From 365Gay.com:
Maryland may join a growing number of states to put limits on protests at military funerals amid fears that a conservative church group from Kansas may target funerals with anti-gay picketing.
The bill, to be considered by a House committee Friday, would make Maryland at least the 15th state to regulate funeral protests in response to the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., which believes American military deaths are God’s retribution for tolerance of gay people. Church members have publicly given thanks for soldiers’ deaths at military funerals, raising calls to regulate the protests…
The measure would ban protests at funerals within an hour before they start. It would also make it a crime to obstruct mourners from funerals or burials. Violations would be misdemeanors punishable by up to 90 days in jail or a $1,000 fine.
Sponsors conceded that the bill could lead to free-speech lawsuits if it is passed. The measure, like in other states, is modeled after regulation of protests at abortion clinics. Courts have ruled that some limits on free speech, like the laws banning protesters from blocking access to abortion clinics, are allowed…
This may not be a popular position to take, but this bill seems to be an unconstitutional abridgement of free speech. I will admit to having probably the most unChristian view of Phelps and his coterie of nut-jobs and I also despise their protests of military funerals. These wackos offend me greatly given that I am Catholic, gay, and former military, all of which they seem to have problems with (as if I cared). I sympathize and agree with Delegate Mary-Dulany James, who sponsored the bill, that “We shouldn’t have to subject any family to this. I’m stunned anybody would do that when people are grieving.” These people are heartless, cruel bastards and hardly paragons of Christian morality. Yet, I do not have to like these clowns in order to stand for protecting free speech nor is it the job of government to regulate what is acceptable speech at a protest (save in very extreme cases such as incitement to violence). The First Amendment gives no guarantees that one will like what another has to say, only that they have the right to say it regardless. The provision to prohibit “obstruct[ing] mourners from funerals or burials” should pass constitutional muster and is one I could support, but not the portion to “ban protests at funerals within an hour before they start”. That will be tossed out in court as it should be. It pains me to say this, but Shirley Phelps-Roper, daughter of the ‘Rev.’ Fred Phelps, is right when she says, “They’re going to give away rights that they claim these soldiers have died for? They’re going to spit in their graves – for what? Some words?”. Of course when she also adds that this proposal is “spitting in the face of God”, I have to laugh. She and her group have done this so many times with their anti-Christian behavior it makes one sick.
Funny. I just read the article about the Patriot Guard on the way over here.
As we all know, Joe, there’s nothing that guarantees where you can exercise your free speech. Pretty much anywhere else, parades and protest routes have to be approved and permits to “peaceably” assemble have to be acquired.
Why should Rev. Fucktard and his merry band be excluded? Frankly, I wouldn’t give a damn if I lost my “right” to make an ass of myself at somebody’s funeral. I wouldn’t do it, so I wouldn’t miss it.
They shouldn’t be excluded. Phelps is subject to the same provisions as all the others are, but to seek to ban his protests because his speech is offensive is going too far. Sidelining them away from the funeral is fine, preventing them from protesting the funeral is not.
I think the precedent restricting the right to protest in front of abortion clinics (a form of free speech restriction the ACLU wholeheartedly embraces [on the logic that an imaginary constitutional right trumps an explicit one]) probably gives the states enough wiggle room to restrict Phelps and His Unholy Unhinged.
I agree with you concerning the obstructing of funerals, such is not protected by the First Amendment. I’m speaking more of prohibiting the protests during the funeral. This is not to say that Phelps has any right to protests at the funeral site (he does not), but near it on public property or private with permission and while it is going on he does.
Which is not necessarily saying that I agree with the restriction, only that similar restrictions have been upheld in the past. This is a tough situation, defending a free speech right that is clearly being abuse by vile people.* I personally don’t think our Republic suffers any damage by telling Phelps and his Merry Band of Hatemongers* to protest somewhere else at some other time. But then, I also don’t think putting a Nativity Scene on a courthouse lawn forces anyone to be a Christian, so what do I know?
