The Westboro Baptist Church is loaded with hateful scumbags. I’ve bumped into a few of them in my life and there’s very little about them that you could possibly like unless you yourself were a hateful scumbag. They’re run by a kook who thinks God “hates” everyone from fags to soldiers to the United States. They’re perpetually explaining why you’re going to hell. They don’t usually tell you they’ll pray for you, instead choosing to remind you of how much they hate you.
In other words, scum.
That being said, this ruling is flat out wrong:
Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law, announced today that a U.S. District Court in Missouri denied a request by the American Civil Liberties Union lawyers made on behalf of a member of the Westboro Baptist Church to prevent the state from enforcing its statute limiting protests “in or about” the location of funeral services (Shirley L. Phelps-Roper v. Jeremiah W. Nixon, et al., No. 06-cv-4156-FJG). The ACLU filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the law on behalf of protesters who disrupted military funerals by picketing and conducting other protest activities.
The court order, issued by federal Judge Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., essentially adopts Judicial Watch’s argument that Missouri’s “funeral protection law” is well-grounded in Eighth Circuit judicial precedent and is consistent with the U.S. Constitution. Moreover, Judge Gaitan specifically cites Judicial Watch’s amicus brief concerning the right of family members and friends of those killed in battle to mourn their loss. The judge writes: “…amicus Judicial Watch notes that Missouri also has an interest in protecting funeral attendees’ First Amendment rights to free exercise of religion.” Judge Gaitan ruled that the ACLU’s client failed to demonstrate a “likelihood of success on the merits” of her arguments. Her request for a preliminary injunction was, therefore, denied.
There’s so much in those two paragraphs that’s just flat-out wrong, but what really tweaks me is the gist of it. Namely that military funerals are all of a sudden protected above others and that suddenly the right of free protest can be abridged simply because it’s a military funeral.
What the hell, folks? It gets worst as the rhetoric starts flinging around fast and furious:
“We’re pleased the court seems to recognize the right of funeral attendees to mourn those who died defending our country without being disrupted by protesters,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Unlike the ACLU, most Americans believe that mourners should be able to engage in quiet and reflective prayer at funerals. As the court noted, ‘…picketing soldiers’ funerals and belittling the sacrifices made by soldiers are intolerable actions…’”
Holy crap, where to begin. Okay…
I believe people have a right to mourn all they want. I believe that people should honor the fact that a funeral is sacred and off-limits. That being said, the idea that a court chose to define military funerals specifically as off-limits bothers me. I don’t disagree with Tom Fitton that most Americans do believe that mourners should be able to engage in quiet prayer, etc., but I don’t believe that most Americans, if they got over the initial gut reaction to the story, would ever even consider making the courts step in and protect funerals from protest.
In this country, we have a right to protest and assembling for those purposes is a guarantee granted to us first among all others. Where the Court errs here is that it seems to say that since the content of the speech is offensive to some, it’s restrictable. I have a real problem with that not only for the idea itself, but for the precedent it sets.
Free speech exists for one purpose and one purpose only; to allow the free airing of unpopular speech and ideas. The idea of freedom of speech is that if you want to say something unpopular, you don’t have to worry about someone persecuting you for it. Of course there are limits on free speech (the old cliche’ fire in a crowded theatre line), but if you think about it, this is nothing like that.
There’s no public harm in a group of wacked-out bigots protesting a funeral. Will they upset people? Of course; that’s their modus operandi. But we can’t start halting protests because the content of those protests would make people feel bad, regardless of the target of those protests. While I find the protesting of slain soldiers to be a detestable and horrible way for anyone calling themselves a “church” to act, I can’t for the life of me bring myself to cheer over this decision because it amounts to the government now setting themselves up as the arbiter of the content of protests.
To say that makes me uncomfortable would be an understatement.
I don’t care for Phelps and his clan of merry loons, but they do have a constitutional right to do what they’re doing. The precedent this sets is terrifying, and frankly all the right wingers puffing out their chests over this decision are quite sickening.
via Judicial Watch
[tags]westboro baptist church, aclu, protest, funerals, judicial watch[/tags]