Does the First Amendment protect the Westboro Baptist Church's protests at funerals?

[ShyGuyInChicago]

Or do you think their behavior is a form of harassment and therefore, not protected. It seems like harassment to me.

[Amnesiac]

There's a fine line between harassment and protected speech. If they're protesting on private property, it's protected. However, the families affected could easily get a restraining order.

[Korashk]

Their protests don't really fall under the banner of harassment based on the fact that they don't address specific individuals or groups with their protests, and they don't continue to protest the same indivuduals or groups. For instance, when they protest at soldiers' funerals they are not [usually] attacking those soldiers specifically. They are protesting soldiers as a concept. Same with their protests at the funerals of homosexuals.

[Peace God]

Yes they should be protected by the 1st amendment...almost everyone should, no matter how much of an asshole you are. That's one of things i love about America.
Plus, i personally dont mind WBC... they show the American public the dangers of religious fundamentalism, biblical literalism and child indoctrination.

[Sith Lord 13]

I believe it should be considered protected speech. If they picketed outside of the same person's house everyday for months, then it becomes harassment, but since they're protesting concepts, not people, it should be protected.

[DarkHorses]

Almost every religion is disrespectful to certain people in different ways. Some Christians protest gays, for example. You can't be happy with what every religion does or believes, but that doesn't mean they don't have the right to protest and believe what they do, even if they might be idiots.

[Punk_Kid]

I think they ought to be hung. I find it quite disrespectful to insult a soldier, or anyone for that matter, that can't argue back.

If you want to know about these twits then go to their website at

godhatesgoths.com

I would love to be charged with arson after burning their church:P

[Sage]

I think they ought to be hung. I find it quite disrespectful to insult a soldier, or anyone for that matter, that can't argue back.

If you want to know about these twits then go to their website at

godhatesgoths.com

I would love to be charged with arson after burning their church:P

By saying that someone should be hung because they have a message you don't like, you're being no better than the WBC. Also, that website isn't affiliated with the WBC.

[Amnesiac]

I think they ought to be hung. I find it quite disrespectful to insult a soldier, or anyone for that matter, that can't argue back.

So? People have the right to be as disrespectful as they want. Why do you care what they think?

[Korashk]

By saying that someone should be hung because they have a message you don't like, you're being no better than the WBC. Also, that website isn't affiliated with the WBC.
If I'm not mistaken it makes him worse. I do not think the WBC advocates killing people. I could be wrong.

[Sage]

If I'm not mistaken it makes him worse. I do not think the WBC advocates killing people. I could be wrong.

Hrm. I actually don't recall the WBC advocating killing people either, but I'll look that up sometime. If they don't, that does make him worse, yes.

[mrmcdonaldduck]

It goes too far. You don't show up at someones funeral and protest against them when they died in a horrible war, and to say that gays are responsible is even worse, in my opinion.

It crosses a morale line that any decent church should have, and this one does not.

Wether the first ammendment protects it is a different story. Unfortunatley it does, so they have every right to.

[Sage]

Wether the first ammendment protects it is a different story. Unfortunatley it does, so they have every right to.
There's nothing unfortunate about that. Unpopular views need protection.

[ShatteredWings]

If you can't get them on first amendment, can't you for inciting a riot and (often) obstructing streets?

[Korashk]

If you can't get them on first amendment, can't you for inciting a riot
Not legitimately.

and (often) obstructing streets?
Protesting in the road without permits is not something people often do...that would be pretty stupid being that cars drive on roads. I guess it's possible but I doubt that is even something that would garner a small fine.

[Punk_Kid]

Ha! They do encourage murder. That website is affiliated with the Church, I know that.

They follow the Bible and believe homosexuals, retards, and anyone else with a disibility or such should be killed. They even take verses from the Bible on the homepage.

Back on topic though, the soldiers lay down their lives to PROTECT their "right of free speech". That is the problem I have for them, besides I hate Religious extremists.

[Sage]

Ha! They do encourage murder. That website is affiliated with the Church, I know that.

Then please point out where on the website it says they are affiliated with the WBC, and one instance where the WBC incites murder.

Back on topic though, the soldiers lay down their lives to PROTECT their "right of free speech". That is the problem I have for them, besides I hate Religious extremists.
I think the only thing being protected through warfare right now are wallets but that's a different debate. Hold any opinion you like- No matter how disagreeable, the WBC has every right to do what they are doing.

[Korashk]

Ha! They do encourage murder. That website is affiliated with the Church, I know that.
God Hates Goths is satire (http://godhatesgoths.com/disclaimer.html), and a god example of Poe's Law (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Frationalwiki.org%2Fwiki%2FPoe's_Law&ei=fe_dTJ3-G8P_lgexsbzWDQ&usg=AFQjCNH9H6D--ykkOxOiQ8iYlfXQ7DCopw&sig2=2NaCi7T6L1w-WVxQRwbOug).

[Silence]

As long as they're here in America, they have the right to speak their views, no matter how psychotic and hateful those views are. We have no choice but to let them.

[Kohta]

By saying that someone should be hung because they have a message you don't like, you're being no better than the WBC.

I agree with you that they shouldn't be attacked because of there message, but they have split up a family because one of the children spoke out against them and they raise there children to not have any choice for themselves which is wrong. So I think something should be done to give those children a chance to choose for themselves instead of being forced.

[Sith Lord 13]

If you can't get them on first amendment, can't you for inciting a riot

Extremely hard to do without infringing on free speech and free assembly.

and (often) obstructing streets?

They're usually too smart to block streets.

[ShatteredWings]

Extremely hard to do without infringing on free speech and free assembly.
Falls under the same reasoning as screaming "fire" in a crouded theater. If they're instigating people to attack them, and they ususally do, it's no longer infringing on their freedom of speech.

Also, harassment?