Snyder V. Phelps No

Board of County Commissioners of Brevard V. Snyder set a precedent since the Court concluded the comprehensive plan, provides for future land use through gradual and ordered growth, and it is not a literal guide. Thus, Local governments have the discretion to decide that certain land uses should be denied, even if they comply with comprehensive plan guidelines.

Albert Snyder’s son, Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, was killed in a Humvee accident on March 3, 2006. Phelps heard about Matthew Snyder’s funeral and decided to head to Maryland with six other followers to picket. The Westboro Baptist Church picketed Lance Corporal Snyder’s funeral with signs that displayed sayings such as: “God Hates the USA/Thank God for 9/11,” “Thank God for IEDs,” and “Thank God for Dead Soldiers.” Before the members of the church arrived, they contacted local authorities to let them know about their protest. They staged themselves on public land that was parallel to a street, all the while agreeing and obeying that police officer’s orders. They showed their signs for about thirty minutes before the beginning of the funeral. Members of the church also sang songs and recited verses from the Bible. The picketers never stepped foot (they were about 1,000 feet away) on the church’s property (where the funeral was held) nor did they use profanity or

I chose the Snyder vs Phelps case and this being the first time listening in on a full Supreme Court hearing, a couple of things did surprise me. The first of which was how calm all the judges were. When the judges spoke, they had an air of confidence, especially the senior judges who barley seemed to stammer. Despite all of the technical words and references to other court rulings the overall tone did not seem as formal as I had imagined. Judge Charles Beyer seemed very lighthearted, with almost every comment he made followed by some laughter. Senior Judge Antonin Scalia even made a hysterical Quaker grandma joke. Before listening to the audio, I would not have believed that this came from a Supreme Court proceeding, let alone from one of

The Dred Scott vs. Sanford case was a huge decision in the history of our country. Dred Scott was a slave who was owned by the Sanford family. The Sanford family moved Scott to a Wisconsin territory, where slavery was prohibited under the Missouri Compromise, where he lived for 4 years working on and off to raise money for him and his family’s freedom. Later on, the Sanford family moved him back to St. Louis where Scott tried to buy him and his family freedom but was denied by the Sanford family. Scott sued the Sanford’s and made a case that he and his family lived in a free area for an extended period of time making him legally free. The state court declared him free but the wages that Scott had were withheld by the Sanford family who then appealed the decision to make Scott free to the Missouri Court. The Missouri Court overturned the decision to make Scott free and ruled in favor of the Sanford’s. Scott then sued the Sanford’s again for physical abuse and the court would not rule on it because they said Scott was regarded as a slave in Missouri territory.

The Dred Scott vs. Sanford case is one of the most important cases that have ever been tried in the United States of America and was heard in the Old Courthouse of St. Louis.   This case that is usually known as the Dred Scott Decision was a ruling by the Supreme Court of America that African people imported into the country and detained as slaves were not protected by the U.S Constitution and could never be American citizens.

In the infamous Dred Scott V. Sandford case, in 1857, the Supreme Court upheld that no one of the African American race has the ability to sue any United States federal court. Chief Justice Taney ruled that African Americans were "chattel" and had no rights under a "white man's government". Furthermore, the Missouri Compromise was affirmed unconstitutional, because the Congress does not have the power to ban slavery in the Western Territories. Sandford was favored by the Supreme Court, which gave slave owners the right of property, in the Fifth Amendment, including slaves who were bought and sold like property.

The church reportedly picketed a local restaurant every day for three years because the owner employed a female knowing that she was a lesbian. Many of the targets for the church are chosen at random. The church picketed a concert by Justin Bieber because he was not using his fame to promote God. Other targets were Bill Clinton's mother, Sonny Bono, Lady Gaga, and Bob Dole. Shirley Phelps-Roper, a frequent protester and one of Fred Phelps' children, would wear American flags sometimes. She would hang them from her pants while protesting so that they would scrape against the ground while she walked. She allowed her children to step on an American flag during protests. The Church uses tactics like these to win media attention and spread its

(Westboro Baptist Church homepage) The members of the WBC, which consists of a small and close-knit group of people, believe that homosexuality is wrong, that anyone who is not an“old-school’’ (Westboro Baptist Church About Us page) baptist like them, (such as the Amish and Jews), are wrong, that God will punish everyone who doesn’t have their views. These people believe all these groups will burn in Hell. They protest funerals and take to the streets with their vile posters to scream their ideas to others. They persecute others because they trust genuinely in the righteousness of God.

