Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
Anonymous commenting is allowed
#219 - garymotherfinoak (01/20/2013) [-]
This image has expired
Too bad they pretty much said "oh we know they are and the damage they cause, but we're still gonna give them tax breaks and not do **** about it."
#222 to #219 - devout feminist (01/20/2013) [-]
"damage"

What damage, they fractured your ego? They hurt your butt? If I recall, they've never instigated violence, so they haven't done anything except offend people, which I thought everybody on this site got off on and insulted people for being offended.

Suddenly it's "I don't like the things you say, **** your constitutional freedoms". Ignoring the validity of doing that in this one case, that's one hell of a precedence anyone, including the government, can use to silence any one they want to legally.
#242 to #222 - makeitasyougo (01/20/2013) [-]
what these people do is abominable they protest soldiers funerals and tell the families that god hates them and the soldiers and is punishing them by killing a loved one, make a god damned mockery of Christianity, and cause enormous amounts of emotional harm to families across the country just so they can sue anyone who intervenes on their "right to protest", its sick and anyone who supports these ******** probably has the mental capacity of a coconut. and yes we can insult people here because its understood to be a JOKE
>endrant
#245 to #242 - devout feminist (01/20/2013) [-]
so, I was right. You're butthurt so they should be allowed to set the precedence that anyone with a disagreeable message can have their constitutional rights taken. How you feel about them shouldn't, and fortunately won't, have any effect on their right to assembly, protest and speech.
#254 to #245 - makeitasyougo (01/20/2013) [-]
well first of all, yes i am butthurt at how the american constitution is being raped by people who do everything in their power to abuse exactly how far the "limit" is. such as the wbc does on a repeated basis, yes they have the right to express their feelings, however, doing something with the intention to cause harm is illegal and is not protected by the constitution. so your entire argument is invalid, considering they have made, on national news, a statement saying that despite constant requests to cease and desist protests by families they will continue to do so, that my friend is harassment and that is not protected by the constitution either
#256 to #254 - devout feminist (01/20/2013) [-]
hurting your feelings isn't causing harm, and it most definitely isn't illegal.
#260 to #256 - makeitasyougo (01/20/2013) [-]
as is harassment, the evident stalking, slander, and numerous other offenses they make and dont get acted on
#258 to #256 - makeitasyougo (01/20/2013) [-]
emotional harm is actually a type of abuse which is definitely a crime though
#263 to #258 - devout feminist (01/20/2013) [-]
Well then, you hurt my feelings, no First Amendment for you. This post makes me sad for the future of our country, shut down FJ. FJ supports 4chan in pushing young girls to suicide, both of them should be barred from speaking.

>implying fj doesn't harass people daily
>implying fj doesn't internet stalk people
>implying fj doesn't slander people
>implying fj doesn't hide behind "herr derr I was jsut joking, don't get so butthurt over it"
#265 to #263 - makeitasyougo (01/20/2013) [-]
>implying most of funnyjunk does all of the above

>implying most arent actually joking

not gonna lie there's some people who truly mean it, and do what you just described and what they do is illegal, however the vast majority are either bandwagoning jokes or just outright joking.. unless its a religious debate ofc then **** gets real... and as for hurting feelings i apologize but i do not like the wbc.. unless one day they jsut say
"get trolled america" then i'll prob die laughing tbh... i'm done with this, successful troll is successful
User avatar #227 to #222 - garymotherfinoak (01/20/2013) [-]
spreading and pressing negative influence of any kind is what i define as damage in this case.
#234 to #227 - devout feminist (01/20/2013) [-]
Then 4chan is a hate group, hell even FJ is a hate group. If saying something offensive were illegal, we'd all be in jail right now. If anything, people here are just hypocrites. They believe anybody should be allowed to say anything offensive as much as they want, unless it disagrees with their own views. I don't claim any rationale to their views at all any more than anyone else, but until they either physically attack someone, instigate mass violence, or commit some other crime, they've done nothing wrong.

And again, I already KNOW that this isn't going to happen, specifically because of the precedence of being allowed to deny anybody with a disagreeable position their 1st Amendment rights.
User avatar #239 to #234 - garymotherfinoak (01/20/2013) [-]
neither of these sites are hate groups. there's a difference in discussing topics in an offensive manner and going into public with signs saying "9/11 was a gift from god," we don't tend to do that. we all have spite in our hearts, and we sometimes collaborate to do harm against people whether it's trivial or major. yes, westboro has committed no actual violence, so no arrests or anything extreme like that should be made.
#241 to #239 - devout feminist (01/20/2013) [-]
denying them constitutional rights isn't extreme but a slap on the wrist arrest is?
0
#224 to #222 - garymotherfinoak has deleted their comment [-]
 Friends (0)