Does freedom of speech apply to all, or just to those with whom we agree? I surprised myself in the writing of this article. By the end of it I realized that I did not have the opinion that I believed I did upon first hearing of this case. When I put aside my emotions I realized that intellectually I had to disagree with my own initial thoughts.
I recently read about a case that is going to be heard by the Supreme Court this session. The case began as a lawsuit brought by a father against a church group that protested at his son's funeral in 2006. The man's son was a U.S. marine killed during active duty in Iraq. The church group believes that U.S. soldiers are being killed because our country in too tolerant of homosexuals. They picketed outside the marine's funeral with signs such as "Thank God for dead soldiers." A Maryland court awarded monetary damages to the marine's father for invasion of privacy and emotional distress, but an appeals court overturned the ruling on the basis of the church group's first amendment rights. The case will now go to the Supreme Court.
I'm sure that this topic could bring forth very heated debates in any venue. I am very glad not to be one of the judges making this decision. As much as I abhor what these people did, I believe the Supreme Court will have no choice but to uphold the appellate court's ruling. While I doubt that the writers of the constitution would support these people’s despicable actions, they insured that they would have the right to voice their opinions no matter how offensive you or I may find them. I have always been quite fond of saying that nowhere in the constitution does it say that we have to right to not be offended.
If we put limits on our first amendment rights, we go against everything that our forefathers believed in; everything that our soldiers have fought and died for since the birth of our country. I may detest what these protesters did and how they added to this poor father's grief, but his son died protecting their right to do so. As vulgar as this group’s actions are to me, I have to stand by their right to perform them.
Freedom of Speech
ReplyDeleteA unfortunate religious group known as the Westboro Church group have taken to protesting outside the funerals of service men and women who have fallen in the line of duty. They believe that US soldiers are being killed because we are too tolerant of homosexuals and abortion. A father of one of the soldiers has sued the group, winning monetary damages for invasion of privacy and emotional distress. However, an appeals court overturned the case based on the groups First Amendment right to Freedom of Speech.
I agree with Amor patriae’s take on the issue. The whole idea that you can pick and choose what should be protected under the First Amendment is preposterous. No matter how innocuous something is, you can find someone who will be offended by it. That is the whole point of the First Amendment, to protect people from the whims and opinions of others. You can’t make exceptions no matter how tempting it is, even in cases as hideous as this one. I also appreciated that the writer changed their initial opinion of the case when thinking unemotionally on it. That is what we as a people need to do more often and what the Judicial Branch needs to do always. While someone being so despicable as to protest outside the funeral of a soldier killed in duty because they believe that the US is too tolerant of homosexuals is repugnant, living in a country that does not allow it is even more so.
The Westboro Church group, infamous for these anti gay protests should stop, but the way to achieve that is not in suing them. In Weston , MO a group of locals heard of the Westboro’s plans to demonstrate outside of the funeral of one of their local soldiers and formed a protest of their own that shielded the funeral and ultimately forced the retreat of the Westboro group. This is a much more effective and satisfying way of dealing with these protestors. Instead of potentially infringing on the rights of all US citizens, we should use our rights to say what we think and give the Westboro Church a taste of their own medicine. Protesting outside their church every Sunday does not sound like a bad way to spend the day. I personally think that the Westboro Group is a crazy, grotesque mutation of what a religious organization should be, but I would rather they protest, than that all those who have fought for our right to do so have their struggles be in vain.
Sadly, I’m going to have to agree with the majority of comments on this one, buy I will voice my outrage in the loophole. Our soldiers are out there dying so that we can enjoy the freedom to say whatever we want without the government being able so censer us. Even when our views are in complete opposition to the norm or most popular, its usually important to listen to their views to reach a greater understanding of others, allowing us to share ideas, beliefs and values. But I have some reasons why this is obviously not the case here as evidence by how their protest moves form free speech to something grotesque. The church thinks our soldiers are being killed because we tolerate gays and abortion. That’s all well and good. I say let them say they want everyone to be less tolerant and deny happiness for our citizens because other people don’t like it. It’s hypocritical given that they’re just giving in and denying us the freedoms that allow them to say such things, but its all well and good. Let them have their church meetings on Sundays preaching whatever they want. Where they crossed the line was going to the funeral of the soldier and spreading their message in a private venue. Now granted I’m not all that enlightened about the specifics of the first amendment, but it seems to me that if its illegal for a single person to go to your house (private property) and harass you about any matter, it should also be illegal for a mob of people to harass you at a cemetery you own a piece of (even a small plot of land where you’re son is buried.) I’m not arguing the church’s right to say whatever it wants. Let them march on the capitol or down the streets waving their "Thank God for dead soldiers" signs all they want. The difference is that this funeral was a private venue. An event for the family of the dead soldier. There wasn’t anyone there with enough political power to do anything about the soldiers being at war. Who were they even protesting? The Father? The cemetery? The dead body? What’s he going do about it? What can he do about it? NOTHING. Besides the media attention that could have been generated form a non offensive public area, they chose to harass the father of a dead soldier. I’m all for free speech, but that’s not what these people were doing. They crashed a funeral and only gave more grief and sadness to a already pained father the man should get some kind of reparations for that.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your commentary, “Freedom of speech: Does the constitution come with disclaimers?” found at http://amorpatriae2010.blogspot.com/2010/10/freedom-of-speech-does-constitution.html, pertaining to Westboro Baptist Church and their recent protests at certain military funeral services, I have to agree, to a degree, with you that “As vulgar as this group’s actions are to me, I have to stand by their right to perform them.”
ReplyDeleteIt is a breeze to back free speech we are in agreement with, what puts our support in the First Amendment to the test is when we disagree with what is being said.
With people and organizations, like Westboro Baptist Church, claiming to be “Christians,” it’s no wonder that my true brothers and sisters who have been converted unto Christ are gazed upon and talked about as though we are ordinary people along with the rest of the world. Followers of Christ would never protest at any funeral service because the deceased chose to live a lifestyle other than instructed by God and especially not at a funeral service for one who has served in the military, risking their life to ensure we keep our freedoms, including freedom of speech.
With that being said though, it is a right granted to all citizens of this country and if the Supreme Court rules unfavorably for Westboro Baptist Church in the recently introduced case, I am weighing the impact of a ruling that may place certain restrictions on free speech. If the court places boundaries on free speech directed at individuals, exactly what would that mean? How could placing restrictions on speech work with our government? The court's decision has the possibility to grant relief for countless military families as they burry their loved ones and creating long-term problems for the multitude. Although it ills me to say this because of the nature of what Westboro Baptist Church has done, if the government continues to make amendments to already established laws, in order that certain individuals are not the victims of others who are protected by those same rights, our country’s backbone will eventually break.