Now the Motherfuckers are claiming Andy Stephenson died of AIDS!

[benburch]

Is there no end to their calumny?

Is there a GBLT lawyer in the house? I believe that making such an allegation is Per Se libel in most states, is it not?

Would any of you take this case pro bono

from; http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1440477/posts?q=1&&page=101

To: franksolich
Well, it appears death was caused by a post-operative infection.

I'm thinking HIV might have played a big part. However, because of the laws on this, it probably won't be revealed.
124 posted on 07/11/2005 4:27:52 PM PDT by PJ-Comix (Join the DUmmie FUnnies PING List for the FUNNIEST Blog on the Web)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies >

[Botany]

1. Let it go ...... who ever is responsible for such a hate does not matter

They win when we answer. Andy was a saint EOS.

[UCSBLiberalCat53]

2. Republican family values

exhibit #12341326289

[ronnykmarshall]

3. I'd love to personally cram a hot poker up their asses.

Fuck Freerepuglic and that pile of shit that runs it.

[Angry Girl]

4. So? Why should that matter so much?

You are perpetuating the prejudice surrounding AIDS. Just my 2 bits....

[benburch]

8. Because they have been lying about poor Andy for months.

First he wasn't sick.

Then he was sick but not with cancer.

Then he had cancer but it was fraud anyway because he didn't register as a charity.

Then he wasn't really dead.

Now they claim he died of AIDS.

This has to be stopped.

[eaprez]

22. Fastest Way to Stop it is to not react to them at all.....

they only do it for the reaction.

[Journeyman]

5. Why do you automatically lean to HIV as a "homosexual" disease?. . .

It's a human disease that kills indiscriminately.

[benburch]

11. I posted here because Andy was gay.

And because I am bi.

And because the only reason they make this allegation is because they are motherfucking homophobes.

[Journeyman]

20. I'll just let this one pass. . .

no sense stirring what's already bubbling over.

[eaprez]

23. and they will still be homophobes tomorrow.....let it go.

[bluestateguy]

17. Fact is...

Conservatives like AIDS. They like it a lot and they applaud its spread. They like what it does to the gay communitty. They like that it makes people afraid to have sex. If they could get away with it, we would not spend a dime on AIDS research.

[The Straight Story]

6. WOW - I am wondering

What would Jesus have to say to about such things from these supposed right wing christians? If Jesus would post, what would he say back to them?

[Gay Green]

27. IMO Jesus would use a LOT

of obscene language.

Like this: :rant:

[Kerrytravelers]

7. Just wondering, is having the HIV virus somehow a slur against your person

It may be a le, and one that conjures up hate in their bubbled world, but for humanity (those of us who are not on the right) is having HIV/AIDS somehow something that cna be considered libeous? It's not like being a child molester, a rapist or a serial killer.

[benburch]

12. At least in Illinois...

To publish that somebody has an STD, EVEN if true, is Per Se Libel.

[Inland]

9. Whatever. Trying to diss their deceased betters only way to get attention

Don't even bother thinking about it.

[Kerrytravelers]

Ben, I know you have been tireless in your efforts.

Don't let them get you sidetracked with their attempt at a hate crusade!

[The Straight Story]

10. Oh, one more thing - why Libel? Something bad about HIV?

My wife, AutumnMist here on DU, worked for awhile at an aids clinic and helped many with hiv and with Aids. I don't see it as being something we want to sue over for libel...just my 2 cents though.

[benburch]

14. Because that is the legal method I am aware of at least in my state.

If any of these people were in Illinois, we could shut them down and make them pay. But I do not know about other states.

[Occulus]

25. It's libel because the fact that someone has the virus

or even the implication that one does, or did, has been used far too many times by far too many homophobes against far too many people who did not have the virus that even the implication that they do have it is used socially against them and their associates.

I'm talking about people losing their jobs, getting evicted, becoming socially ostracized, etc.

The amount of experience you have with AIDS patients would actually be used against you by these people. That's why it's per se libel. These types make some truly odious claims about the virus, all out of ignorance and fear:

HIV can be spread by kissing
HIV can be spread by casual contact
We don't know what really causes HIV (yes, I know, I know, HIV is the virus; AIDS is the disease; in these people's minds, they are the same thing)

And on and on. They, for example, would be the ones who would try to block the sale of a home to an infected gay man because they don't want their children to get the "fag disease" too. Remember the hysteria in public schools back in the mid to late '80s? For these types, that hysteria was completely justified and in fact never really ended.

It's sick, and it's sad, and they retaliate against those who they believe have or had the disease- dead or alive. That's why it's slander; that's why it's libel. These people care nothing for the actual truth, because in their warped minds, the truth as we know it is wrong.

[eleny]

13. Shows just how scared they were of him in life

Now, the power of his memory and message is making them white hot terrified.

[bluestateguy]

15. I'm not a lawyer

But I would argue that since Andy had become a public figure through his activism and the fundraising drive that would make a libel case even more difficult to prove.

[DURHAM D]

16. How miserable are these freepers little lives ? Does anyone on

DU know enough about anyone on freerepublic to make a personal comment about them? Does anyone here follow their daily rantings to the extent that they can make an observation about a single person there?

What a bunch of pervs - the only meaning in their lives is to observe ours.

[Pallas180]

18. I think it's up to Andy's family to sue or take any action - n/t

:eyes:

[troubleinwinter]

19. Aside from the clear

fact that this was entirely made-up because Andy was gay, it shows that they just make shit up.

They are a fucking bottomless pit of lies.

[kestrel91316]

21. Unfortunately

I don't think it is a tort to "libel" a deceased person. If Andy were alive that would be another matter ENTIRELY.

[GrpCaptMandrake]

24. Not Libellous, but . . .

To those who were part of his immediate family, it IS conceivable that the comments could be construed (along, b-t-w, with all the other tawdry garbage they've said about him) as the intentional infliction of emotional distress, a recognized tort in almost every jurisdiction and actionable for the surviving family.

[davidinalameda]

26. as someone who will probably die from AIDS complications

I've come to realize and accept that it's a disease like any other

when we have people react like they're doing on this thread, it only fuels the belief that having AIDS is somehow a "wrong" thing--it's a common reaction so no big deal

fuck the freepers and celebrate Andy's life. I never knew him but I see the tributes to him and can tell that he must have been a pretty good guy to see people rally around him like they have.

[Democrats_win]

28. Cannot sue for libel if the libeled person is deceased?

We've seen this type of thing from Fred Phelps. They are terrible people and they live lives of hate accomplishing nothing.

[booley]

29. Sounds like a guilty conscience to me

If Mr. Stephenson (I don't feel I knew him well enough to call him andy) died of a post operative infection, then the delay caused by the freeper's disruption didn't cause his death.

If Mr. Stepehnson had AIDS then he was suffering from an incurable and ultimatly terminal disease and so again, the freeper disrupters are not at fault.

And lets not forget that far too many Cons (especially theo cons) consider AIDS a "Lifestyle" disease, which means Mr. Stephenson would be at fault for his illness. not the freepers.

of course, this is all just self serving spin, of the kind that modern Cons seem to use whenever they are forced to recognize the consequences of thier actions and ideology. Even if they did not plan the end result, they are no less culpable.

They do the same kind of rationlizations for iraq, American bodies coming home in bags, the torture at Abu Ghraib, Afghanistan, Gitmo...

why wouldn't they do it on a more personal level to hide thier guilt?

Just my 2 cents...