I’ve always been a supporter of free speech, but I can’t help but feel supportive of a jury’s decision yesterday to fine the Westboro Baptist Church $11 million, which will effectively bankrupt the organization.
They’re the people who redefine the “fringe” in the Country by showing up at soldiers funerals holding signs saying that they were killed oversees as punishment from God for America’s toleration of homosexuality.
These are the same folks who wanted to erect a monument in Wyoming proclaiming:
“Matthew Shepard entered Hell October 12, 1998, at age 21 in defiance of God’s solemn warning: Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind; it is abomination. Leviticus 18:22.â€
In reference to Matthew Shepard, a gay college student who was tied to a fencepost and beaten to death back in 1998.
It’s all shameful and despicable.
I live in the Washington Heights neighborhood of Milwaukee, WI with my wife Jen, our daughter Emerson, and sons Carter and Colton.
That’s “riddance”, two “d”s.
Sorry, I don’t agree. The Westboro Church is shameful and dispicable, but freedom speech is diminished if the jury’s verdict stands. Erecting that monument and picketing soldiers’ funerals is “speech” and is protected by the First Amendment.
The members of the Westboro Church were never violent or disruptive, so I suspect this decision will be overturned on appeal…and it should be.
It is true that we are guaranteed free speech, but the error in Smitty’s post is to take that one step further and suggest that we don’t have responsibility for what we say. Like any other freedom, in some cases exercising it could cause harm to another party, and when that harm is proven in a court of law that party is entitled to restitution. For example, if I’m exercising my state endowed right to drive my motor vehicle and I run someone off the road and destory their car, they are entitled to whatever sum of money is needed to make them whole again in the eyes of the law.
In this case, the hate speech of the Westboro church was determined to have caused harm to another party and the jury determined that $11 million was the amount required to make the other party whole. This is the constitution at its best – protecting the rights of both Westboro Baptist and the injured party while at the same time resolving the dispute. This is a civil matter and doesn’t even get into constitutional law, which by the way also has plenty of precedent to reflect that at times the goverment can limit certain types of speech.
The case is a bit more complex than either commenter lets on. The verdict was founded on invasion of privacy and inflicting emotional distress. The invasion of privacy bit is pretty clear, as the demonstration took place at a funeral, and while I don’t know precisely where the funeral was being held, I suspect it was on private property (as most churches and cemeteries are) where freedom of assembly doesn’t pertain.
The interesting part on appeal will be the part about inflicting emotional distress. I suspect that also will be upheld on appeal, but that will be a closer call, as there is nothing anywhere in the law that declares we have to be nice to one another; we are free to say unpleasant things to one another. (If not, then it’s time to shut down all political blogs as well as most legislative bodies.)
I think the facet of this particular case that will prevail on appeal will be based on the fact that there was never even a speculation that this particular soldier was gay, and that fact will reinforce the invasion of privacy stance as well. (Please don’t leap from there to the conclusion that I would support something like that at the gravesite of a gay soldier. I wouldn’t. Actions may be legally permissable without being morally conscionable.)
Freedom means we all have to defend anyone’s right to advocate at the top of their lungs positions that we would spend the rest of our lives arguing against at the top of our lungs. We are not given a constitutional right not be be offended, we are only given the right to be equally offensive.