Funeral Protests Ruled OK By Supreme Court

[IndigoSensor]

The supreme court ruled 8-1 that funeral protests, in particular in the case of anti-gay protests, are ruled constitiutional and protected by the first amendment of freedom of speech. The full article can be seen in this link, and here is an except: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41868004/ns/politics-more_politics/

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the First Amendment protects fundamentalist church members who mount attention-getting, anti-gay protests outside military funerals.

The court voted 8-1 in favor of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan. The decision upheld an appeals court ruling that threw out a $5 million judgment to the father of a dead Marine who sued church members after they picketed his son's funeral.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the court.

Justice Samuel Alito dissented

msnbc has a poll up, and currently 80% of those who voted strongly disagree with the ruling (with the option of 5 different choices).

To me, I actually find the disagreement with this ruling shocking. I personally do find the protests of the funerals absolutely sickening and borderline evil to those who are grieving and the one who passed. I don't think it should be allowed. With that being said though, this is a matter of freedom of speech, and my opinion on the matter can not and should not override that. As long as they are out of the immediate range of the funeral (assuming it's a private event), then it should be permitted. It's only fair. I agree completely with the supreme court's ruling, and the saying that infact ruling against WBC would erode freedom of speech rights down the line if this were to be found to be unconstitutional. I will also say though, that if this does cause psychological damage to those who are grieving, then I do believe they should be sued for the damages they caused, as the first amendment does not protect that.

I personally just find it very interesting to see that so many people disagree with the supreme court ruling. Further, this isn't fueled by me being against gays or anything of the sort. I mean, I am gay, and I tend to lean to liberal in the political realm as well. Yet, I find the supreme court ruling to be logically sound and fair (despite how I might feel about the protests).

How do you all feel about this? I seem to be in the signifigant minority on this and I wish to understand where others opinions on this are coming from.

Discuss.

 

[Wyote]

We just need to protest the protesters, so much so that they become a non issue and the protesters protesting the protesters are the ones in the media all the time... protesting in a way that spreads something positive.

 

[TheLastMohican]

We just need to protest the protesters

Yes. Protest them with savvy, or ignore them. The worst-case scenario is WBC hogging media attention, because that is precisely why they do this stuff in the first place.

 

[acd]

Or wait until they finally imbreed themselves braindead.
I don't see how this isn't harassment and how these military families are not entitled to privacy.

We just need to protest the protesters, so much so that they become a non issue and the protesters protesting the protesters are the ones in the media all the time... protesting in a way that spreads something positive.

Let's start a nationwide non-profit organization devoted to protesting the Westboros. In every city!!

 

[Siamese cat]

I believe that a lot of those who voted that they disagree with the ruling did so because they considered only an event where people would disrupt the funeral holding protests.

 

[Wyote]

Let's start a nationwide non-profit organization devoted to protesting the Westboros. In every state. In every city.

1-2-3 GO!

 

[Stu]

with the same brush

We just need to protest the protesters, so much so that they become a non issue and the protesters protesting the protesters are the ones in the media all the time... protesting in a way that spreads something positive.

Where is the moral leadership of all the other evangelical churches. They are the ones who really need to step up here. Don't think for one moment that the average, non church going joe schmoe does not equate these hate mongers with the normal decent " I feel Jesus in my heart" Christians.

 

[Barnabas]

Where is the moral leadership of all the other evangelical churches. They are the ones who really need to step up here. Don't think for one moment that the average, non church going joe schmoe does not equate these hate mongers with the normal decent " I feel Jesus in my heart" Christians.

You think that other Christians aren't denouncing them?

another question, can an entire country or nation enforce a restraining order against a group of people?

 

[aeon]

I do not value what the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas does, regardless of my view on that which they protest (and in this, I do not agree with the Westboro Baptist Church or value it either).

That said, I do value the decision and ruling of the United States Supreme Court in this matter, and am glad to see that First Amendment rights have been recognized and upheld.


cheers,
Ian

 

[headache]

I saw it on the news.

I couldn't help but think, "You're a church group. You shouldn't be holding signs that start with "God hates.....""

Something is just seriously wrong with that.

 

[This]

I was under the impression that the protesters where protesting AT the funerals if that is not the case than I agree with the supreme courts Decision although I think that the protesters should have to remain at a certain distance. I know that if one of my family members was protested at a funeral that wouldn't be the last funeral to happen that day and it's so vile and disgusting I'm quite honestly surprised that no one from the WBC has been murdered at one of these protests.

