Funeral protester charged as son steps on flag

[Stubob]

OMAHA, Neb. - A Kansas woman whose church protests at military funerals
across the nation was charged Thursday with four misdemeanors after her son
stomped on a U.S. flag during a demonstration in Bellevue.

Shirley Phelps-Roper, 49, of Topeka, Kan., was charged with negligent child
abuse, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, flag mutilation and
disturbing the peace.

"I have not failed to do my duty to my children, to my God or to my fellow
countrymen, and I take my job dead serious," Phelps-Roper said Thursday,
vowing to aggressively fight the charges.

The charges were filed Thursday in Sarpy County Court by County Attorney Lee
Polikov. A message left Thursday afternoon for Polikov was not immediately
returned.

Phelps-Roper said Polikov "has pointed the big guns of government at my
liberty and at my children."

The American Civil Liberties Union will likely represent Phelps-Roper, and
was waiting for official approval from its board, said Laurel Marsh,
executive director of ACLU Nebraska.

Phelps-Roper acknowledged that she allowed her 10-year-old son, Jonah, to
stand on the flag. She said the act qualifies as freedom of expression, and
she promises to challenge the constitutionality of the flag-mutilation
charge. She noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down laws
forbidding flag desecration.

According to Nebraska's flag law, "a person commits the offense of
mutilating a flag if such person intentionally casts contempt or ridicule
upon a flag by mutilating, defacing, defiling, burning, or trampling upon
such flag."

Phelps-Roper is a member of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka and the
daughter of the church's founder, the Rev. Fred Phelps.

Phelps-Roper said church members have protested at hundreds of military
funerals across the country for 17 years. Westboro's message during funeral
protests is that the soldier deaths are God's punishment for the nation
accepting homosexuals.

The Bellevue funeral was for Nebraska Army National Guard Spc. William
"Bill" Bailey, who was killed May 25 when an explosive device struck his
vehicle in Iraq.
This was e-mailed by a Vietnam Vet -

[Genghis77]

It is so wrong to protest a war at a funeral for someone that just gave their life for the cause. The honorguard should fix bayonets and escort such protesters from the grounds.

Protest a war sure. Audie Murphy protested the Viet Nam War openly and publically. But he was also frequently at the airport in Oakland to greet and welcome the returning soldiers. Hate the politicians for putting them there. Hate the profiteering military industrial complex. But honor the soldiers because they believe what they are doing right.

[Genghis77]

It is so wrong to protest a war at a funeral for someone that just gave their life for the cause. The honorguard should fix bayonets and escort such protesters from the grounds.

Protest a war sure. Audie Murphy protested the Viet Nam War openly and publically. But he was also frequently at the airport in Oakland to greet and welcome the returning soldiers. Hate the politicians for putting them there. Hate the profiteering military industrial complex. But honor the soldiers because they believe what they are doing right.

[Bill of Rights]

It is wrong to protest at a funeral at all, moreso of a soldier who died fighting for our country, but the "wrong" is moral, ethical, not legal. There are no charges that can be filed if they are peaceably assembling and on public property. I do not Not NOT support or defend the actions of these anti-American @$#%s, but I have to support their right of expression... or set precedent to lose my own.

Blessings,
M

[Genghis77]

I happened to see this woman on the Tyra Banks Show. She also stated that all the people in the Trade Center Towers were a bunch of homosexuals and deserved what they got. Tyra was amazingly cool with the situation and simple stated it would be the last time she would appear on her show. She broke for commercial and gone after.

No problem with protests. Do it plenty myself. It's even a just and patriotic thing to stand up to wrongs. But there are proper times and places. And you want to have good information and cause. That woman is just plain wacko and needs a period of hospital committment until the medications take effect.

For the record I know a respectable number of vets and the Iraq war comes up a lot. Practically all I know are against the way things are going, many for getting involved in the first place. To a man, they blame President Bush and Vice President Cheney. Likewise most veterans blamed Presidents Johnson and Nixon during Viet Nam and Truman and Eisenhower during Korea.

