I anticipate that I’ll get flack for this post, and please leave a comment if you want. But if you do, please try and support whatever opinion you have instead of merely calling me names, OK?

The Supreme Court decision that found in favor of the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC)  was expected, and every Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender person, as well as every LGBT organization ought to be happy about how the ruling came down. Even if you think the WBC is the most vile, obnoxious crew lower than slime, you ought to be glad that the court ruled this way. It is all about Free Speech.

The group has become famous for their protests at military funerals where they try and claim that America’s woes are because of support for lesbians and gays. The ruling went 8 to 1 with Justice Samuel Alito dissenting.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for the majority, and according to him this came down to free speech rights in the First Amendment.

Now, please don’t misunderstand me. I find the WBC to be utterly disgusting, but they are, by definition a church, and by whatever name they use, they deserve the right to free speech. Just because we don’t like what they have to say doesn’t negate their right to say it. Unlike groups identified as hate groups, such as the American Family Association (AFA) or the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) these slimy folks simply share their understanding of God’s message, and they do it within the confines of what is legal. I don’t believe you can even fault them for lies or misinformation.

Albert Snyder made the decision to sue the Phelpses after he came across a poem on the church’s site attacking his son’s parents (himself and his wife) for the way that they brought Matthew up.

I think if Snyder had sued over the poem- something along the lines of defamation of character- maybe he would have had a better case, but the WBC simply used their first amendment rights to express themselves a legal distance from a funeral.

Every queer rally or pride march or public display of affection that lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender person engages would be subject to legal action if the court had found in favor of Snyder. Our right to assemble and express ourselves is the single most important right we have, and if we want it,  we have to accept that others have it as well.

The Westboro protest was far enough away from the funeral that Snyder could see only the tops of the signs when driving to the church. In addition, the court said, there is no evidence the picketing interfered with the service. “We decline to expand the captive audience doctrine to the circumstances presented here,” Roberts said.

If the captive audience doctrine is expanded, it can easily be used against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans persons. Personally, I think trying to shut the WBC down is the wrong approach. In fact, I think the more they are out there preaching their crazy notions, the more people they turn off and see them as crazy persons. We give them too much power by treating them as if they are threats.

What is really most surprising here is that Judge Alito voted against the Constitution. Known as a conservative and a libertarian, it is odd that he took this position. It suggests that strict adherence to the Constitution isn’t all that important to him. His dissent opinion ought to be interesting reading.

“Mr. Snyder wanted what is surely the right of any parent who experiences such an incalculable loss: to bury his son in peace,” Alito wrote. But members of the Westboro church “deprived him of that elementary right” when they turned Matthew Snyder’s funeral into “a tumultuous media event,” he [Alito] said.

For someone who claims to be a original constitutionalist, this is especially odd. Where is this parental right articulated? Where is it found in the Constitution or elsewhere? Alito said during his confirmation hearings:

“In interpreting the Constitution, I think we should look to the text of the Constitution, and we should look to the meaning that someone would have taken from the text of the Constitution at the time of its adoption.”

When questions of the constitutionality of same-sex marriage come up, this judge’s willingness to create rights that do not otherwise exist, while at the same time ignoring the clear meaning of the First amendment  will surely matter. Too often, judges like Alito claim that same-sex marriage is not covered by the constitution because it isn’t so directly articulated. Yet here we see him in favor of a “right” that isn’t articulated in the Constitution in any way, indirect, direct, or even implied. How’s that for being an activist judge?

Please leave a comment and share your thoughts on this.

via Supreme Court Sides With Westboro Baptist Over Funeral Protests – Lez Get Real.

Other links:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/0302/Supreme-Court-hurtful-speech-of-Westboro-Baptist-Church-is-protected

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504564_162-20038304-504564.html

 

Photo By gcawflickr

Comments are closed.