* (“Ad Hominem!” shrieks Stephen. “Namecalling!” whines JwGreen.)
If the ACLU can hold its nose and defend the KKK in Skokie, we should be able to do the same with Phelps and Co.
The light of publicity will expose their evil, and it’s better to have them out where they can be seen, and tracked, than driven underground where they can grow like a cancer.
We just have to explain more cogently–and shout louder!
this is interesting. i am all for the aclu defending the rights of the kkk to speak and demonstrate in a peaceful manner. i publicly support the burning of the flag as a form of protest – that this country could do better by its own. i am all for the ban at abortion clinics and i think gwb went to iraq under false pretenses, but i will not under any circumstance tolerate the described protest at any funeral. period. full stop. eod.
I agree with Average Gay Joe. I don’t believe the government should prohibit these obnoxious demonstrations — and the more they do it, and the more press they get, the worse they look, anyway.
As for abortion clinic protests, here once a week, both Roman Catholic parishes gather across the street to kneel and pray novenas. No signs, no shouting, no speaking, just prayer. But if you listen to the femininazis here, you’d think they were bombing the clinic.
Here in Michigan, we have a novel way of interacting with the Klan’s annual Spring trek up the Capitol steps, or Phelp’s repeated performances during the pro-marriage ballot issue, or other noxious PR events disguised and protected as Free Speech –we just do a better job of counter protesting. Last year, for the Klan rally with 9 hooded guys and about 11-12 onlookers, we had a mariachi band play great music, we ate, we danced and promoted a vision of tolerance in diversity of opinions. The camera crews followed the food.
For Phelps’ people, we organized a larger group of religious and civic leaders from across the State and called the spade, a spade– with US flags behind us, bunting all around, and compassion. His group’s message was all about hate –our’s was of tolerance and protection of their right to speak. We even offered ’em cookies, pizza, soda and water, but they’d have nothing to do with it. Again, we got the TV cameras, press people, and onlookers –and far better coverage.
I take issue when the protest infringes on the rights of others to hear and be heard –or conduct an essentially private function. Some in our group wanted to rent bullhorns and out-shout them… wisely, more mature minds won out and we were respectful in our protest of their protest.
But with private military funerals, give the Phelps people a place to protest –help organize others to combat the message, do a better job of counter protesting. Let’s just make certain our protest is bigger, more tolerant, and has the goodies to lure the press away. Good can triumph over evil –even if its a free speech case. And the best way to air time on local TV is through a pressperson’s stomach.
This appears to be a time, place, or manner restriction on speech that is content-neutral. If the statute is written carefully, I think it will pass 1st Amendment muster. Needless to say, I think it is appalling for people to picket funerals for any reason – even the funeral of – say – a Nazi death camp guard or Al Qaeda terrorist.
Whatever happened to common sense and dignity? Let them have their “right to protest” for any human being capable of inflicting more pain on mourners needs to be exposed to good and decent people who obviously are not part of their pathetic lives.
The Phelps horde is a vile bunch and I despise everything they do but if we ban their speech then we have stooped to their level. Let them do all the ranting they want to but we can shout louder and longer than they can. Make it hard for them to be heard but don’t take away their right to be heard. I would suggest the motorcyclists who go to drown them out turn the exhausts of their motorcycles toward them and rev them real fast. Stink them out
The fighting words exception to the First Amendment (Beauharnais v. Illinois) is still good law. These guys can, constitutionally, go to prison for years for yelling defamatory statements about the deceased within his relatives’ hearing. As for the cause of their particular form of insanity, I cannot even begin to speculate — mother-son, father-daughter, brother-sister, over how many generations?
I am reluctantly also on AGJ’s side on this matter. Imagine if such a law passed and it was then applied to a Gay Pride Parade? We wouldn’t like that much would we? Except in extreme extraordinary circumstances (imminent danger of harm/death), I will always come down on the side of more and not less free speech.
