Should Westboro Baptist Church Be Allowed To Protest Military Funerals?

568 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Limiting freedom of speech

Imagine: no black rights, no women’s rights, no gay marriage, no freedom, no opinions. If we weren’t able to exercise our first amendment by stating our opinion, none of these rights would’ve existed. This is why I agree with the Supreme Court's decision because Westboro protesters addressed matters of public import, on public property, in a peaceful manner, and in full compliance with the guidance of local officials. As long as the protesters abide by these actions, the Westboro Baptist Church should be able to protest military funerals. The Westboro Baptist Church is an congregation that is strictly homophobic and protests places and people who are homosexulally accepting. In this case, they were protesting a military funeral because they believe that the soldier who died, died because America is accepting of gays. They are allowed to protest because under the first amendment, they have the right to state their opinion peacefully. …show more content…

After years have gone by, courts have decided that certain types of speech are not protected. These unprotected types of speech include threats, child pornography, and fighting words. Fighting words are words that can incite conflict. Some say that what the Westboro Baptist Church was saying was fighting words. However, anyone can consider anything a fighting word if the people using them are opposing your beliefs. This is why I don’t think that fighting words were actually used and why they should be protected. Public debate topics such as gay rights should also be protected by the first amendment because one side of the story just because the judges don’t agree with what they are saying. The opinion/belief cannot be taken into account when the Supreme Court is making a decision, only the

Show More
Related

  • Abington V. Schempp Case Study

    731 Words  | 2 Pages

    This example of a Supreme Court case shows that the court is not above politics. Even though most Americans, including government officials, practiced some form of Christianity, the judges were not willing to compromise the information in the Constitution for the popular beliefs of individuals. I agree with the Supreme Court in its decision to ban the practice of prayer in public schools. Not only does it violate the Constitution, but it encroaches on our freedom of thought and action. Being excluded from a public classroom because of personal beliefs does not sound just.

    Read More

  • Dixie Chicks Rhetorical Analysis

    978 Words  | 2 Pages

    The people that do not support the Dixie Chicks think that they had no right to criticize the government, but they had every right to. Because of the first amendment they are allowed to say exactly what they want to say. One common thing that the protestors would say is shut up & sing, this was also the title of their documentary, which explains their point of view from the comment. This is ironic because the protesters were taking away the Dixie Chick’s freedom of speak, saying that they aren’t allowed to do say things like that, but by doing this they were expressing their freedom of speech. They are saying that Dixie Chick’s that the can’t express their freedom of speech, while expressing theirs. Another important factor that lead to the downfall of the Dixie Chicks is the deregulation of the radio. This deregulation resulted in large corporations taking over almost all of the radio channel. An example is a radio corporation called Clear Channel. This radio went from having 65 radio stations to over 1,000 across the United States. Clear channel owned most of the radios located in the south which was a major factor in the Dixie Chicks issue. The south is known for its high amounts of patriotism making what the Dixie Chicks even more offensive to them. Clear Channel took a lot of offense, being from the south, from what the Dixie Chicks said and gave the fans no choice if they wanted to hear them, so they

    Read More

  • Modern Interpretation of The First Amendment

    1663 Words  | 4 Pages

    The first Amendment of the United States Constitution says; “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”[1] Our fore fathers felt that this statement was plain enough for all to understand, however quite often the United States government deems it necessary to make laws to better define those rights that are stated in the Constitution. Today the framers would be both encouraged and discouraged by our modern interpretation the First Amendment the United States Constitution.

    Read More

  • Wounded Knee:The Ties of Religion and Violence

    3114 Words  | 7 Pages

    On the morning of December 29, 1890, many Sioux Indians (estimated at above two hundred) died at the hands of the United States Army near Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Reservation. The Indians were followers of the Ghost Dance religion, devised by Wovoka, a Paiute prophet, as a spiritual outlet for Indian repression by whites. The United States Army set out to intercept this group of Native Americans because they performed the controversial Ghost Dance. Both whites’ and the Sioux’s misunderstanding of an originally peaceful Indian religion culminated in the Battle of Wounded Knee. This essay first shows how the Ghost Dance came about, its later adaptation by the Sioux, and whites’ fear and misunderstanding of the Dance, then it appraises the U.S. military’s conduct during the conflict, and American newspaper coverage of events at Wounded Knee.

