We have some pretty lively discussions in my Press Law & Ethics class but none more energized than when I told students about a decision handed down in federal court. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a man to pay $16,510.80 in court costs to the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan.
The man had sued the church for disrupting the funeral of his son, a soldier killed in Iraq. The church protests at military funerals and other places as a way to preach the message that service members die because God wants to punishment U.S. tolerance of homosexuality.
The majority of my class comes from the Southeast. I would say for the most part they are conservative politically and Christian.
And I think most would describe themselves as patriotic, particularly the Kentuckians, who hail from a state with a strong military signature. The questions I asked them, among others, were:
- In the media’s eyes, when does a “church” become a “cult” or “evil” or a religious imposter?
- Doesn’t the church have a Constitutional right to protest?
- If we acknowledge the church’s right to protest, how should we deal with the church and its behavior?
- Judges often order plaintiffs who lose to pay court costs. What’s wrong with the judge ordering the payment in this case?
Solutions my students offered ranged from tossing a hand grenade at the Church members — illegal and extreme — to taxing any church that behaves the way Westboro Baptist does, also not possible.
The point I tried to make with my students is one we often hear but generally find unacceptable: We must take the good with the bad when it comes to our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. Clamoring for government intervention whenever we find something distasteful will result in government intervention.
That intervention will grow and will never go away — even after the Westboro Baptist churches of the world do.
For my students and many others, contributing to the “Marketplace of Ideas” rather than restricting it can be a tough pill to swallow.
But one of the links in the resources below shows a novel way one young man is fighting back against the hatred spewed by the church.
And “Jason” uses tactics that brought smiles of approval from my class.
How about you?
Resources:
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEGLFJ-Nqq4
- www.google.com/hostednews/...
- voices.washingtonpost.com/…
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7Of_2ykZpQ
- http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_funeral_protests
They make me sick. They have quite the pair of male sex organs if you ask me, they protest at military funerals and cause pain for all who are just trying to grieve and say goodbye when the person being buried is the one who died fighting for that freedom. We are fighting extremists over seas but what we fail to realize is that we have them here at home. Maybe we should be worried about that. The Supreme Court can rule all they want but it still wont make it okay.
The real answer to this problem is national legislation that prohibits any demonstrations at funerals. Whatever the grievance is with the person being lowered into the ground, they have no ability to respond. The fact that they demonstrate at military funerals is particularly sickening; most of these individuals died guarding their friends. The Phelps family are media whores who bring nothing to the Marketplace of Ideas. That sort of speech should be prohibited. Using the First Amendment to defend this behavior is like watching a child smear feces on a wall in a smiley-face likeness and then say that they are contributing to art.
Also, church's that behave like political action committes should be taxed.
Thanks for taking the tine to write. I was not tracking with you on this until your last paragraph. I agree with your position on taxing and think that the IRS should spend a lot more time closely examining the behavior of churches and other nonprofits who clearly engage in activity that should qualify them as taxable entities. Best- Mac
Thanks for the post. I mentioned the cross issue in another posting. But I am not sure what that has to do with the behavior of the church members at Westboro. Do you endorse it?
Battle over spiritual symbols; the Mojave cross case is made of particular people wanting to have a cross eliminated which was put up about 70 years ago in the Mojave Desert. Those trying to get it removed are saying that no person sees it, and it's also only a memorial for Christians. The main reasons were that there are numerous other religions, and that a request to put a Buddha statute close to the cross was refused. When did we become such a selfish society? Don't take a war memorial down, but who really cares if individuals of other faiths want to put their own memorials up also.
Post new comment