Opinion

Westboro Baptist Church hides behind First Amendment

Last Wednesday, the Synder v. Westburo Baptist Church Supreme Court case came to a close with an 8-1 decision in favor of Westburo, a church that recently picketed the funeral of Lance Corporal Mathew Snyder with signs reading “God hates fags” and “Thank God for dead American soldiers.”

The Supreme Court stated in agreement that they have chosen “to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate.”

While these are nobly spoken and agreeable words, the truth of the matter is that there is no victory here.

The ruling is not a loss, because the First Amendment protects Westboro, and freedom of speech prevails. However, the decision gives Westboro the power to continue abusing the Amendment and American citizens.

The result of the case makes it clear no lesson has been learned, and there is no punishment for this type of harassment. The group’s words are designed to be vicious, and the pains their words inflict are deliberate.

Does the Westboro rhetoric contribute to any legitimate debates that are in danger of being stifled?

Those who are supportive of the ruling often simply suggest that we deprive them of publicity, and ignore them so that they fizzle out on their own. But not all of us have the ability to just not to listen.

It is an unfortunate fact that Westburo will always garner publicity as long as they exist. To say otherwise and disregard the issue for that reason is nonsensical.

For both current and future victims, it is necessary to show that we don’t lack the power to deal with these types of issues.

At the very least, steps have to be taken to strengthen the laws in order to protect soldiers and privacy rights.

One of the major fears of this case was that if Snyder were to win, a slippery slope would occur and we would eventually lose our freedom of speech altogether.

But the aim of the Constitution and law should be to ensure a family’s right to conduct a funeral without hurtful interruption or distraction.

There is a time, place and manner in which the protests can be rightfully held. A funeral is not one of the places that should be considered acceptable.

Hope for resolution is clearer when thinking of the single dissenter Justice Samuel Alito, which shows that this is still an issue that is subject to further discussion. Reasonable regulation is not yet a thing of the past.

8 Comments

  • Harassment by religious extremist

    Jehovah's Witnesses instigated court decisions in 1942 which involved cursing a police officer calling him a fascist and to get in your face at the door steps,….this same JW 1942 court decision upheld infamous Phelps hate church in 2011
    —-
    Danny Haszard, more on this group
    http://www.dannyhaszard.com

    • okay i know nobody is going to read this but check out this guy's website because it is nuuuttttssss

      • Yes, the website is very nutty.
        Short to the point statement.
        I am a US Army Veteran. I was overseas. If for some reason my son or daughter chooses to server I will support them, if they choose not to, then I still support them. They have their life to live and it is my job to help guide them like a map does for a driver.
        If either were to serve in the military and if either were killed and these hate filled phony funeral disrupting scum of the earth persons arrive and were going to picket their funeral service were I would be saying goodbye to my flesh and blood. They would be laid waste to like scarifies of undeserving scum they are and I would put their corpses at the foot of the casket in a show of respect to not only my fallen blood, but also to my fallen soldier in arms.
        Any disrespect to the dead, a fallen soldier or any of their surviving family is unacceptable with no exceptions. There is a time and place for almost all things, but protesting at a funeral in anyway shape form or fashion is not one of those things. Anyone that does this type of an act I hope they burn in Hell forever.
        US Army Veteran

        • not looking to be jerk but would you have the same reaction to the WBC picketing the funeral of a gay person who didn't serve in the military? like, is desecrating a civilian funeral less disgusting than a military funeral? i'm not saying that's what you're saying but that seems to be the overall vibe from a lot of people.

  • its interesting how literally no one in the white house or congress cared when the phelps church was just picketing LGBT funerals, stalking LGBT people, staking out their houses and so on. most americans either didn't care or secretly agreed with fred phelps. but when they start picketing the funerals of Our Glorious Fallen Troops, now everyone can't wait to have an opinion about it.

  • Why does the article say the WBC "hides" behind the First Amendment?. These people represent the FIRST AMENDMENT. They have EVERY RIGHT to expose the immorality of our society, they have every right to expose the people who have left God to espouse perversions such as homosexuality, illegal wars, immoral politicians.
    Good for them.

    Joe
    CCFIILE.com
    CCFIILE.org

    • First of all, gay Americans don't cause wars. This is a SPLC-certified hate group. They say horrible things like "thank god for dead soldiers." While I disagree with the vile filth and hate they spew, they still have the freedom to make themselves look like idiots. Freedom of speech means freedom for everyone unfortunately, but I am proud of the people who use their freedom to counter-protest WBC's hate.

Leave a Comment