    Read More

  • Westboro Baptist Church Case Study

    837 Words  | 2 Pages

    Since the First Amendment protects chiefly speech on public issues, depending on the case, there could be special protection for the defendant. It is not necessarily clear what defines a public issue, but it can generally be considered if it is “relating to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community.” (Snyder v. Phelps) It is unimportant if the statement is inappropriate or controversial. Since the matter of Westboro’s signs relate completely to public matters, it cannot be directly assumed that phrases were meant to directly attack Snyder or his family. Also, while the statements made by Phelps and Westboro as a whole might be outrageous and crude, they are views of public concern. (Snyder v.

    Read More

  • We are Free to Be You, Me, Stupid and Dead by Roger Rosenblatt

    1178 Words  | 3 Pages

    Although this amendment gave people the right to express their opinions, it still rests in one’s own hands as to how far they will go to exercise that right of freedom of speech. According to Roger Rosenblatt “since freedom is the way people's minds were made to be”, freedom of speech is important to speak one's mind in a way that expresses his/her opinion, even if this opinion does not seem to convince others. In my opinion, without freedom of speech, the United States would have failed to be such a powerful country as it is today. . Although your opinions might disagree with others, you still have the right to voice them. For example, Roger Rosenblatt indicated that when a basketball player for the Denver Nuggets, was suspended from the league because of his religious conventions that stopped him from playing in the league.

    Read More

  • Derek Bok's Prohibiting Hate Speech?

    815 Words  | 2 Pages

    Should the First Amendment stop protecting hate speech? In Derek Bok’s “Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus”, he argues that hate speech should be protected as censorship would be against the First Amendment. He declares “One reason why the power of censorship is so dangerous is that it is extremely difficult to decide when a particular communications is offensive enough to warrant prohibition or to weigh the degree is offensiveness against the potential value of communication.... if we were to forbid flags, it is only a short step to prohibiting offensive speakers” (Bok 67) What Bok is attempting to say is that we can technically declare anything as offensive. The idea of hate speech is varying on the opinion of a person rather than law.

    Read More

  • Should Nazi officers be put in jail even with old age?

    699 Words  | 2 Pages

    Imagine when you were a little child, your whole family was taken from you by people who forced themselves into your country and took you to a concentration camp. While you were at this camp you watched your family members starve to skin and bone. As a young child you saw people shot on the spot, babies head’s bashed out and young mother’s separated from their young children. When the Americans finally came to liberate you you immediately want to celebrate with your family members but learn that they are all dead. You spend the rest of your life living with the thought that your whole family is dead and it is all the Nazis fault. How would you feel to know that some of the surviving Nazis are still out there living a free life and getting away with all of the crimes they help put in motion?

    Read More

  • Symbolic Speech Should Be Protected

    2507 Words  | 6 Pages

    Because it is a Constitutional right, the concept of freedom of speech is hardly ever questioned. “On its most basic level [freedom of speech] means you can express an opinion without fear of censorship by the government, even if that opinion is an unpopular one” (Landmark Cases). However, the actions of Americans that are included under “free speech,” are often questioned. Many people support the theory of “free speech,” but may oppose particular practices of free speech that personally offend them. This hypocrisy is illustrated by the case of Neo-Nazis whose right to march in Skokie, Illinois in 1979 was protested by many, but ultimately successfully defended by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The residents of this predominantly Jewish town which contained many Holocaust survivors were offended by the presence of the Neo-Nazis. However, then ACLU Executive Director Aryeh Neier, who...

    Read More

  • Snyder V Phelps Case Summary

    861 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Snyder v. Phelps et al Supreme court case in 2011 was one of the most controversial cases in United States Supreme court history. Fred Phelps, the leader of the Westboro Baptist Church, took his followers to picket the Snyder’s son. Snyder’s son, Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, was killed in action. The Westboro Baptist Church came holding up signs stating such things as, “Thanks God For 9/11”, or “Thank God for Dead Soldiers”. After seeing these signs, the grieving family attempted to take them to court, hoping to silence them. Originally Snyder won, until through multiple appeals the case eventually found its way in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court eventually ruled in favor of Phelps 8-1.

