So, what are your thoughts on Phelps vs. Snyder

[tazber]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 1:38pm

It's undeniably a thorny issue and a slippery slope.

My take is that there are certain places/events where respect must be upheld. Burials are held out in the open. The mourners can't escape the disruption. If the Westboro fools want to protest at a funeral service held in a church, or a wake, or even a funeral home then they should be allowed to.
But at an actual burial I believe their actions cause harm and present a volatile situation.

Think about protesters at courthouses for example. They would never be allowed to protest inside the court (security issues aside) and disrupt the proceedings. They are permitted to voice dissent outside the courthouse as loudly as they want however.

Well, burials aren't inside. And the current legal distance that dissenters are required to conduct their protests clearly isn't enough.

No one is suggesting that the Phelps' don't have a right to their beliefs, or that they don't have a right to express them loudly provided they are within the parameters of the law (and for the record, Westboro always adheres to the law. They notify the police and city of their plans well beforehand and they never react to violence perpetrated upon them except to flee).

So, to me, in the specific case of outdoor burials their actions are less about free speech than civil disobedience.

And to be clear, I'm not even saying all outdoor events should be protected. Gay Pride parades are outside and as far as I'm concerned if someone wants to protest, fine (although it's reprehensible to me personally).

So, I think that burials should be protected from such disruptions.

I would love to hear some thoughts on this. We are a thoughtful and intelligent bunch here at BWW, and I have many times had a change of opinion after reading someone else's perspective.

So, should burials be protected from disruption, or is maintaining free speech a greater good?




link to Yahoo summary

Updated On: 10/6/10 at 01:38 PM

[Roscoe]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 1:46pm

I'm not sure I agree that burials are exempt from protests. I'm going to have to go with the free speech this time, which puts me in the unenviable position of supporting Fred Phelps, but I think there's a difference.

Supporting Fred Phelps' right to free speech does not mean I support his right to harass mourners and to generally be the bottom-feeding scumbag hate-mongerer that he is. I think there will need to be some kind of regulation of all this, with protesters being kept a specified distance from the mourners and burial at all times.

I don't want there to be any laws banning me from holding a banner that says "THANK GOD FOR DEAD DICK CHENEY" at his funeral.

Updated On: 10/6/10 at 01:46 PM

[Eris0303]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 1:49pm

I just started a thread about this one myself. You must have posted while I was mulling over how to share my thoughts.

I think there should be some protection of funerals. No matter what your beliefs are someone should be able to mourn for their child without such distractions.

[Q]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 1:54pm

The best I can come up with is some sort of unrealistic proposal like 'they can't be visible or audible to the mourners'.

The reality is, no matter how hard I've tried, I just can't find any objectivity in this situation. I don't envy the court at all in this.

[morosco]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 1:54pm

I think there will need to be some kind of regulation of all this, with protesters being kept a specified distance from the mourners and burial at all times.

I also think that protesters should be required to pay for the security that must be provided at these volatile demonstrations.

Posted: 10/6/10 at 1:57pm

You can not say you support freedom of speech unless you support others' freedom to say thing you loathe.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 1:57pm

"I also think that protesters should be required to pay for the security that must be provided at these volatile demonstrations."

I think the cemetery will have to pick up the price tag on that. I shouldn't have to pay for the security when I hold up my "GEORGE W. BUSH BURNS IN HELL OK" banner at his eagerly anticipated funeral.

[Q]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 2:02pm

"You can not say you support freedom of speech unless you support others' freedom to say thing you loathe."

While I believe that, I can't completely ignore the specific circumstances of a burial. It seems important enough to override other considerations.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 2:02pm

From the thread that I started:

I don't envy Justice Breyer's position at all. By siding with Snyder he could be going against Free Speech but if he sides with WBC he sides with "psychological terrorism" (great phrase btw).

I side with Snyder all the way but the Supreme Court has to be "above" emotional responses.

BUT...

This phrase changes it all:

The church also posted a poem on its website that attacked Snyder and his ex-wife for the way they brought up Matthew.

