Why I Support A Ban On Funeral Protesting

[Infinite Hope]

One's constitutional rights are guaranteed to the point where they violate those of others. It's a clear balancing test not only in fact, but in law. Restrictions on FUNERALS of soldiers are a mere recognition of that fact. I don't oppose anyone's freedom of speech. Freedom of speech was never protected everywhere in every circumstance.

Being in the rare position of being both an avid anti-war activist and sibling of a soldier who came inches from death (more than a dozen rounds came inches from his head, hit his upper vest instead and took a bullet and shrapnel to his arm), I have a unique perspective. A funeral is a family's final closure, including families like mine which oppose the war. To have the funeral become a piercing reminder of the senseless and needless loss of his life, to become a painful distraction from that family member and the times and memories past, to become a taint on the final goodbye is reprehensible. Whether intentional or unintentional, such a location for protest becomes not just a protest against the war, but a protest against the soldier who was forced to fight and forced to die.

There are many good places to protest without necessitating yet another painful dagger in the already-bleeding heart of the distraught and mourning family.

[MonkeyFunk]

1. This is a primary issue?

Anyway, I disagree.

As reprehensible as they are, they have a constitutional right to protest.

[Infinite Hope]

8. Actually they don't. As in the original post, one's rights are only guaranteed until they infringe..

...on the rights of others. That's constitutional law.

[MonkeyFunk]

10. And where do people have a right

to be free of protesters?

Sorry, if they're on public property, they have a right to protest, no matter how wrong-headed and despicable.

[unpossibles]

13. is a cemetery public property?

I am all for freedom of expression and will even support that right for people I can't stand, but I also believe that a funeral is neither the time nor place.

[MonkeyFunk]

14. I agree. There's no time or place to protest a funeral.

that's a different question from outlawing it.

The first amendment is not there to protect speech that everybody likes - that doesn't need protection.

[Fovea]

17. What needs protection

is the grieving process of those close to the departed.
Interfering in that process is like denying someone sleep against their will.

At the event of interment, or other disposition of the remains such as a memorial service, the funeral party should not be subject to harassment.

This sort of speech is no more protected than showing up with a burning cross at an AME church function, IMO. And anyone subjected to it could claim justifiably to have been damaged emotionally from it.

If I were on the jury of a defendant/family member-friend of the departed who later tracked a protester down and parked their car on them, I would more than likely find for the defendant.

[MonkeyFunk]

18. Sorry, you're just wrong

There's no constitutional right to have a funeral free of protest. There IS a constitutional right to assemble peaceably and protest.

[Infinite Hope]

30. Only with a permit. And if a statute restricts funeral protests, such protests are illegal.

And such narrow restrictions on protests at funerals are well-founded and constitutional.

[Fovea]

32. How about this?

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1048518258780


So much for the absolute right of assembly and speech.
and Google Oliver Wendell Holmes and shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater.

The signs and slogans of the Westboro church are no different than a burning cross.

[babylonsister]

2. The whole concept of protesting at any funeral is abhorrent to me.

Prior to Phelps, did that ever even happen?

[xchrom]

3. i have to agree. nt

[Exilednight]

4. They should be allowed to protest, as long as they can do it....

in a peaceful way. I have seen several videos on youtube where their funeral protests turn violent.

I would argue that phelps's church should be restricted from protesting due to their actions of violence, which they have a long history of.

[seabeyond]

5. i dont like the kkk either. they have the right to speak out. i do NOT support the ban

on funeral protest. and i am disgusted by it. i am sorry for those caused more pain because of it

[GarbagemanLB]

6. If the protest is peaceful and on public property, they have every right to do it. They are disgusti

g, though.

[Ian David]

7. I take a nuanced approach to the issue

On the one hand, we don't want Republicans claiming every parade, rally, and political meeting to be a "Memorial Service" of some kind, so they can bar protesters. We also don't want them turning actual funerals into a safe-haven where they can stand before the cameras to make unchallenged assertions.

On the other hand, any time we limit free speech somewhere, it is a threat to free speech everywhere.

I would like to see some kind of funeral-protest law upheld, to protect the rights and privacy of mourners, but I would like the law to be defined and interpreted as narrowly as possible, to avoid having it abused and misused.

[Infinite Hope]

9. I whole-heartedly agree. n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. As soon as we allow this, you and I won't be able to take to the streets either

It's about free speech; whether we like the message or not isn't the point.

And yes, this hits close to home for me. I live in Phelps' backyard.

[lightningandsnow]

19. Agreed.

Thank you.

[Fovea]

12. I think that funeral protesters should be allowed to protest

if and only if the friends and families of the departed are allowed to use temporary insanity as an absolute defense for premeditated murder.

I've been to a funeral that was the scene of an early Phelps 'protest'.
Fred Phelps is about as reverend as OxyRush's draft deferral.
It is rare to see so much evil in one small knot of protoplasm.

The first amendment is about communications and the public square. There is nothing about Fred Phelps message that a first amendment zone a required 500 yards from a funeral would be diminished. I feel the same about any protester at any funeral.

I would not protest @ Dick Cheney's funeral. It is not only a sacred rite in all formal religions, it is a deep human need, the denial of which is the abrogation of a fundamental human right, IMO.

[MonkeyFunk]

15. I don't see "temporary insanity"

being a defense for "premeditated murder". That seems sort of oxymoronic.

[Fovea]

16. There you go

you clever little monkey.

[yurbud]

20. ...uh, who is doing this besides Fred Phelps?

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. There is a copycat church here in KC

So I would imagine there are others.

[yurbud]

23. starting the thread here made me think you meant some lefties were doing it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

26. Not that I am aware of

But I am not the one who started the thread.

[Ichingcarpenter]

22. Totally agree with the exceptions of Dick Cheney's funeral

or Donald Rumsfeld.

[DS1]

25. wait till the people leave. then you can shit on his grave

[Ichingcarpenter]

28. Can I shit in his burial hole before it starts too?

Just wondering the protocol for a War Criminal.

[DS1]

29. sure. if you have a wide stance

:rofl:

[DS1]

24. I support funeral protester snipers

bullet in the head. done.

[MadHound]

27. I have to wholeheartedly disagree

As much as I abhor Phelps and his ilk, he does have the right to assemble and demonstrate at funerals(as long as he follows relevant rules such as remaining on public property, etc.). Does it suck, yes, but then again so did the Neo Nazi march in Skokie Illinois thirty years back. But the point of the matter is that if we start limiting the free speech of those groups that we abhor, before you know it, our own free speech will also be dramatically limited, and do we really want to go down that slippery slope.

Yes, I realize that this is painful for the family, yes I realize that it is an abomination, but it is better than the alternative, watching our free speech rights disappear.

[rucky]

31. Military funerals are paid by taxpayers

and happen on federal land.

But there is the Skokie arguement - deliberately causing mental distress.

[walldude]

33. Oh shit.. now you did it.

You got Obama and Hillary people agreeing on something. I think the space/time continuum is about to collapse in on itself.. :rofl:

[JimGinPA]

34. Is Anyone Protesting Funrerals Besides That Homophobe "Church" In Kansas?

Pardon my ignorance, but I haven't heard of any other funeral protests.


I just can't see any reason to cause further grief to the families of fallen soldiers for policies the soldiers themselves had no control over.

[Infinite Hope]

35. Some groups tried in Minnesota before it was banned about 2 years ago. n/t

[Infinite Hope]

36. I didn't realize the U.S. House of Reps. passed a ban in 2006.

It came up in a google search just now...it must not have passed the Senate...anyone?
http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2006/05/10/1