We felt that there is a certain amount of respect that everyone deserves and the WBC is crossing this line and stripping people of this respect. As a result, there should be laws created to limit the amount of emotional stress that this group can put onto the people they encounter. One way this can be done is by not allowing the church to protest at certain events such as the funerals of deceased military members. Although the WBC has the right and is protected by the first amendment, allowing them to express their freedom of speech, they are using this to their advantage and are exploiting others. I personally believe that the creators of this amendment had no intention for it to be used to protect people who act like the members of the WBC. I do agree that the WBC have the right to their freedom of speech and protest, however, they are in some ways, impeding and striping the rights and freedoms of the people they encounter and the young members of the church who shout and hold signs when they have yet to understand the meaning of

Not affiliated with any southern baptist or general baptist churches, the thirty-nine member (The Journal) Westboro Baptist Church is primarily known for its continued protest against the LGBT community, the Catholic Church, and the military (Wikipedia). The westboro Baptist Church’s first public service was held on November 27, 1955(Wikipedia). This was the first time the church publicly condemned the world. Most recently the Westboro Baptist Church have agreed with the shooting at the Pulse Night Club in Orlando, Florida stating that God sent Omar Mateen to kill the gays because “God hates fags.” While other churches preach about loving one another as god has loved them, the westboro

I hope the people of the United States understand what the Dred Scott decision will mean for the country. In my opinion it will have a negative impact on the county due to issues surrounding slavery. One of the main reasons being it shows where the government stands on the issues of slavery. It has tested the constitutionality of the Fugitive Slave Law and the Missouri Compromise and has unjustly over looked our forefathers belief that all men are made equally.

Laramie consisted of many other religions that presented the views of many of their citizens towards homosexuality. Reverend Fred Phelps, a minister from Kansas, negatively impacted the gay community as he protested against homosexuals. He believed gays were determined to go to hell because of God’s hatred for them. Reverend Phelps like McKinney was a homophobe, which upset many citizens when he ranted about gays going to hell right after the murder of Matthew Shepard. Many citizens including Romaine Patterson decided to take a stance against such hatred to “show the differences. And [to] think at times like this when we’re talking about hatred as much as the nation is right now, that someone needs to show . . . that there is a better way of

In the beginning of this article, Rosenbaum relies on the appeal of emotion, pathos, to persuade his audience to agree with his claim. He tries to achieve this by telling a story of a church group picketing the funeral of a gay marine. He states, “The Supreme Court upheld the right of a church group opposed to gays serving in the military to picket the funeral of a dead marine with signs that read ‘God Hates Fags’ ” (Rosenbaum). This event caused an uproar and disrupted the peace of a marines’ funeral. Many people began to question the limits of free speech because of this. How can people use hateful speech such as

Some of the most interesting arguments were in regards to weather Snyder was a public figure or not. The Snyder’s Lawyer claimed they were handpicked to gain the maximum amount of exposure in regards to the protests and picketing by the Phelps family and Westboro. Westboro claimed they had protection under the first amendment, speech on public issues and speech on a matter of public concern, because Snyder made his son a public figure by asking, publicly, for an end to the war. Westboro also claims they were not “up close and in their grille, or berating” insisting that it was public speech rather than harassment. Both sides were given equal opportunity to argue their case, and both were asked equally difficult questions.

In the notorious pro-choice court case, Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court stated that the definition of privacy is, “broad enough to include a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy”, and this “right”, the court believed, was founded upon the “concept of personal liberty.” However, the aborting of children is not a liberty nor is it a duty that God has given to any of the four jurisdictions of authority. On the contrary, God has given each jurisdiction the duty to defend the life of the unborn. Life has always been properly considered, in the United States, as a God-given unalienable liberty that no man can take from the innocent. Tragically, in one hundred and ninety-seven years, the definition of liberty from time time of