    Read More

  • Why Flag Burning Should Be Banned

    674 Words  | 2 Pages

    Freedom of speech and expression is a right given to all Americans under the First Amendment of the Constitution. It is a difficult concept to embrace when individuals are faced with ideas they oppose. In this kind of situation, the protection guaranteed to American citizens becomes even more important. The First Amendment was designed not only to protect the freedom to express ideas and sentiments with which one agrees, but also the ideas and sentiments with which one disagrees. It is for precisely this reason that the government should maintain the right of individuals to express their dissatisfaction with the policies of the government through the act of flag burning and not amend the Constitution to make such an act illegal.

    Read More

  • Ben's T Shirt Case

    418 Words  | 1 Pages

    The reason why the justices argue about whether Ben’s t-shirt was speech is because some of them believe that the message and symbols on one’s clothes are not speech, and they believe that those messages and symbols are simply one personal interest of what to wear, and it is not related to speech at all. They have to clarify what is speech; otherwise, they cannot define whether the first amendment protects it or not.

    Read More

  • 'Protecting Freedom Of Expression On The Campus' By Derek Bok

    1024 Words  | 3 Pages

    "Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” by Derek Bok, published in Boston Globe in 1991, is an essay about what we should do when we are faced with expressions that are offensive to some people. The author discusses that although the First Amendment may protect our speech, but that does not mean it protects our speech if we use it immorally and inappropriately. The author claims that when people do things such as hanging the Confederate flag, “they would upset many fellow students and ignore the decent regard for the feelings of others” (70). The author discusses how this issue has approached Supreme Court and how the Supreme Court backs up the First Amendment and if it offends any groups, it does not affect the fact that everyone has his or her own freedom of speech. The author discusses how censorship may not be the way to go, because it might bring unwanted attention that would only make more devastating situations. The author believes the best solutions to these kind of situations would be to

    Read More

  • Freedom of Speech: Dissecting Snyder v. Phelps

    2117 Words  | 5 Pages

    Phelps, welcomed the notion that members of the Westboro Baptist Church wanted to use their First Amendment rights. However, Justice Alito maintained that the manner in which the church expressed themselves does not constitute First Amendment protections because “[t]hey first issued a press release and thus turned Matthew’s funeral into a tumultuous media event. They then appeared at the church, approached as closely as they could without trespassing, and launched a malevolent verbal attack on Matthew and his family at a time of acute emotional vulnerability.” Justice Alito argued that the picketing done by the church caused Snyder grave emotional distress and damage given that Snyder was mentally vulnerable at a moment where a father loses their son. Justice Alito argued that neither Snyder nor his son were public figures. Therefore, Justice Alito pointed out that the church chose to exploit the emotional vulnerability of a private individual. According to Rosalie Levinson of the Suffolk University Law Review, the Court’s ruling on Snyder v. Phelps shows that “the government’s only valid interest is in ensuring peace and tranquility, whereas the real harm posed by fighting words, including targeted hate speech, is not physical violence, but the emotional damage inflicted by the words themselves.” In other words, Levinson is suggesting that the Court’s decision has made it so that individuals can express themselves to the point of inflicting severe emotional harm to others, so long as the expression is lawful and remains peaceful. Levinson articulates that this notion is troublesome considering that “[h]ate speech . . . is often targeted at the least powerful, most vulnerable segments of our society.” In the view of Levinson, mental harm due to hate speech and verbal dehumanization of individuals, which leads to a negative effect on that individual’s physical health with regards to heightened heart

    Read More

  • Bill of Rights in the U. S. Constitution

    963 Words  | 2 Pages

    Now the Bill of Rights protected all of these rights, but many people don’t really get what these ten amendments are all about. The first amendment was freedom of speech, press and religion. This amendment means that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”. So that mostly means that Congress cannot make any law stating to what you can say, your religion, and with the press.

    Read More

More about Should Westboro Baptist Church Be Allowed To Protest Military Funerals?

Open Document