Having said that, I completely support the Patriot Guard counter-protests and I think that is the way to fight this battle — airing it fully in the wonderful “marketplace of ideas”, rather than go down the path of government-controlled speech which may be used against you and I the next time.
A lot more emphasis should be placed on the rights of the families and friends gathered to mourn and honor those they’ve lost. I don’t fear an erosion of Constitutional rights if a pile of shit masquerading as a man of the cloth is denied the right to wave “God Hates Fags” signs ascross the street from a funeral service.
We ought to look at a different part of the First Amendment. Funerals are almost always religious services and are usually held at places of worship. Anything that intentionally disrupts a religious service — and, for me, “God Hates Fags” etc. signs across the street is a disruption — interferes with the mourners’ “free exercise” of religion. (Phelps’ rights aren’t denied because he can wave all the obscene signs he wants inside his own church.)
Matt, #10, I admire the efforts you described to counter the KKK and Phelps. But do we really want counter protests outside a funeral? Here in the midlands, motocycle clubs are planning to attend the funerals of servicemen and women and place themselves between the mourners and Phelps and his half-wit followers. God bless them, but that’s really the last thing we need at a funeral or interment.
Too often we get carried away with freedom of speech rights to the detriment of other rights.
Back in the 1990s an organization of Catholic “pro-life” zealots in Omaha, Nebraska (Lambs of Christ, or something like that) learned that a doctor who performed abortions was a member and deacon of a Presbyterian church in Lincoln, Nebraska. The Catholic group filled a couple of buses and went to Lincoln to picket the Presbyterian church on Sundays, demanding the dismissal of the abortion doctor. The Presbyterians ignored the demands and the Catholic group returned every Sunday to picket. They marched on sidewalks outside the Presbyterian church, waving placards at cars entering the church parking lot and passing out color photos of aborted fetuses to children arriving for Sunday school.
At the behest of members of the Presbyterian congregation, the Lincoln city council passed an ordinance banning the picketing. It was vetoed by the mayor, a Catholic who went on to become Nebraska governor and now is Bush’s secretary of agriculture. His veto was overridden but a judge later voided the ordinance because it violated the free speech rights of the Catholics picketing the Presbyterians.
I thought the judge was wrong. I still believe the Presbyterians had a right to attend Sunday services without having to put up with the picketing.
Just years earlier, another Catholic “pro-life” group learned that an Omaha Lutheran church had among its members a doctor who performed abortions. The zealots used red paint (symbolizing the blood of Christ) to inscribe “murderer” across the doctor’s garage, stood up during the Lutheran services shouting demands that the doctor be ousted and, at Christmas, mailed color photos of aborted fetuses to elderly members of the Lutheran congregation.
The issue never went to court but I fear the obsession with “free speech” rights would have again trumped the rights the Lutheran congreation — and the doctor — should enjoy.
Imagine if such a law passed and it was then applied to a Gay Pride Parade?
Honestly, a lack of “Pride” parades would make no nevermind to me.
#19
At least in the current form a lot of them appear to be nowadays.
#18
Right?
It always amazes me how folks (most notably the ACLU) are more than happy to stomp people’s rights into the dirt under the guise of “protecting” the rights of some piss-ant oxygen thief.
just curious, most seem to lean on the side of free speech. and under normal circumstances, i, too, would be such a person. suppose, u started getting protest against the war or against military recruitment at schools at these funerals, i just can’t stomach that. funeral is the time for family, you got to respect their privacy. they don’t need that kind of foolishness going on.
The idea of motorcyclist drowning out the sounds of the protesters is interesting, but I don’t see how that makes the situation any better for the mourners. And the idea of tv coverage exposing them for the vile people that they are, only serves to give them the exposure that they want. i’m inclined to go w/espn’s refusal to air field crashers
#22
Privacy?
Where TF do you think you are? Folks only care about privacy as it applies to themselves. The left couldn’t give two shits about the privacy of folks in the military or their families. Why else do they piss and moan about not getting to publish photos of dead bodies and coffins?