I happen to Admire Napoleon Bonaparte. Though I have often heard him compared to Hitler by some. What I most admire him for is the last Head of State of a major power to actually ride and lead attacks at the front of his Armies. (Hint: Does that express my thinking concerning the aforementioned presidents?)

[VegasGeorge]

Where do citizens' rights to free assembly and free speech start to unreasonably infringe on others' rights to peaceably gather and conduct private business like a funeral? It's a difficult question, and I doubt if there is a satisfactory answer. One idea of mine is that protesters have a right to protest, but no right to have their protest heard or seen by any particular group of others. So, if what the protesters are doing is unreasonably disruptive to the lawful activities of others, the protesters should be moved back as far as it takes to eliminate the interference. This is where I would support the use of force if necessary.

[Bill of Rights]

The first problem that comes to mind, George, is that anyone can claim that a group is unreasonably disruptive and by doing so, prohibit the free exercise of the rights of assembly and speech. I see where you're coming from, and in principle, I agree, but in practice, it unfortunately falls down. When it comes to public property, I don't think I can agree with any "reasonable restriction" on anyone's rights, governmentally speaking, so long as no actual harm or loss occurs. ("My right to swing my fist ends at the tip of your nose.") We do not have the right to never be offended.

Like you, I don't know the right answer, but also like you, most of the time I can at least see why something is not it.

Blessings,
M

[VegasGeorge]

"My right to swing my fist ends at the tip of your nose."

Well, actually you're wrong about that. You are thinking of a battery, and forgetting about the assault. A battery is a completed assault, but it is an unlawful assault for you to swing (take a punch) at me, even if it misses.

I understand and agree with you about the difficulty of protecting rights of protesters and rights of others. There have been an endless string of court cases about this issue. Protesters in front of an abortion clinic have to stay on the public sidewalk, and cannot interfere with the peaceful ingress and egress of persons visiting the clinic. But, we all know how poorly such rules work in practice. As I recall, demonstrators at political conventions are kept a city block or more back from the convention. It's a tough problem.

[Bill of Rights]

"My right to swing my fist ends at the tip of your nose."

Well, actually you're wrong about that. You are thinking of a battery, and forgetting about the assault. A battery is a completed assault, but it is an unlawful assault for you to swing (take a punch) at me, even if it misses.


Woops. I wasn't clear, sorry. I didn't mean swinging in a threatening manner, but just standing and swinging my arm in a circle. I can do that so long as you don't fall within the arc of the swing. (also, Indiana, I'm told, does not have statute to cover one or the other of those, and I think it's assault that does not exist here, but is charged as either battery, if completed, or attempted battery, if not. I don't remember that for certain, however, and I'm too lazy at the moment to look it up, and in any event, it matters not to this discussion.

I understand and agree with you about the difficulty of protecting rights of protesters and rights of others. There have been an endless string of court cases about this issue. Protesters in front of an abortion clinic have to stay on the public sidewalk, and cannot interfere with the peaceful ingress and egress of persons visiting the clinic. But, we all know how poorly such rules work in practice. As I recall, demonstrators at political conventions are kept a city block or more back from the convention. It's a tough problem.

(shakes head in exasperation) Of course demonstrators are kept back at political conventions: we can't run the risk of the American royalty having contact with the commoners. I quoted the phrase a few days ago, re: titles of nobility. We have them, we just don't call them Kings, Queens, Dukes and Duchesses.

In America, they're called Presidents, First Ladys, Senators and Representatives.

Blessings,
M

[Genghis77]

Forget the legalities. Fact is you go into the wrong place and shout the wrong thing to the wrong person, you WILL reap the reward of your deeds.
I have before put ends to free speech which were also verbal abuse of a child. One being a man that was a father swearing at his son without reason and kicking and hitting him. Sure he had a right to free speech. When told to stop he didn't and I took action and stopped him. All duly reported to the authorities. I was exhonerated of any wrong doing and the father ordered future contact with his son only with supervision. By the way, my action was that I snagged him by the ear with a number #6 trebble hook and pulled him into the water to cool off. Not only I a good shot but not too bad with a fishing pole. I was aiming for his nose.