March 2, during the Supreme Court case Snyder v. Phelps, an 8-to-1 decision ruled that the Westboro Baptist Church’s hateful protests at military funerals are protected under the First Amendment, proving that even the most offensive and hurtful speech is still considered legal.
Many people are concerned about this, including students here at Marquette. It’s hard to accept that people have the right to say verbally abusive things no matter how distant from the law it seems.
The Westboro Baptist Church has been spewing an agenda of hate and intolerance around the country for years, but Snyder v. Phelps arose from a protest Westboro held at the funeral of Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder, a Marine who died in Iraq.
Westboro is an organization built on hate and prejudice, feeding off attention from the media and elsewhere. It’s known for an extreme stance against homosexuality, and for picketing at soldier’s funerals.
It’s disheartening to hear that no matter how offensive and disrespectful Westboro is, its members can still picket and protest at funerals of fallen soldiers and others around the country. However, members of Westboro are still guaranteed the same First Amendment rights as those who don’t abuse them.
Yes, the First Amendment is broad, but that ambiguity is meant to protect individuals no matter how controversial or unwanted their opinions are by others.
Just as Westboro can go out and scream nonsense, others can scream right back at them. It doesn’t make any difference, and it just creates more noise, but everyone screaming has the right to do so.
The First Amendment doesn’t directly prohibit the place or time this speech is allowed. It doesn’t mention how far you have to keep away when protesting. It doesn’t say that your speech must be respectful or have any kind of moral significance.
The First Amendment states that Congress cannot stop you from having freedom of speech, press or peaceful assembly.
It’s obvious that the members of Westboro are blinded by their own ignorance to see that what they preach does not help society or promote any sort of healthy debate. The group’s message only seeks to upset everyone who hears it.
But, there are instances when speech rights can be prohibited, especially when it includes fighting words and hate speeches. Basically, these messages possess no meaning or value other than expressing hatred for other people and specific groups.
Hate speech is considered as any expression of hatred for a particular group of people whether it is due to race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, religion or sexual orientation regarded as offensive or provokes violence.
However, hate speech does not always receive constitutional protection.
Westboro’s message, especially at funerals, is definitely charged enough to provoke violence.
A funeral is a private act, yet the Court states that new laws restricting picketing within a specified distance of a funeral can help protect grieving families and allow Westboro to continue voicing its message.
Westboro knows how to play the system, which is the reason why the organization can still conduct its protests. Westboro communicates its views by protesting in public places where picketing complies with the law. Even though its members’ opinions are vicious, they haven’t caused any physical violence yet.
A person’s words can be a powerful weapon, and the government cannot always prohibit it. Sometimes the decisions upholding our rights and freedom of expression aren’t popular, but they are essential to preserving our rights to an opinion. If the government restricts Westboro and its beliefs just because they’re unpopular, then anyone’s views could be prohibited for being disliked.
Although we don’t condone Westboro’s message, we still support its right to free speech. Legislation passed to prohibit Westboro from saying its thoughts could have far-reaching effects on other groups being able to spread constructive or destructive messages.