1. Jury Awards Father $11M in Funeral Case

Comment #84186 by mattpenfold on November 1, 2007 at 11:43 am

hungarianelephant,

I have no intention of defending the amount of damages awarded as they are simply ludicrous. However awards of damages out of all proportion to the harm done seem to be common in US courts.

2. Jury Awards Father $11M in Funeral Case

Comment #84131 by mattpenfold on November 1, 2007 at 8:49 am

It strikes me that there seems to be a divide here between those who think Phelps should be allowed to spew his vile but that does not mean he can do so at anytime or anyplace. Then there are those who think his right to free speech is paramount. It is to those people who I ask this: Why do you think the right to free speech is more important than other rights ? There are also such things are a right to a family life and that would include burying your loved ones in peace. Phelps can protest in many places, he does NOT have to do so at a funeral. A family burying a loved does need to have some form of formal rememberance.

And people also need to remember this: Society does have a right to require people not to act in anti-social manner in a public place.

3. Jury Awards Father $11M in Funeral Case

Comment #84025 by mattpenfold on November 1, 2007 at 3:12 am

"Bertybob, I don't understand. The Phelps' are non-violent, and neither advocate nor request violence. The only violence that seems likely to emerge from their protests are from those offended by what they say, which needless to say, doesn't really count."

They are engage in an activity they know, or should be expected to know, will possibly incite others to be violent towards them. No doubt that is part of their rationale.

No one here has said Phelps should not be able to hold and articulate the views he holds but some, such as me, are saying he should not be free to do at a time and place when his doing so will cause the distress it clearly does. There is a right for people to expect others to behave with a certain degree of decorum in a public place and those who are unable to do so should not expect their behaviour to go unchallenged.

I understand this can be a fine distinction but much of Western Europe seems to have managed it. The right to free speech does NOT trump all other rights, and one of the rights it should not trump is the right to bury a loved one with dignity. If Phelps wants to protest let him protest outside a military base at the time the funeral is taking place. His right to free speech would still be protected, and the family would bury their loved in peace.

4. Jury Awards Father $11M in Funeral Case

Comment #84002 by mattpenfold on November 1, 2007 at 1:42 am

"Certainly this will be overturned. Their speech may not be nice, but it is constitutionally protected."

Of course, it would not do to forget that the American people are their to serve the their constitution rather than the constitution being there to serve them.

Any constitution that allows the likes of Phelps to picket funerals like he has is seriously flawed. Common sense seems to be something those who think Phelps should be allowed to picket funerals are lacking. His deeds are odious, and whilst he should have the right to hold them, and even articulate them if anyone wants to listen, he should not have the right to do so in places were he will cause the distress he so clearly has done.

5. Germany imposes ban on Tom Cruise

Comment #52088 by mattpenfold on June 26, 2007 at 6:00 am

It would have been better if the authorities has just recommended no one see the film because Cruise is a crap actor.