Posted by
Billy on Tuesday, March 16, 2010 2:44:42 PM
The Supreme Court has decided to take a case that may change the boundaries
for types of speech protected by the First Amendment.
The case was brought by a Maryland man whose son's 2006 funeral was picketed
by members of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas. Members of the
"church" consist of "pastor" Fred W. Phelps Sr., and his family who preach a
false doctrine that basically claims American soldiers are dying in combat
because of this country's increasingly tolerant attitude toward homosexuals.
(The above is part of a column written by Cal Thomas,. I have posted more of the column below. Please take sometime to read and study it.)
The history of the case is this: a jury in Baltimore awarded Albert Snyder
more than $10 million in damages. The amount was reduced on appeal and the case
was eventually thrown out by the 4th Circuit Court in Richmond. That panel of
three judges said the picket signs could not be reasonably understood to be
referring directly to Snyder and his late son, Marine Lance Corporal Matthew A.
Snyder. The court said as distasteful as Phelps' rhetoric is, the expressions
are part of a national debate on homosexuality and so it is protected speech.
I called Nat Hentoff, who is regarded by many as an authority on the First
Amendment and a fierce defender of all sorts of outrageous speech. Hentoff
believes speech that might be construed as leading a person to act "is a clear
disturbance of the peace at a religious or any kind of event" and thus "is not
protected by the First Amendment."
Hentoff is right. The venue for military funerals is not a college campus or a
political rally. Very often it is a church or synagogue. Even if it is a secular
venue, the sexual behavior or orientations of dead soldiers and their families
are unknown to the Phelpses, who are using a family's grief to advance a
judgmental attitude that is rejected in the Scripture in which they claim to
believe.
At first I found them faintly amusing, but upon reflection I consider them
deeply offensive, un-American and anti-Christian.
(Amen Cal. He is 100% right this group should not enjoy the right to go after a family who has already suffered because they have had a love one killed. Even more troubling is that some might think this group is what Bible based faith is about. This group is speaking for no one but the one who fights God everyday. Read more of the above column Unprotected
Speech.)