Court Won't Block KKK From Highway Cleanup

from JoeUser Forums
From Associated Press, link here:
politics
2,596 views 6 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
This is a sticky situation, but I have to say that I agree with the court on this one. The KKK may be an organization of losers, but if the highway program is open to other groups that are considered contraversial (such as National Guard Units and the Boy Scouts or Religions), then it's hard to justify singling out the KKK (even though they do an pretty good job of singling themselves out). To me, the best way to handle it would be to let them take care of the highway and let them sink or swim on their own.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that Missouri's "desire to exclude controversial organizations in order to prevent 'road rage' or public backlash on the highways against the adopters' unpopular beliefs is simply not a legitimate governmental interest that would support the enactment of speech-abridging regulations."


Substitute "Homicide " for road rage and the government's argument would have been more compelling.

I would direct any would be "D.C. sniper" to make his or her way to that "half-mile stretch of Missouri 21 near Potosi" for target practice. But that's just me.
TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

No it wouldn't, the government has rarely been able to forbid a group from performing because it might prevent a homicide.  I give you various marches by NAACP members, if they hadn't marched it might have prevented homicides, but let's face it, we're better off without Jim Crow.


Cheers

Reply #4 from PolMach Forums Top
This is a sticky situation, but I have to say that I agree with the court on this one. The KKK may be an organization of losers, but if the highway program is open to other groups that are considered contraversial (such as National Guard Units and the Boy Scouts or Religions), then it's hard to justify singling out the KKK (even though they do an pretty good job of singling themselves out). To me, the best way to handle it would be to let them take care of the highway and let them sink or swim on their own.


Oh come on, you compare the Boy Scouts to the KKK? Guess I never heard about the lynchings in the boy scouts.

"A KKK chapter sought permission to pick up trash along the road, but was turned down because the program is not open to groups that discriminate based on race or those that courts have said have a history of violence"

If you accept the KKK, then can Al Quaida advertise its group in the same way?
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #3 By: jeblackstar - 1/10/2005 5:10:04 PM
No it wouldn't, the government has rarely been able to forbid a group from performing because it might prevent a homicide. I give you various marches by NAACP members, if they hadn't marched it might have prevented homicides, but let's face it, we're better off without Jim Crow.


Cheers


I'd have to agree with this.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
No, I'm not comparing them at all, I am merely citing them as examples of other groups who have been barred from access to public programs or activities for contraversial stances on issues. The Boy Scouts have been challenged many times because they do not allow openly gay people, or atheists into their troops, and National Guard (as well as other U.S. Military) recruiters have been barred from recruiting on college campi because of "don't ask, don't tell).

You may not like my examples, that's ok, but let's not be found guilty of taking the example and making it the point. ;~D