 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| . |  |
. |
Washington (AFP) Oct 6, 2010 The US Supreme Court Wednesday weighed whether an anti-gay religious group that pickets military funerals with signs that read "Thank God for dead soldiers" is exercising its right to free speech or invading a grieving family's privacy. With large crowds gathered outside, the nine justices heard arguments from a lawyer for the Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church, who said the case was about free speech, and a lawyer for the father of 20-year-old Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq and whose funeral was picketed by members of the church. Snyder's funeral in 2006 was a private event that was disrupted by private individuals who had "specifically targeted the Snyder family by name," argued Sean Summers, lawyer for the father of the fallen Marine. Summers said the US Constitution's first amendment, which guarantees Americans the right to free speech, had no role to play in the case pitting the Snyder family against Westboro Baptist church, who have disrupted many funerals of US soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Westboro Baptists' lawyer, Margie Phelps, daughter of church patriarch John Phelps, argued that Snyder had intentionally turned his son's funeral into a public media event and the protesters had shown up to debate with him and others attending the funeral "on the sins of America and the wages of war." The First Amendment protected their right to do that, she said. Margie Phelps told reporters later that publishing an obituary turned a private figure into a public one, and their funeral into a public event. The church to which she belongs believes that soldiers' deaths are God's punishment on the United States because the country tolerates homosexuality. "All we wanted to do was bury Matt in a decent, civilized way," an emotional Albert Snyder told reporters on the steps of the court after the hearing. "But the Phelpses' conduct was so extreme, it's beyond the bounds of basic human decency," he added. Kansas Attorney General Steve Six said in a friend-of-the-court brief filed with attorneys general from 47 other states in support of the Snyders that the Phelpses had "attacked, denigrated and violated" the "solemn right of privacy in one of the most sacred traditions of human civilization." "Mr Snyder is a private individual, he's entitled to have a funeral in a private way. The First Amendment does not allow the Westboro Church to hijack that event," Six said. Nearly half the US Senate has also filed an amicus brief in support of Snyder, as have several veterans' organizations. "We have to get back our common sense and common decency," said Bob Gehr, a 67-year-old army veteran who served in Korea. "We hope Mr Snyder wins the case," he said, holding up both hands with fingers crossed. But the church also has its supporters, many of them advocates for First Amendment rights, including top media outlets. The Washington Post wrote in an editorial: "If Westboro's vitriol is deemed unworthy of First Amendment protection and a private citizen can sue to silence the church -- or shut it down -- then everyone's rights will be eroded." The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press filed a friend-of-the-court brief with 21 media organizations, including the New York Times and wire services calling on the justices to decide in favor of free speech. They cited the "important constitutional ramifications for reporters" that the case could have. The Supreme Court has very rarely limited First Amendment rights, even though most free speech cases involve "unpopular speech, offensive views," said CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin. In a landmark case earlier this year, the justices upheld the right to free speech in a case involving videos or pictures depicting extreme acts of cruelty inflicted on animals. But law student Matthew White and several others outside the court said the church's messages were "incitement," which is not covered by the First Amendment. "I don't think they have to carve out an exception to the First Amendment because these can be clearly seen as fighting words and incitement," said White. "Ruling against Phelps wouldn't require any precedent-changing decisions," he said. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the case in early 2011.
Share This Article With Planet Earth
Related Links Democracy in the 21st century at TerraDaily.com
Ecuador's president extends emergency after uprisingQuito (AFP) Oct 5, 2010 Ecuador's President Rafael Correa on Tuesday extended until Friday a state of emergency that was imposed in response to a police uprising last week. Correa said he acted at the request of lawmakers who questioned whether the police could be relied on to keep order. "I have lost all confidence in the police who were here," said the speaker of Congress, Fernando Cordero, who suspended sess ... read more |
|
|
| The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2010 - SpaceDaily. AFP and UPI Wire Stories are copyright Agence France-Presse and United Press International. ESA Portal Reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement,agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by SpaceDaily on any Web page published or hosted by SpaceDaily. Privacy Statement |
del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
YahooMyWeb
Google
Facebook