This makes them guilty of libel which they can be found guilty of easily.

And I realize that the libel part has little to do with the topic at hand. I just see it as something more cut and dry. Something the judge can rule against them over.

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 2:07pm

Our freedoms are not absolute, they're subject to all sorts of regulation. That said, I don't know what I think about this one. Don't people protest, both for and against, at many executions? I know I've seen videos of anti-death penalty folks protesting, as well as folks supporting the execution. The latter often carry signs that are as heinous as what Phelps & Co carry. As far as I know, no one has sued them. Would we be as engaged as we are if the family of a serial killer sued the family of his victims, because they carried signs outside the execution?

OK, so now I apologize for rambling, and for not being certain that I'm making sense. But, I think I've just talked myslef into supporting Phelps' rights in this case. So, I now I think I need to shower.

Updated On: 10/6/10 at 02:07 PM

[Q]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 2:11pm

mad - that's actually a very interesting point. I hadn't thought of that at all.

I have to say, though, that I've been turned off by those demonstrations, as well. I might not feel so vehement about it, but I've never understood those 'protests', either.

Posted: 10/6/10 at 2:16pm

If I stood on a busy corner and yelled "F$&k You" at everyone who passed by, I have a feeling I would be detained, arrested, and probably charged with disturbing the peace or something.
To me, what these Phelps "people" do is no different. It is not a protest. It is an intentional infliction of emotional pain. And that is.not.legal.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 2:18pm

When it comes down to it, if siding with the Phelpsf*cks means protecting the 1st Amendment, then I'm in.

But my question is: Is there not a difference between a private funeral and an execution (or any of the other parallels people draw)? Or if there isn't, can there not be?

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 2:21pm

My guess is that these are military funerals, and I believe military cemetaries are public grounds.

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 2:28pm

The only way to get him is for defamation of character or harassment. They will never get him on freedom of speech.

[tazber]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 2:58pm

Good point madbrian,

Executions are held inside though with only invited people. While the families of the victims are there, they aren't protesting. Any protsters are outside the facility.

And an execution isn't a burial. I don't think the families of the victims should be allowed to disrupt the convict's burial either.

[Q]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 3:02pm

"And an execution isn't a burial. I don't think the families of the victims should be allowed to disrupt the convict's burial either."

That was my point, except Taz actually made it instead of muddling it up

But extension of that thought, maybe the answer to the Westboro situation is to let them protest where the soldiers are actually being killed - the front lines.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 3:07pm

Ooh, I like that idea.

Protesters are often told where they're allowed to protest. I vote for "site of the demise."

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 3:43pm

I hate to say this, but just as the Nazi's had the right to protest in Skokie, Phelps has the right to protest in a public space.

I hate everything he stands for, and cannot fathom the pain they cause when at burials. But, just because I disagree with them, does not mean I get to censor their speech in a public place.


I don't even think this is a close call.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 8:46pm

i agree with the damn 1st amendmenters: when you start limiting what people can say in public it's a slippery slope that ends up in an ugly place.

specify a distance at which they must be from the proceedings if necessary, call it a safety requirement and do it at the local level, but once you say "you cannot say this here" you open things up for someone else to tell you what you can say where.

they're a heinous lot, but that's not the issue.

i want roscoe to be able to protest too.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 9:01pm

"i agree with the damn 1st amendmenters: when you start limiting what people can say in public it's a slippery slope that ends up in an ugly place."

Which is EXACTLY what the Phelps family has been riding on.

So, while I may not protest at his actual funeral, nothing will stop me from peeing all over Fred's grave after he's buried.

And then tap dancing.

And then planting a banner that says something nasty about him, along the lines about how he always wanted to take it up the butt.

And then pouring toxic chemicals over his grave.



Damn. I really need to stop.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 10/6/10 at 9:02pm

Yeah, 1st amendment.

Having just seen The Laramie Project again after 10 years. perhaps a volunteer army of angels can be assembled from coast to coast with great big wings that block the Phelpsians from view as was organized for the Matthew Shepard funeral? Perhaps they could be sponsored by an ear plug company?