Our main mission is to attend the funeral services of fallen American heroes as invited guests of the family. Each mission we undertake has two basic

[Fandango 1,440]

Right, cos people holding up signs saying 'Thank God for Dead Soldiers' are the same as invited guests trying to shield the grieving family from such hatred.....

They're two parts of the same bullshit argument.

That argument is??

What part of invited guests don't you understand?

Families losing a loved one shouldn't be subjected to hatred from 'anti-war' or 'anti-gay' activists, neither should they feel a need to employ, or "Invite" (though that raises the question in my mind of who actually approaches who..) similar activists to preserve their dignity.

Its another example of the polarisation of debate in this country, people are so militant on one side or another that there's no middle ground for real discussion.

This argument for example, is quite common.

We have an unwavering respect for those who risk their very lives for America’s freedom and security.

I don't agree with the Patriotic rose-tinted view that America's soldiers in the middle-east are defending America's freedom and security. If you don't agree with GWB's policies pertaining to the 'War on Terror', its very hard to support the actions of the military who are carrying it out. The fact that US troops are being killed on an almost daily basis, is extremely unfortunate (with apologies for the euphemism) - but that doesn't mean we should abandon the very legitimate questions about why our troops are in Iraq (for example) in the first place.

Hiding behind patriotic fervour is simply a way of avoiding dealing with those issues, IMO.

That argument is quite separate from the religious nutters claiming that the dead soldiers are God's vengeance for defending gays. Those people are just crazy.

I'm sorry, but this is bullshit logic. Regardless of how anyone feels about the war...these soldiers are doing their duty. If they die while in service to this country, they deserve the respect and HONOR of every single one of us, despite political views.

These people attending these funerals are only doing so in an effort to neutralize the absolute lowest of the low...picketing at a funeral. You want to sit here & pull apart words & take umbrage at 'protecting America' when you disagree....but at the end of the day, a soldier is dead & 'anti-war' protestors exploit the tragedy to further a political agenda. You're right....this should absolutely not be happening, and it has absolutely no right at a funeral......so why you choose to focus on the fact that the families invite these people to protect the sanctity ot the occassion, instead of focusing on the absolute heartlessness & cruelty of the protestors, is beyond me. You're focusing on the solution instead of the problem. Is the solution ideal? Of course not...but what other choice do the families have, eh? What should they do? Since you have it so sussed, why not share your solution for everyone? Cos I'll tell ya what...if God forbid you knew or are related to a soldier who was killed, how could you deal with the loss, the grief...every emotion under the sun...then walk outside the church/synagogue/mosque and see people chanting hateful stuff?

You say let the family deal with their loss....yet the only people who are trying to ensure that happen are these bike guys.

The argument may or may not be separate from the religious nutters....I only used the example of their signs cos it happened to be here in another thread the same day. But do you think the message from extreme anti-war protestors is any less hateful or devastating for the families?

They wouldn'tbe there if it wasn't needed. And I'm sure there are many grateful families that they are there.

[Fandango 1,440]

I just want to add:

Every man in my family proudly served in the armed forces. They didn't get to choose where they went, or what their missions were. It wasn't a holiday for them. They felt a duty to their country, so they served. My father is a former USMC & fought in Vietnam. He RARELY will speak of what happened there, but once I got him to tell me about what it was like coming home. He told me after all these horrible experiences over there..after living through death and hell and the worst things you could imagine, he came home with such joy from having survived, and expecting a hero's welcome, only to be spat upon & called the most deplorable names imaginable.

I couldn't even imagine having to live through it as a grieving family member. I wasn't even alive at the time, and it hurts me to no end.

I don't have a problem with people who differ on the war...but how anti-war translates to anti-solider is just absolutely heartbreaking to me & for that reason, I support this group wholeheartedly.

Edited March 14, 2006 by LisaD

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I don't have a problem with people who differ on the war...but how anti-war translates to anti-solider is just absolutely heartbreaking to me & for that reason, I support this group wholeheartedly.

Well said.

Unfortunately, too many lefties don't get that. To them, the fact that a grieving family may invite a group doesn't make them ok, if the groups message is contrary to the message of the left. If their message isn't welcome, they're going to make sure no one elses is either.

[pax 0]

Again, I'm not really sure that it's anyone else's business if the family has asked the group to come. These families have been quite wrongly chosen as targets by what is by any standard an extremist hate group, and I don't think anyone has any right to criticize the soldiers' families for wanting to counteract those actions with a more supportive message.

I think that any "lefties" (and I do rather consider myself one!) might do well to direct their petulance elsewhere on this issue; specifically, towards the rotten "religious" who decided it was their place to show up at a funeral and inform the grieving that their loved one is burning in hell.

