fuckups.[/quote]
I do agree with your premise that the citizens of this country can and should demand common decency, however w/r/t a funeral, a law that supports common decency and right to privacy is what the public would want.
Why set the stage for conflict? Is it not better to try and put a stop to this kind of BS before it takes place? I personally think that it is better to have this law in place and enforced by the police than to have to break from the burying of a friend or relative to enforce this common decency.
[quote]
The “representative of the people” remark will never fly.[/quote]
Sorry Mike, but the US is a representative government.
[quote]
That is the tyranny of the majority.[/quote]
No it’s not. The US has a constitutional democracy sure, but we’re also a representative republic. A republic representative of the people.
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/whatsdem/whatdm2.htm
Diane Ravitch, scholar, author, and a former assistant U.S. secretary of education, wrote in a paper for an educational seminar in Poland: "When a representative democracy operates in accordance with a constitution that limits the powers of the government and guarantees fundamental rights to all citizens, this form of government is a constitutional democracy. In such a society, the majority rules, and [u]the rights of minorities are protected by law and through the institutionalization of law."[/u]
I think the last part says it well; the “institutionalization of law” to protect individual rights, not mob rule.
[quote]
150 years ago slavery was okayed via lawmakers “representative of the people”.[/quote]
True. But sadly enough, slavery will always remain America’s great sin due to it having actually been “representative of the people”. We did however enter into a very bloody civil war with that very issue being a driving force. That discussion would encompase an entire thread on it’s own though, and I have the second half of the Pistons to watch ;-]
[quote]
This is why we live in a constituional republic as opposed to a pure deomocracy, pure democracy is mob rule, natural rights be damned.[/quote]
You’re right, pure democracy is not what we in the US function under. As I said above, the US is a representative republic. Now, you can succesfully argue that slavery, our ethnic cleansing of the American Indians and the absence of Women’s rights, we’ve never been a true “republic for all”. But we are a representative republic. Despite our past sins as a nation.
[quote]
Bigflamer wrote:
But would you have wanted a herd of douchebags at his funeral denouncing him as a “fag”, in an army of “fags”?
Mikeyali wrote:
No, of course I wouldn’t want that. But living in a free society sometimes means that we don’t always get what we want. But again, this is the arena of the citizen, not the police.[/quote]
As I said previously, I personally don’t see a problem with a governing body establishing laws which support what is commonly held as decent and right. Obviously wee agree that burying your child in peace, free from molestation by others, is an inherent right of any parent or family. This, IMHO, is such a basic right that the government should have laws established to support this.
[quote]
At my friend’s funeral Hillary Clinton announced that she intended to show up. She was promptly told that she was not welcome. WE also had this kick-ass group of Nam-vet bikers that showed up and cordoned the area off. I assure you, these citizens would have prevented those shitheads from showing up.[/quote]
I have heard of these guys and I think they are doing a kick ass job of supporting the troops and America’s fallen servicemen. If ever I get the opportunity, I will shake their hands and thank them personally for what they do. Bikers really are great people.
[quote]
Frankly though I think the biggest crime here is that in the past soldiers at these funerals hadn’t just kicked the shit out of the protesters. I can safely say that my friends and myself would have kept them away from the family, but perhaps that’s because we’re Marines. grin[/quote]
I can personally atest to the agressivenes of the average Marine and wouldn’t be suprised to hear about a couple of Marines taking the initiative to set those fuckers straight. But that is how those douchebags function. Almost like guerrila warfare. You see, when said Marines kick the shit out of said assholes, assholes sue, and win, on acount of battery and clain infringement on “freedom of speech”.
The assholes then take the money won from the lawsuit and expand their bastardazation of this “freedom of speech” to upset yet even more funerals of servicemen.
We need a law on the books for this to be a crime, so this situation is much less likely to occur.
[quote]
Bigflamer wrote:
Freedom of speech does not meen freedom to harrass parents when they are burying their children.
Mikeyali wrote:
That is exactly what it means.[/quote]
I will have to disagree with you on this point I’m afraid.
[quote]
Oftentimes I hear people say that “freedom isn’t free”. They are right. Instead of crediting us military with that phrase perhaps they should consider shouldering the load themselves. Freedom means being a man and telling your upstairs neighbor to turn down his music yourself instead of calling the cops on him. Freedom means shaking your head at protesters instead of having the law come break them up. Freedom means having to put up with things you find distasteful, because others just might find what you do distasteful.
mike[/quote]
I agree with the basic premise of this last part. However, in the case of a family burying their child unmolested from a verbal assault full of hate, I think it is absolutely the right and responsibility of a representative government to support such basic individual rights.
You seem to advocate a kind of democratic anarchy which, IMHO, is not healthy for a society. We obviously agree that what is going on at these funerals is not right. We just disagree on how this should be handled.
I believe that we need an established law on the books to try and prevent what is going on and also give the families of the fallen soldiers some kind of legal recourse when it does occur. When there is a law on the books to prevent this, it then becomes officially “wrong” in the eyes of the law. Until then, it remains legally acceptable. This should not be.