 

[acd]

I'm not against freedom of speech, but this ruling is ridiculous.
They're not just protesting, they are targeting and harassing.
It's one thing to stand in a public square and protest, it's quite another to target someone's funeral and harass their family.
Their whole M.O. is to rile people up in their most vulnerable circumstances. For what? Do you think they really believe people are going to change whatever the hell these fanatics are demanding because they've managed to assault them emotionally during a tragedy? Why should that be allowed? I don't care if they were 1000 ft. from the funeral... They still arranged it so that those leaving the funeral could see them.

Why is it that the privacy of grieving families means less than the coarse behavior of a group of rambling ridiculous nonsensical fanatics??

You couldn't walk up to someone on the street and start screaming that they're a "fag" and telling them god hates them and they should be dead without being hauled off by the police.

Their message isn't even coherent. 'God hates fags--who live in America, and that's why your Marine son is dead.' It's just absurd.


AND they are a religious organization.
I'd say if they want to be so politically active they should pay taxes.
These guys and the whole freaking Mormon church. (But I digress...)

 

[LivingProof]

To think the UK Supreme Court just ruled sexual orientation triumphs Christian beliefs..

 

[headache]

To think the UK Supreme Court just ruled sexual orientation triumphs Christian beliefs..

Yea, I could really climb on my soap-box about what rulings some courts make.

Sometimes "BOTH" sides of an issue are correct.

They were protesting at funerals. Should they have a right to protest for a belief? Mostly yes, depending on if it's non-violent protests. Should they be made to do it at a far distance so they grieving can have their rights protected too? Absolutely!

 

[LivingProof]

I firmly believe common courtesy triumphs freedom of speech. At least in this day and age.
Whatever you believe, just don't be a jerk, and the world is all good.

 

[This]

I firmly believe common courtesy triumphs freedom of speech. At least in this day and age.
Whatever you believe, just don't be a jerk, and the world is all good.

I believe in freedom of speech but sanctioned freedom of speech, I think you should be able to say whatever you want in the media for example but targeting a grieving family is completely different.

 

[Norton]

All freedoms have boundaries, including the freedom of speech. For example, one cannot protest within the White House grounds, which are bounded by a big heavy metal fence as well as hidden devices. So, I see nothing wrong with restricting the venue of the hateful speech of the Westboro Baptist Church morons to an area beyond the hearing of mourners at a military funeral. This isn't an infringement of free, hate-filled speech. Rather, it's just an infringement of harassment and torment, which last I heard, isn't a constitutional right.

 

[IndigoSensor]

That's the thing though, there is a physical distance that these people must withhold from the funerals themselves if they are private. It's not like they are 10 feet from these people. The media seems to gloss that detail over.

 

[Blind Bandit]

Or wait until they finally imbreed themselves braindead.
I don't see how this isn't harassment and how these military families are not entitled to privacy.


Let's start a nationwide non-profit organization devoted to protesting the Westboros. In every city!!

I agree. There is a limit to free speech and this pisses me off. I'm tired of bigots and morons hiding behind our constitution. Only to stab someone in the back didn't deserve it. I would love to educate these kinds of folks but I fear they are to fair gone.

Honestly if they protest a funeral of someone I knew I would not tolerate it. Freedom of speech shouldn't impose on another civil / constitutional rights.

I'm not against freedom of speech, but this ruling is ridiculous.
They're not just protesting, they are targeting and harassing.
It's one thing to stand in a public square and protest, it's quite another to target someone's funeral and harass their family.
Their whole M.O. is to rile people up in their most vulnerable circumstances. For what? Do you think they really believe people are going to change whatever the hell these fanatics are demanding because they've managed to assault them emotionally during a tragedy? Why should that be allowed? I don't care if they were 1000 ft. from the funeral... They still arranged it so that those leaving the funeral could see them.

Why is it that the privacy of grieving families means less than the coarse behavior of a group of rambling ridiculous nonsensical fanatics??

You couldn't walk up to someone on the street and start screaming that they're a "fag" and telling them god hates them and they should be dead without being hauled off by the police.

Their message isn't even coherent. 'God hates fags--who live in America, and that's why your Marine son is dead.' It's just absurd.


AND they are a religious organization.
I'd say if they want to be so politically active they should pay taxes.
These guys and the whole freaking Mormon church. (But I digress...)

Seconded. Pretty much everything I wanted to say.

 

[This]

That's the thing though, there is a physical distance that these people must withhold from the funerals themselves if they are private. It's not like they are 10 feet from these people. The media seems to gloss that detail over.

It's clear they are only protesting funerals to harass and cause grief and attention. They can do that elsewhere, they don't need to protest the funeral of someone who died for our country.