It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Supreme Court is entering an emotionally charged dispute between the grieving father of a Marine who died in Iraq and the anti-gay protesters who picket military funerals with inflammatory messages like "Thank God for dead soldiers."
Originally posted by Cameoii
as long as they were on public property and not breaking any other laws.
SCOTUSblog's Lyle Denniston writes that in Snyder v. Phelps, the high court will focus on "a significant question of First Amendment law: the degree of constitutional protection given to private remarks made about a private person, occurring in a largely private setting."
Originally posted by Jenna
The protesters have a right to free speech, but the families at the funerals have a right to privacy and the right to not be harassed by protesters.
“How these soldiers are living and dying is a topic of substantial public interest and dialogue, at least nationwide, probably worldwide. The prevailing view is that the soldiers are heroes, and that God is obligated to bless America,” (.pdf) Phelps’ lawyers wrote. “Those views clash with the Bible, in respondents’ sincerely held religious opinion, and when these funerals are used to express those viewpoints, respondents feel duty-bound to provide a countervailing message, to wit, if you want God’s blessings, you have to obey him, and if you want the soldiers to stop dying, you have to stop sinning in this nation.”
Originally posted by Cameoii
The funeral was in a church, and publicly announced in a local obituary. It seems that would take it out from under the private setting heading.
Originally posted by Cameoii
I'm getting the understanding that this will pit freedom of speech against freedom of religion. The phelps claim that these drastic protests are an expression of their religious beliefs and thereby protected by law.
When viewed from that prospective, wouldn't this be akin to abortion protesters with vicious signs and displays in front of clinics during an emotional time to young women?
Originally posted by iMacFanatic
Damnit...I don't want to but I agree with you...whole heartedly.
Originally posted by Cameoii
Jenna: Although my emotions are right on track with your post, I have to disagree in one regard. Freedom of speech is a free pass to say whatever vile thing you want as long as you are not breaking any other laws or ordinances. There would be no need to protect our freedom of speech if it only covered things that offended no one.