TODAY THE LUNATICS WHO CALL THEMSELVES THE "WESTBORO BAPTIST CHURCH" OF TOPEKA, KANSAS ARE APPEARING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO ASSERT WHAT THEY DEEM THEIR UNALIENABLE RIGHT TO SCREAM "THANK GOD FOR DEAD SOLDIERS" AT PEOPLE AS THEY BURY THEIR DECEASED LOVED ONE, shouting that their son is burning in Hell because he fought for a nation in which homosexuality is "tolerated". Given the brutalization of Matthew Shepard and the recent suicde of an "outed" Rutgers University student, we at the Alexandria Daily Poop can only conclude that these loons are either actually a family of very bad improvisational comedians (and tasteless into the bargain) OR that they will not be satisfied until the United States establishes an official Inquisition empowered to root out and stone to death every single person who ever so much as experimented with homosexuality as a child. (We are guessing it is the latter).
While we were listening to news reports and commentary about this event, we got the idea for what follows......
The following is satire, for those of you who don't know how to recognize it.
SUPREME COURT DECLARES EDITOR OF BLOG "ALEXANDRIA DAILY POOP" TO BE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND SOLE MEMBER OF THE COURT FOR DECISION IN CHURCH GROUP CASE, OPINION GOES AGAINST WESTBORO BAPTIST CHURCH
October 6 2010
In a shocking move, the entire Supreme court voted unanimously to recuse themselves from the case involving the Westboro Baptist Church, or Snyder v. Phelps as the case is styled. They then appointed F. Allen Norman, the editor of an obscure Internet web-log called "The Alexandria Daily Poop" as Special Chief Justice and Sole Member Of the Court for the specific and sole purpose of deciding this case, and pre-emptorily declared this action to be Constitutional. "This case makes us all want to vomit, for different reasons of course" said Justice Antonin Scalia. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said: "No sane person would want to be making the final decision on this case. There's no nut like a Nationalist nut, so I guess Mr. Norman is nuts enough to decide this."
Special Chief Justice Norman ordered a transcript of the proceedings to be disstributed immediately after the hearing. Special Chief Justice Norman heard no arguments and delivered the following commentary, opinion and ruling:
"Ladies and gentlemen, please be seated.
Before we begin, I want to say that I am almost as shocked to be here as you are to see me here. I only read the briefs for both sides yesterday, and I find that these have been sufficient for me to form an opinion and a ruling. I do not need to hear anything either side has to say. The insane lunatic ramblings of one side and the statements of obvious truths by the other need not be repeated in different words but identical content for me to understand them.
The appellant was awarded five million dollars in a lawsuit against the appellee in the sum of five million dollars for emotional distress suffered due to the conduct of the appellee during the funeral of his son, a United States Marine who died in a motor vehicle accident in a combat zone in Afghanistan. The facts here are not in dispute. The appellee and/or his agents placed themselves in a position where they could heap scorn, ridicule, and insult upon the grieving family as they accompanied the Earthly remains of their deceased loved one to his final resting place. I find that any reasonable person would know that such behavior would inflict extreme emotional distress on the bereaved. Such behavior is so vile as to be offensive to almost anyone's sensibilities. When the infamous child rapist and murderer John Wayne Gacy was executed, did anyone think to do such things to such loved ones as he had as he was laid in his grave?
The appellee appealed this judgement and had it reversed on the grounds that the judgement violates their right of 'free speech" as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
This Amendment states that "Congress shall Pass no law respecting an Establishment of Religion, nor prohibiting the free exersise thereof; or of Speech or the Press, or the Right of the People to Peacefully Assemble for the Redress of Grievances". The judgement against the appellee violates none of these provisions.
It is the opinion of this court that too many cases have been brought before this court and others, seeking to use the guarantee of the First Amendment as a cloak for, not speech; but reprehensible and outrageous behavior. And while behavior may be "speech", when it is directed not toward the government but against private citizens acting in what is universally recognized by any decent and reasonable person as a private moment of greif; when it is deliberately calculated to disturb the family of a deceased loved one be that loved one a vile hoodlum or a brave hero fallen in the performance of his duty; and when that distress is a desired result of such speech, be that distress the whole part or a component of the desired result of the actor; then the First Amendment does not apply.
It is amply evident that the appellant was reckless in the extreme in the foregoing. Part of the appellee's intent was clearly to inflict suffering on the appellant. The Ninth Amendment clearly states that just because a right is not enumerated in the Constitution does not mean it does not exist. It is the finding of this court that if there is any right commensurate with those enumerated, it is the right of a grieving family to accompany their loved one on his or her final journey on this Earth in peace. The appellee has egregiously, willfully, wantonly and knowingly violated this right, and seeks to have this court recognize their violation of an unenumerated right by claiming the aegis of an enumerated one.
By the agreement and conditions of my appointment, I may rule only on this case and my ruling shall set no precedent. But also my ruling is binding and final.
Therefore, it is the ruling of this Honorable Court that the judgement of the original court against the appellee and for the appellant is not only re-instated but increased five-fold to twenty million dollars; and the court further directs the United States Marshalls Service to sieze and inventory all property of the Westboro Baptist Church; to include the real and personal property of its officers; and the bank accounts and other assets; and dispose of such property money and assets in such a mannner as to render to the appellant the sum of this judgement plus his costs and attorney fees; and to apply the remainder to the costs of the execution of this judgement; and if there be remaining any funds that they be returned to the appellee; but if there is insufficient money to pay the foregoing, the assets of the appellee shall be levied upon until all this judgement is paid in full.
This case is closed, and this court is adjourned.
- ► 2017 (74)
- ► 2016 (77)
- ► 2013 (136)
- ► 2012 (123)
- ► 2011 (77)
- ▼ October (5)
- ► 2009 (56)