| Free Speech | And Society | | Ariel Kincaid | 11/1/2012 |

Hum 176
Media and American Culture

|

The freedoms that the United States prides itself on came at a cost, and it continues to require a sacrifice from those members of the military and their families to protect the country. A controversy regarding the freedom of speech that has been covered recently by the media is the protests that the Westboro Baptist Church performs outside of military funerals. According to Fama (2012), “The church links the deaths of service members to America’s acceptance of gays and has a webpage full of press releases highlighting the picketing schedule of military service member funerals” (para. 11). This church group is considered a hate group by most people and highly controversial because they shout very cruel things to the families of soldiers that are being buried. This is a very touchy issue because the families of soldiers that gave their life in protecting their country are dealing with their grief as they bury their family member and are being bombarded with members of this church using their freedom of speech. The father of one of the soldiers whose funeral was protested sued the church’s Reverend and other members, but the ruling in his favor was later overturned by the state appeals court, and he was expected to pay the court costs for the church. Others helped him to raise the money necessary to pay these court costs. Then in 2011, “[the] Supreme Court ruled decisively Wednesday that a fringe anti-gay group has a constitutionally protected right to stage hateful protests at the funerals of dead servicemen, saying ‘such speech cannot be restricted simply because it is upsetting or arouses contempt.’” (Conery, para. 1). More recently, state legislatures and even the federal government have placed restrictions on protesting outside of funerals. According to Laviana (2012),
The Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012 … will impose new restrictions on funeral protesters by increasing the quiet time before and after military funerals, and increasing the size of the buffer zone between protesters and the entrance to a funeral. (para. 4)
These new restrictions will allow for funeral goers to not be blocked from going to or leaving the funeral or having protestors interrupting the proceedings of the funeral while still allowing for the Westboro Baptist Church and other groups to exercise their freedom of speech. The grounds for the final Supreme Court ruling of 8-1 in favor of the church are that this church has the right to protest at military funerals and that banning them from doing so would violate their First Amendment rights. According to Ross (2011), “A majority of justices ruled that these fundamental rights outweigh the concerns of grieving family members who would rather not deal with what they say are obnoxious protesters from the Kansas church” (para. 2). It basically boils down to the fact that the protestors from this church have the right to voice their opinion in a public place, even if they are upsetting and unpopular. I do agree with the outcome for a number of reasons. I think that one of the things about living in the United States is that we have to respect everyone’s freedoms or be a hypocrite. I do find that the actions of this church group are horrible, but it would be unfair of the courts to rule that only the members of this particular church are unable to exercise their freedom of speech in protesting something while other groups are still allowed to protest controversial issues. For instance, abortion clinics are protested often by groups in this controversial issue, but are not stopped from doing so completely. Every group or individual should be allowed to voice their opinion, but they should not be able to infringe on the rights of others as they are exercising their freedoms. I find that having restrictions on how protestors are allowed to protest is the best way to protect individual rights along with the protestor’s freedom of speech. If this country would stop allowing unpopular opinions to be voiced then it would be doing a disservice to those that wanted this country to be free from tyranny. It would be wonderful if they would stop protesting military funerals to get their views out there, but having restrictions in place allowing them to keep their freedoms while protecting mourners is a good solution. One of the hardest things to accept about freedom of speech is that even those with unpopular views are allowed to public voice their opinions. It could have been easy for the courts to rule that the Westboro Baptist Church cannot protest military funerals because of how heinous the rest of Americans finds their actions. The right decision can be hard to make at times, especially in a case like this where the speech that is being protected is hurtful and harsh. The thing is protecting everyone’s freedoms is what is important in this country.

References
Conery, B. (2011, March 2). Supreme Court upholds protests at military funerals as free speech - Washington Times. Washington Times. Retrieved November 26, 2012, from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/2/supreme-court-oks-church-protest-military-funerals/?page=all
Fama, J. (2012, August 7). Military Funeral Protesters Vow to Defy New Law - ABC News. ABCNews.com. Retrieved November 26, 2012, from http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/military-funeral-protesters-vow-to-defy-new-law/
Laviana, H. (2012, August 4). Bill increases restrictions on protests at soldiers’ funerals | Wichita Eagle. The Wichita Eagle. Retrieved November 26, 2012, from http://www.kansas.com/2012/08/04/2435328/bill-increases-restrictions-on.html
Ross, L. (2011, March 2). Westboro Funeral Pickets Are Protected Speech, High Court Rules. Fox News. Retrieved November 26, 2012, from www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/02/westboro-funeral-pickets-protected-speech-high-court-rules/