[Sister Fracas 5]

As long as they are invited as they say, and they don't approach the family in a terrible grieving time (to become invited), then I don't see the problem.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

... and they don't approach the family in a terrible grieving time (to become invited), then I don't see the problem.

Agreed, soliciting invitations would be in bad taste.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't have a problem with people who differ on the war...but how anti-war translates to anti-solider is just absolutely heartbreaking to me & for that reason, I support this group wholeheartedly.

If you read what I wrote I'm not actually objecting to the family inviting whomever they choose, if of course they truly did invite them. Certainly they have the right to do that - I was objecting to the fact that this is necessary to begin with. I wouldn't want a bunch of strangers at my funeral. Would you?

I don't see my views as being 'anti-soldier', I just don't see how you can separate criticisms of the war from how it is being carried out. That doesn't mean being unsympathetic to the loss of service personnel. As I said that is unfortunate, but they shouldn't be in Iraq in the first place. Seeing as there are so many unanswered questions surrounding the war, does dressing it up as something it isn't help answer those questions?

AS I said, I think hiding behind patriotic fervour obscures rational debate on the core issues behind the Iraq war, for example. A family doesn't want to hear that their loved one died for nothing (and rightly so). That said, families should have a right to bury their loved on without being harassed by political groups.

As long as they are invited as they say, and they don't approach the family in a terrible grieving time (to become invited), then I don't see the problem.

Yep. Freely invite = OK, Invite yourself = naff off

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Let's just see when the news breaks that the Bush administration actually funds these guys through some channel. Sure wouldn't be a surprise.

Would be kinda cool, too, if those that champion the right of a family to grieve the way they see fit to afford that same courtesy to families such as the Sheehan's. Those, of course, are leftist nuts.

[pax 0]

Who said that the Sheehans, or any family, don't have the right to grieve the way they want?

[Fandango 1,440]

Let's just see when the news breaks that the Bush administration actually funds these guys through some channel. Sure wouldn't be a surprise.

Would be kinda cool, too, if those that champion the right of a family to grieve the way they see fit to afford that same courtesy to families such as the Sheehan's. Those, of course, are leftist nuts.

I'd actually have a lot of respect for any politician - lib or conservative - who helped protect families & let them grieve without hate groups attacking them.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Who said that the Sheehans, or any family, don't have the right to grieve the way they want?

Hatas that came and shouted them down any chance they had...

[Sister Fracas 5]

hmmm...found this on their forum... http://www.patriotguard.org/Forums/tabid/6...ic/Default.aspx

The question asked was

Subject: How do we get the word out about us?

The family members are contacted by our state captains explaining who we are and asked if the family would like us to be there for them. Since it's the families decision for us to be there or not we await on thier decision. Contacting the families should be done by the state captains just as stated else on this site.

Does this go into a grey area? I know it says it's the families' decision, and I'm sure they don't pressure the families, but does this go over a line? As I said before, it's a terrible time of grieving and I'd hate to see any families be given anymore decision-making stress.

[Fandango 1,440]

I think it's still a respectful thing to offer to go.

I also found this:

It all started back in early August of 2005 with the American Legion Riders chapter 136 from Kansas. They were appalled to hear that a fallen hero’s memory was being tarnished by misguided religious zealots who were protesting at funerals.

Their History

So my assumption that they'd only be at funerals with political protests was wrong. They could have shielded the family who buried their son with protestors saying 'Thank God for Dead Soldiers'....so how can that be wrong?

[Mirorgate 0]

At a funeral, there are always people that you will not know, but the deceased does/did in some way.. whether through work, circle of friends, how ever else they knew them and became close.

If the deceased were also in the military, his Unit/Battalion leader/representative will also be there, whether the family knows them or not. There is also the honor guard, flag bearer, funeral home representatives, etc. the list does go on.

The military, at funerals.. consider all (AF, USMC, Army, Navy) as "Brothers in Arms" who sacrificed their life for their countries ideals and stands for what it represents. Which in their minds might be different from others perspectives.. who cares, it is what they thought and believed in, and volunteered for. These ex-mil is what I think most of this biker grp is made up of? So yes, in their own way they are showing respect and a desire to show this to the dead soldier, their family and community in their own way. You don't agree with it, that's fine. Don't condem them for their idea of extended family because of that disagreement though.

I'm just sorry that they no longer use live amo in the 21 gun Salute to pop those nut jobs protesting at a funeral. Fine... freedom to gather and protest in non violent means, freedom of speech, whatever... but lack of class and tact it shows.