You know there used to be things such as journalistic ethics and integrity. Clearly those were tossed out the window long ago in favor of pushing liberal agendas.
Interesting discussion this post has sparked. Thank you. I’m not even sure what to respond to though. I will add though that my reasons for this are hardly noble but instead are entirely selfish. I do not give a damn about Phelps and his brood. They can rot in Hell for all I care. Forgive me, guess I’m not the best of Christians myself, but I honestly feel that way about him. Yet we have enough history of the government taking a good intention and twisting it to threaten everyone’s liberties which I cannot abide. Free speech either means we have to right to speak our minds regardless of whether people agree with us or not, or it doesn’t. These kinds of cases are extremely difficult and certainly give me pause, but no one said freedom was easy.
Does anyone think they could get on “public insanity?”
or “public nuisance?”
I agree with the post and think it was very well stated. Interesting points in the discussion, and it’s heartening to hear people listening to one another, but I think AGJ has it right.
What really makes me happy about this post is the clear-headedness of it. How beautiful to be able to stay focused on the principle of freedom in the face of such ugliness. Bravo to that, and thank you. We sure need to model this for one another these days, and it is very difficult.
#23: TGC, not sure where this journalistic ethics and integrity comes from, but to be clear there is no liberal agenda in the press; it is a corporate ethic. it’s all about the bengamins.
all of this does make me curious, given that just about everyone here supports these protest, would you support flag burning as well?
i may need to rethink my views of u everyday conservatives.
I am unclear about what they think they are gaininig from this. It is truly unfortunate these sick bastards are allowed to get away with this perversion aimed at grieving families and friends . Isn’t the deliberate infliction of emotional pain sometimes construed as a crime?
#27: It’s not that I support these protests, but the right to protest and for free speech. I categorically deplore what Phelps and his ilk are doing. As for flag burning, that’s a separate issue, but in a word: yes.
AGJ, I don’t care what GP sez ’bout you; you alright in my book. at the end of the day, i support free speech, i think i would prefer their protest elsewhere. and that is b/c i would never dare think to, let alone do, protest at someone’s funeral. that is just evil, pure sickness, repulsive
all of this does make me curious, given that just about everyone here supports these protest, would you support flag burning as well?
As my father puts it….one of the joys of the United States is that everyone is free to express his or her own stupidity.
I would not support a ban on flag-burning, and the reason is simple; it is just a matter of time until Democratic Party spokesperson Cindy Sheehan does it.
Would I support flag burning?
No. Because it’s contrary to the United States Flag Code.
It was accidental, of course, but the liberal’s comparison of Phelps and flag burning is apt. Flat burning is every bit as hateful, disgusting, and obnoxious as Fred Phelps and his crew could ever be. In fact, I can’t think of anything but flag burning that sinks to the same subhuman level as Phelps.
Exactly, rightwingprof, which is why we need to keep it legal — so that the hatemonger groups that the Democrats support are even more encouraged to do it.
People will finally realize what the Dems stand for when their pet moonbats like Cindy Sheehan start burning American flags. In fact, I would frankly consider goading these moonbat groups into doing it.
#2
I agree wih you. However, I don’t know how I would feel if it were directed at member of my family.
Too bad we don’t have “murder of passion” in our law.
Saturday in Nebraska there was a memorial service at a church for a young Army lieutenant killed in Iraq (he was buried at Arlington).
Phelps and a dozen or more of his relatives showed up and picketed the church, singing vile songs and shouting such obscenities as “God Sent the IEDs” and “God Hates You”.
Six motorcylists from the VFW Patriot Guard riders showed up, their machines drowning out the protesters. The Patriot Guard then stood between the mourners entering the church and the hafl-wits marching across the street.
A few minutes after the service started Phelps and his fellow half-wits packed their signs in crates, loaded their vans and left.
I can’t believe this is what the early Patriots intended when they added free speech to the Constitution.
