Another problem with "Ten Commandment" monuments on public property:

[Theophylact]

They make it difficult to prevent people like the Reverend Fred Phelps from putting up his "monuments," too.

(If you have a strong stomach, visit the Reverend Fred Phelps's home page. Unfortunately, it's not a parody.)

[M_Six]

Somewhere in the world there is a village that's missing its idiot. What a jackass.

[Target]

<sigh>..... so much "hate" from a man supposedly filled with the love of God? Regardless of your interpretation of Leviticus 18:22, shouldn't any judgement be left to God himself, rather than a Reverend?

Religion or the Reverend's beliefs aside, could not the family simply block Reverend Fred Phelps (or anyone else for that matter) from creating and displaying this monument based on the grounds that they do not have permission to use the name and likeness of their son?

While you may think its ok, and don't yet follow where I am coming from, consider this. The Reverend is attempting to convey a message. Right or wrong, it doesn't matter. What matters is that this monument is being used to advertise a position and further a cause. Thats something tangible. Hard to put a value on, but valuable none the less to someone like Reverend Phelps. Given that he stands to "gain" from having the monument placed using the name and likeness of the victim, should not the victims estate either (1) have control over whether or not that name and likeness can be used? OR, (2) be compensated at their discretion for allowing the name and likeness to be used?

[John Prophet]

"could not the family simply block Reverend Fred Phelps (or anyone else for that matter) from creating and displaying this monument "

Hehe, I could have stopped him, lol.