Judge temporarily stops funeral protest law

Patriot Guard

Great Club J Collins. I've read many of your posts and enjoy them, but never knew about Patriot Guard till I saw this recent posting of yours.

I think my Daughter and I are going to join the club. We both ride, and we both believe in what you guys are doing. I just finished reviewing the site with her, and we were both touched by the mission you guys are on.

jb
 
Except for aethism (Communism) and its near-brothers (Fascism).

An the oscar for ignorant statement of the week goes to....

Some communists may be atheists, most atheists are not communists.
 
An the oscar for ignorant statement of the week goes to....

Emsa.

Some communists may be atheists, most atheists are not communists.

Communism is, by definition, atheist.

No, not all atheists are Communists. I know many atheists who are more freedom-loving than a few "Christians" I can mention.
 
Sometimes they do more than funerals -- I remember several years ago when President Bush was the commencement speaker for USMA, a group decided to stage a protest just outside the gates. The Patriot Riders lined the streets with their flags waving so that the parents could celebrate the day without the distraction! A fantastic act!!! :jump1:
 
Patriot Guard!!

We need them in our town tomorrow. This was posted in our paper this morning.
http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/displayUpdate.htm?StoryID=89346

For some reason they are protesting the funeral of the murder/suicide of 5 members of our community. I'm unclear why as they apparently have no military connections. The family members of the deceased had already requested no media, and only close family and friends attend the funeral. In the comments section of the article someone posted they had talked to the Patriot Guard, but they only attend at the invitation of the family.
 
Last edited:
They did this at the funerals for the NIU shooting victims, as well.:thumbdown:
 
Emsa.



Communism is, by definition, atheist.

No, not all atheists are Communists. I know many atheists who are more freedom-loving than a few "Christians" I can mention.

Why thank you for the award but I couldnt possibly accept and anyway since you agreed with the main point of my comment I dont think I would qualify unless your assertion that not all atheists are communists is equally ignorant, which I think we both agree it is not.

Plus you are wrong, traditional marxist theory does consider atheism as a foundation of a communist society but not all communists subscribe to traditional marxist theory. In many places in the world (latin america being a good example) religeon and communism coexist very overtly. Study the role of on the ground catholic priests in communist uprisings in South America and you get a fascinating example.
 
In many places in the world (latin america being a good example) religeon and communism coexist very overtly. Study the role of on the ground catholic priests in communist uprisings in South America and you get a fascinating example.

My parents came from Cuba. My uncle was imprisoned for his role in the Bay of Pigs and his wife had to smuggle the host and wine (despite having been stripped searched first) so he and his fellow prisoners could celebrate Communion. They had to do it at night when the guards were asleep or less active.

And yeah, priests have often been involved in communist uprisings because they were rising against oppressive dictatorships that the Communists were trying to "liberate" the people from. Once the Communists took power, they all too often closed the churches and exiled, imprisoned, or executed the priests. Three of those were in that prison cell with my uncle. They had been supporters of Fidel at one point. Then they were on the beaches of Giron fighting against him.

Another uncle of mine, who just so happens to be a retired Jesuit priest, had to flee the island because his life was theatened by the Castro regime.

So when Communism "tolerates" religion, it is merely because it knows that if it went to war with it openly the people could revolt, especially in deeply religious places like Latin America. In other words, it is a matter of strict convenience. Even then, they continue to do everything possible to harass the clergy and the congregation, and don't even think of trying to bring faith into the schools because that's where the next generation is being brainwashed into thinking the State is God and that their parents and grandparents are just superstitious fools.

Don't pretend to tell me what Communism's attitude toward religion is. :mad:
 
Last edited:
One of the associate pastors at my church was in Russia weeks after the USSR fell. He said people wept because they could finally have a bible without the fear of imprisonment/vanishing from face of the Earth.
 
Don't pretend to tell me what Communism's attitude toward religion is. :mad:

And dont pretend to think that your families experience of one country, horrific as they are, gives you some absolute knowledge of the world that gives your views the status of univesal truth.
 
Explain why you believe repugnant speech is not protected under the US Constitution.

I'm very interested to know how you come to that conclusion.

Source(s):
Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 42.01(a)(1), 49.02(a) (West Supp. 2007) concerning disorderly conduct the statute provides: “a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly: (1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place”
 
And dont pretend to think that your families experience of one country, horrific as they are, gives you some absolute knowledge of the world that gives your views the status of univesal truth.

The universal truth and intended result of Communism is: no religion, a society of Atheists. That's fact and semantics won't change it.

Marx said: "In a Communist Utopia, Religion ceases to exist because there is no need for it."
 
Not all speech is protected.

Source(s):
Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 42.01(a)(1), 49.02(a) (West Supp. 2007) concerning disorderly conduct the statute provides: “a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly: (1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place”
Thanks. Also notable would be various laws and cases against slander and libel.

While I feel what they are doing is repugnant, disrespectful and wrong, their speech is protected just as yours and mine are. Sorry, I cannot support your position no matter what your argument is.

Explain why you believe repugnant speech is not protected under the US Constitution.
I'm very interested to know how you come to that conclusion.

"Repugnant" is a subjective term, and as such has been used to exploit the lack of respect for other people that runs rampant in our society. What this is coming to is the major problem among modern laws: lawmakers refuse to acknowledge that they have a moral responsibility to society in the laws that they make, and that this moral responsibility can be met without favoring a particular religion, thus preserving their precious "separation between Church and State (which, coincidentally, NOT a Constitutional quote...)."

The reason we protect freedom of speech is a self-defense mechanism to prevent tyranny and anarchy. When we start to limit speech and expression, we run the risk of allowing those powers of censorship to be used and abused against particular groups--or those who say things we do not like. The Supreme Court ruled that this self-defense mechanism was so important, it should even be allowed to disrupt our national security (NY Times v. US).

Protesting at a funeral shows disrespect at a personal level -- something this group is NOT trying to do.
The Topeka, Kan., church has protested at military funerals nationwide because it believes U.S. troop deaths are punishment for the nation’s tolerance of homosexuality.
How ironic, and how disgusting; these people are picketing the funerals of the very people who fought and DIED to defend their "right" to picket. These heroes died for the U.S. If you want to get policy changed, picket Capitol Hill or the White House.

"Freedom" does not mean "doing what you want." The common use and understanding of the term "right" is drastically out of place. If everyone were to instead use "privilege" and "responsibility," we wouldn't have these problems.

Hate to break it to those defending it, but Communism is anti-religious by nature. (That's the reason it won't work.) Wasn't it Marx who called religion the opiate of the masses...?

The Catholic Church's role in Latin American uprisings was due in part to the then-common preachings of "Liberation Theology," which is social teaching that helps particular groups identify better with the Church and relate Her teachings to their lives more directly. The main problem was that this teaching advocated overthrow of oppressive organizations (sometimes violently) as a solution to their problems-- a decidedly non-Christian ideal, which is why Liberation Theology is no longer accepted or preached by the Church.
 
I haven't read the court decisions regarding allowing these jokers to make themselves a nuisance at cemeteries, but you'd think that if they can get away with disturbing people in a very fragile state at a burial, they could go around making a rukus at libraries that have offensive literature and hospitals that treat AIDS patients. Of course nobody has thrown out the rules about being quiet at a hospital and non-disruptive in a library (even though the unbathed homeless are allowed to stink up the place - that was an interesting decision),

I'm still scratching my head as to why you can't enforce a disturbing the peace ordinance at a place designed to be a peaceful public place.
 
Back
Top