Jack, sometimes harkening back to the Founders works… with the Constitution’s enumerated rights I doubt it. They couldn’t have imagined how SCOTUS would expand those rights to the condition the rights are found today –General Washington, for instance, would have a flag burner shot by a firing squad. No quibbling. Line ’em up; muskets fired. He didn’t need lessons in protecting the collective will of the public or troop morale of the soldiers.
And he never would have thought the freedom to assemble would be separated so widely from the right to petition govt for redress.
And I think NDXXX has it right: let the kooks speak; let ’em prove their “value” to the debate, to society. Free speech is a powerful tool in democracy –even if we’re repulsed by what the speakers say or do.
#18, #36
Does this mean, Jack Allen, that you support censorship?
This subject really sparks a raw nerve of rage within me, so I ask that you all please try and bear with my following rant.
Why is Fred Phelps, this sad excuse for a human being who has the unmitigated gall to consider himself a “Man of God,” allowed to traipse across this country and picket the funerals of slain gay men and women? Why does this sick freak possess more right to engage in this heinous activity than I do to legally marry the wonderful man I’ve spent the last 14 years of my life with?
Regardless of whatever legal roadblocks may exist, this should not be tolerated by anybody anymore. Fred Phelps is unfit to represent the name of our Lord in any fashion. He needs to be hauled in front of a judge and severely punished for these sickening atrocities! How can anybody look at what he’s done and claim he has the right to be doing it? Does this man have any idea how much mortal danger he is putting himself and his family in? If he were to do this at the funeral of somebody I cared for, he would either be in jail or he would be dead!
Freedom of Speech aside, what he is doing is immoral and despicably cruel! I really do hope and pray he answers for this crime someday, if not to the law then certainly to God, himself!
Phelps is domestic terrorism at its finest. This country was based on freedom from, not freedom. Freedom from oppression from tyrants and religious persecution. The true irony is that we have become a country oppressed by tyrants that are protected by their religion and persecute others for not having their beliefs. Phelps is very reminiscent of Hitler, but thankfully does not possess the evil genius Hitler possessed to drive a nation. The protesting soldiers’ funeral is sick, and is quite dangerous. Veterans suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder could snap, and please put me on the jury, hmmm, seems like justifiable homicide.
I understand your concerns about free speech being limited with this legislation, however it is important to remember that these words are definitly considered “hate speech.” Such speech has the potential to place family members who are burying their loved one in severe physical and mental danger. It has been proven medically that the loss of a loved one is one of the most horrific times for one’s mental and physical health. Adding such hatred to this scenario will only increase and the physical and mental anguish. These protestors are not advancing any ideas-much like the famous case that lead to the well-known fact that one cannot yell “fire” in a crowded theatre.
Hello,I~M not American and I live outside the USA. I wonder whether or not it`s possible to join you.Cross my heart hope to die,I can cheer up a lot of people,But I want To speak About War atrocities In Iraq,and Gay rights and problems.I won`t offend anyone.It`s up to you,either to give me access or not.I had already joined other gay websites.Wish You The Best Of Health.
j
I’m not gay, but I support the right to be gay. I wish that we lived in a nation where individuals like yourselves could be proud of who you are because of your good deeds for society, not hated for whom you love by religious fascists who think they’re better than others because they go to church on Sunday. I am so sick of the hypocracy in the religous right it makes me want to puke. We have to stand up as a group against the evil Bush administration. Help me wage war on the religous right and fascist Republicans. Our nation and our planet are in grave danger from the current administration. Demand the impeachment of Bush.
I’m planning on going to a right wing church on Sunday and pamphlet the congregation with a picture of Jesus at a peace rally wearing a t-shirt that says “Support our troops, impeach Bush”. If you’re a Christian, and yes, Jesus loves gay people – He Never Said Homosexuality was a sin, you should stand up to these hypocrites and claim your religon. “I’m gay and Jesus loves me too” might be a good war cry. Don’t let the false prophets make you feel guilty for loving someone. Jesus was all about love. How can it be bad?